😵‍💫Proof that AI is not the perfect writing partner

In partnership with

Glad you’re joining us this bright, sweaty Monday morning. 

What’s on tap? The Main Thing gives you a warning about using AI tools for one of the tasks AI is mostly good at. 

After that breakdown, I’ve got a buffet of Monday Marketing News for you. Let’s get going…

Appetizer: Need better dialogue in your video or audio ads? Pro screenwriters can help. See this video how-to.

Tailored HR Software Recommendations for Your Organization

Choosing HR software can be overwhelming—with over 1,000+ tools on the market, it’s easy to spend days and still feel unsure.

That’s why thousands of HR teams rely on SSR’s HR software advisors. Instead of spending hundreds of hours on research and demos, you’ll get free 1:1 help from an HR software expert who understands your requirements and provides 2–3 tailored recommendations based on your unique needs.

Whether you're looking for an HRIS, ATS, or Payroll solution, we help you cut through the noise and make confident decisions—fast.

Why HR teams trust SSR HR Advisors:

✅ 100% free for HR teams
✅ Get 2-3 Tailored solutions from 1,000+ options
✅ 1:1 expert guidance from HR advisors
✅ Trusted by 15,000+ companies

From MIT to the Indianapolis Colts, smart HR teams trust SSR to find the right software—without the stress.

Find the Right HR Software, for Free

The Main Thing

Letting AI Tools Misguide You?

Few months ago I was doing some ghostwriting for a client. 

The client ran every word I wrote through ChatGPT. 

Every word!

This fella leaned heavy on AI to judge how good the writing was.

Was GPT helpful? Yeah, but…

No matter how good the writing was, GPT had suggestions for improvement every time.

Not just for me, but the other three ghostwriters too. So, I’m not butt-hurt. I’m telling you this because that’s the problem with using AI.

It’s good at pointing out mistakes and weak points in writing. However, if you tell it to point out weak points, IT WILL DO AS YOU ASK. Even if changes are unwarranted.

That means you’ll get bad advice from a bot.  

Prime example below. I pasted a few paragraphs into GPT and asked it to show me problems with the writing. The AI feedback is below…

*BOT talk begins--- ❌ Weaknesses and Problem Areas

1. Overuse of Fragmented Sentences

The stylistic choice to break sentences for rhythm works—up to a point. But the excessive fragmentation starts to feel mechanical or lazy. Examples:

“Some of it good. Some of it not so good. Most of it uneventful.”

“Like the army itself. Which is how they found me.”

These choppy lines might be aiming for hardboiled cool, but they can come off as formulaic or emotionally disengaged. Occasionally using longer, more complex sentences would lend variety and sophistication.

2. Flat Descriptive Language

There’s a lack of vivid imagery. Descriptions like:

“Long slow periods of nothing much, with occasional bursts of something.”

…are vague and nonspecific. The phrase “bursts of something” is almost deliberately nondescriptive, which could be the point—but it makes the writing feel inert. This passage would benefit from sharper, concrete details or metaphors to give weight to the abstract musings.

3. Passive, Detached Protagonist

The narrator’s emotional detachment is a stylistic choice—but it might alienate readers. We don’t get a clear sense of motivation, conflict, or urgency. He’s drifting city to city, observing things, but not doing anything meaningful. That can make the story feel like it’s floating rather than progressing.

4. Redundant or Empty Lines

Some lines repeat ideas without adding depth:

“The Army Times is a strange old paper.”

Followed by multiple sentences that just confirm it’s old and sort of dry. There’s not enough payoff for the space it takes. This could be tightened considerably.

5. Mild Stylistic Clichés

Phrases like:

“You can leave the army, but the army doesn’t leave you.”

…feel recycled. It’s a trope used in dozens of military or crime dramas. It’s not bad per se, but it feels unoriginal unless the next lines subvert or deepen it—which this piece doesn’t quite do.

6. Inconsistent Tone

The voice walks a fine line between gritty realism and self-conscious style. Phrases like:

“...if you read the words sideways you sometimes hear a real sardonic tone…”

start to sound a little too clever, almost breaking the fourth wall. Is this a cold-blooded ex-soldier narrating—or a literary writer playing with genre? It wobbles. ---*This ends the bot talk.

Wow. Jack Reacher Novels Must Suck.

The feedback above is for part of a Reacher novel.

Despite selling over 100 million books, ChatGPT thinks it knows how author Lee Child could improve the Jack Reacher stories!

GPT “thinks” it knows more about writing than one of the most successful authors in history.

If that doesn’t send alarm bells off in your brain, I don’t know what would. 

Again, I love hating on AI, but I do give it proper due. It’s fine for checking your writing quality.

But it is not fool-proof, as that example clearly shows. 

Another example is coming up to show AI is not perfect.

AI is Getting Too Much Credit

I saw some dude on LinkedIn last week saying ChatGPT could tell us exactly why the Coldplay concert CEO affair video went viral. The LinkedIn poster had GPT’s breakdown, step-by-step.

He was claiming GPT could provide a playbook for going viral.

Hell, anyone, bot or human, can do a breakdown after the fact.

Have GPT predict the next viral video. Then I’ll be impressed. 

Hindsight is easy. Post-game sports shows are proof of that. 

Anyway, the point is that we’d be morons to ignore AI tools, but just as dumb to lean on AI for everything. Especially trusting its way-too robotic judgment on what good writing is.

Now, on to Monday Marketing News.

Please share Inbox Hacking with a fellow marketing go-getter or business owner. I appreciate you reading & sharing.

Shane McLendon - Copy Kingpin

“The word adventure has gotten overused. For me, when everything goes wrong – that’s when adventure starts.” ~Yvon Chouinard