Tuesday, February 3, 2026

Why You Should Admit What’s “Wrong” With Your Product

 

Most marketers are terrified of saying anything negative about what they sell.

They think: “If I point out a flaw, people won’t buy.”

In reality, the opposite is true. Because the moment someone lands on your page, their brain is already asking one question: “What’s the catch?”

They’re not necessarily consciously thinking it. But subconsciously, they are scanning for danger. So if you pretend your product is perfect … their brain doesn’t relax, it gets suspicious. And suspicious people don’t buy.

The simple move that builds instant trust

There’s a proven persuasion technique called a damaging admissionIt basically means: You say the thing people might not like about your product … before they do. The public relations folks call it "controlling the conversation."

Why does this work so well? Because when you bring up the objection first, the buyer’s brain goes: “Okay, they’re not hiding anything.”

That one moment of honesty creates trust faster than ten testimonials. And something even better also happens: Their subconscious mind gets permission to stop worrying about that issue. It’s been acknowledged. It’s been handled. Now they can actually pay attention.

A flaw is often just a mispositioned feature

Most “flaws” are only flaws if you let the customer frame them. But if you frame them first, you can often turn them into a benefit. For example, there’s a popular fitness program that advertises: “No gym. No equipment. Just your body.”

At first glance, that sounds like a limitation. No weights? No machines? No fancy gear?

But they don’t hide it. They spotlight it. And then they flip it: “Because you don’t need a gym, you can work out anywhere ... at home, in a hotel, or even in your living room. No excuses.”

What looked like a weakness becomes a primary reason people sign up. The friction has been removed.

Why hiding flaws kills conversions

When you avoid talking about the downside of your offer, the customer fills in the blanks themselves. And they always imagine something worse than reality.

If you don’t say: “It takes time to see results,” they think: “This probably doesn’t work.”

If you don’t say: “It’s not for beginners,” they think: “I’m going to get ripped off.”

If you don’t say: “It’s simple,” they think: “It must be cheap or low quality.”

While silence creates fear, honesty builds an environment of safety.

The real game: control the narrative

Every product has tradeoffs. Your job isn’t to eliminate them, your job is to frame them.

When you shine a spotlight on the “flaw,” you’re telling the customer: “This is intentional … and here’s why it’s better for you.”

That’s when the weakness becomes a reason to buy.



Monday, February 2, 2026

Why Every Copywriter & Content Writer Needs an AI Usage Policy

 There should be a policy for that

Clients are comparing you to AI on your perceived value vs. AI’s near-zero cost.

That’s why every copywriter and content writer should consider having a simple AI usage policy for client projects. It doesn’t have to be drawn up by a lawyer, it doesn’t have to be complicated, it just has to be clear.

It should answer three things:

  • Where you use AI
  • Where you don’t
  • And why that protects the client’s brand

This reframes the conversation from “Are you using AI?” to “How are you using AI to make this better?” Now you’re not competing with AI, you’re directing it.

Clients already know AI is cheap. What they don’t know is whether it’s safe, accurate, or on-brand. They're leery of raw AI output … they want strategy, judgment, and brand safety. And an AI policy shows you’re not replacing yourself with a tool, but using a tool under control. This increases trust and helps justify your fees.

Currently AI is cheap ... controlled, intentional expertise is what still commands a premium.

Here’s a sample policy. Feel free to copy it and put it to work for you.

AI Usage Policy for [Copywriting/Content] Writing Projects

This brief policy explains how AI is (and is not) used in [my/our] work, and how [I/we] protect the quality, originality, and integrity of your brand content.

Human-led strategy and voice

    • All projects begin with human-led strategy: positioning, messaging, and brand voice decisions are made by [me/us], not by AI.
    • Your brand voice, audience insight, and offer structure are defined and maintained by a human writer throughout every project.

Where AI may be used

    • AI may be used for low-level support tasks such as: generating outline options, exploring angle ideas, reorganizing notes, or producing rough variants for individual lines.
    • AI may assist with light editing support (e.g., clarity suggestions, grammar checks, or length adjustments), always followed by human review and revision.

What AI is never trusted to do alone

    • AI is never used as an unedited “first draft” that is then simply rubber-stamped; all substantive copy is written or heavily rewritten by [me/us].
    • AI is not relied on for factual accuracy, legal or compliance language, or sensitive topics; any AI-assisted suggestions in these areas are verified and, where needed, re-crafted.

Quality, originality, and ownership

    • All final copy delivered to you is curated, edited, and approved by a human, with a focus on originality, clarity, and brand fit.
    • Any AI-assisted phrasing is treated as raw material to be transformed, not as finished content, to protect your distinct voice and reduce the risk of generic or derivative language.

Transparency and customization

    • If a project or context requires stricter constraints on AI use (for legal, ethical, or internal-policy reasons), [I/we] will adapt this policy and follow your specific requirements.
    • If you ever want details on how AI was involved in a given piece of work, [I am/we are]      happy to explain where it was used and how the final decisions remained human-led.

 
_______________________


If AI is not part of your process, you can still take control of the conversation with an AI usage policy such as:

AI Usage Policy

  • [I/We] do not use AI tools at any stage of [my/our] writing process.
  • All research, strategy, drafting, and revision are done by [me/us] using [my/our] own expertise and ethical sources.
  • Every deliverable is fully original, human-created work.

  • [I/We] do not consent to [my/our] work being used for AI training or machine-learning purposes.


 

Friday, January 30, 2026

Amazon's "Ask This Book": Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down?

 


Amazon just added a new Kindle feature called Ask This Book.

Reading a book on Kindle and have a question? You can type a question about the book you’re reading and get an AI-generated explanation instantly ... inside the book itself. Not a quote. Not a page jump. An interpretation.

Forget who a character is? Ask. Unsure why something matters? Ask. The system explains it in its own words, without the author’s voice, and without leaving the page.

And that raises a real question for writers.

This isn’t a reference tool. It’s not helping readers find what they already read. It’s telling them what the book means. And it’s doing that without the author’s voice.

There’s no opt-out. If your book is on Kindle, this feature can explain it, summarize it, and interpret it. You don't see the questions. You don’t see the answers. You can’t fix mistakes. You don’t get a say in how your work is framed.

So, writers, how does that feel?

Does this help readers stay immersed or does it put a machine between you and your audience? Is this a useful assist, or the start of something that slowly rewrites how your work is understood?

The Authors Guild is already pushing back (as they should), arguing that this effectively turns books into annotated editions, without permission or new terms. Amazon didn’t negotiate. They just turned it on.

Some people will say it’s accurate. Maybe it is. But accuracy isn’t really the point. The question is control (and voice) and where interpretation begins and ends.

Copyright is about control over how work is reused and reshaped. This puts a machine between the writer and the reader. Even if it’s accurate, it’s no longer the author’s voice doing the explaining.

And once this becomes normal, it won’t stop here. Explanations become summaries. Summaries become condensations. Condensations become rewrites. Then something else entirely. And every step moves the reader further from the original work.


Does Ask This Book feel like a helpful tool for your readers or a line that shouldn’t have been crossed?


_________________________

For more details, check out “What Amazon’s ‘Ask This Book’ Feature Means for Authors” 



Thursday, January 29, 2026

How Confident CTAs Drive More Conversions

 

Please


You were taught to say please.

Good manners. Polite. Civilized.

All good things ... except in a Call to Action.

When you say “please” in a CTA, you’re not being courteous. You’re being hesitant.

“Please sign up.”

“Please download.”

“Please consider…”

That one word quietly tells the reader: I’m not fully convinced this is worth your time.

A strong CTA doesn’t beg. It leads. It assumes confidence. It believes in the value. It removes friction instead of adding doubt.

If what you’re offering truly helps, don’t apologize for asking.

Say what to do. Say it clearly. Say it confidently. And save “please” for the dinner table.

 

Call To Action (CTA)

Here are 16 examples of confident, no-apology CTAs ... the kind that lead instead of ask:

Get the guide

Start your free trial

Book your strategy call

Download the checklist

See how it works

Join the newsletter

Claim your spot

Watch the demo

Start risk-free today

Upgrade your plan

Read the case study

Test it for 14 days

Build your first campaign

Access the template

See pricing

Get instant access - no commitment


 

The slow erosion of meaning from the brands we build and the work we create.

Marketing has been slowly losing its nerve for a while now. Not in some dramatic implosion … more like a house settling wrong. Quiet. Gradua...