# Anti-Patterns: Copywriting

These approaches seem like good copywriting but consistently fail to connect or convert.

---

## 1. The Hype Machine

**The Mistake:**
```
"Revolutionary AI-powered solution!"
"Game-changing technology!"
"The BEST product EVER created!"
"Absolutely INCREDIBLE results!"
"You won't BELIEVE what this can do!"

Sounds like:
An infomercial.
Spam.
Desperation.
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Hype erodes trust
- Everyone claims "best"
- Readers tune out superlatives
- Actions speak louder than adjectives

**Better Approach:**
```
REPLACE HYPE WITH PROOF:

Hype: "Revolutionary!"
Proof: "Saves 4 hours per week"

Hype: "Best in class!"
Proof: "99.9% uptime, verified by AWS"

Hype: "Incredible results!"
Proof: "30% more conversions in 30 days"

SPECIFICITY > SUPERLATIVES:
"Amazing results" → "23% increase in signups"
"Trusted by many" → "Used by 10,000+ teams"
"Super fast" → "Loads in 0.4 seconds"

BANNED WORDS:
Revolutionary, Innovative, Best, Amazing,
Incredible, Game-changing, World-class,
Cutting-edge, State-of-the-art, Unique

These are lazy.
Find the specific truth instead.
```

---

## 2. The Thesaurus Overload

**The Mistake:**
```
"Utilize our solution to effectuate
 optimal operational efficiencies
 and synergize cross-functional
 collaborative workflows."

Writer thinks: "This sounds smart!"
Reader thinks: "I have no idea what this says."
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Complex words hide simple ideas
- Big words don't impress—they confuse
- Reading level should be 6th-8th grade
- Clarity builds trust; complexity breaks it

**Better Approach:**
```
SIMPLE > COMPLEX:

Utilize → Use
Effectuate → Create
Optimal → Best
Collaborate → Work together
Facilitate → Help
Implement → Do
Leverage → Use
Synergize → [Delete]
Streamline → Simplify
Bandwidth → Time

HEMINGWAY RULE:
If there's a simpler word, use it.
If you can cut a word, cut it.
Read it aloud—if you stumble, simplify.

BEFORE:
"Leverage our robust solution to
 optimize your operational workflow
 and enhance productivity metrics."

AFTER:
"Get more done in less time."

Same meaning. One-tenth the words.
```

---

## 3. The Benefit-Less Copy

**The Mistake:**
```
Product page:
"Built with React and Node.js"
"Uses GraphQL API"
"Features real-time database sync"
"Offers enterprise-grade security"

Developer: "Cool, but what does it do for me?"
Non-dev: "I don't understand any of this."
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Features describe the product
- Benefits describe the outcome
- People buy outcomes, not inputs
- Technical specs don't create desire

**Better Approach:**
```
FEATURE → SO WHAT? → BENEFIT:

Feature: "Built with React"
So what?: It's fast
Benefit: "Loads instantly, so you never wait"

Feature: "Real-time database sync"
So what?: Changes appear everywhere
Benefit: "Your team sees updates the moment
          they happen. No refreshing."

Feature: "Enterprise-grade security"
So what?: Data is safe
Benefit: "Your data stays yours. Period."

COPY STRUCTURE:
Lead with benefit.
Follow with feature (as proof).
End with outcome.

BENEFIT-FIRST:
"Changes appear instantly.
 Real-time sync means everyone sees
 updates the moment they happen."

Not:
"Features real-time sync for
 instant update propagation."
```

---

## 4. The Endless Scroll

**The Mistake:**
```
Landing page:
Section 1: Hero
Section 2: Features
Section 3: More features
Section 4: Even more features
Section 5: How it works
Section 6: Benefits
Section 7: Use cases
Section 8: More use cases
Section 9: Integrations
Section 10: Testimonials
Section 11: Team
Section 12: FAQ
Section 13: Blog posts
Section 14: Newsletter
Section 15: CTA

Nobody scrolls this far.
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- More is not better
- Attention decreases with length
- Confusion increases with options
- Most sections go unseen

**Better Approach:**
```
MINIMAL EFFECTIVE PAGE:

1. HERO: Value prop + CTA
2. PROOF: Social proof
3. BENEFITS: 3 key benefits
4. HOW: Simple explanation
5. TRUST: Testimonials
6. ACTION: Final CTA

That's it. Six sections.

CONTENT AUDIT:
For every section, ask:
- Does this help them decide?
- Does this add or remove friction?
- Does this answer a real objection?

If no → cut it.

LONG COPY EXCEPTION:
High-consideration purchases.
Expensive products.
Complex decisions.
Even then: scannable, not dense.

RULE:
Every section either helps conversion
or hurts it. There's no neutral.
```

---

## 5. The Fake Urgency

**The Mistake:**
```
"Only 3 left in stock!"
(Unlimited digital product)

"Sale ends tonight!"
(Same sale, every night)

"Limited time offer!"
(Has run for 6 months)

"Don't miss out!"
(Nothing to miss)
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Fake urgency destroys trust
- Users are savvy—they recognize tricks
- Once caught, you lose credibility permanently
- Pressure without reason = manipulation

**Better Approach:**
```
REAL URGENCY ONLY:

Honest:
"Sale ends December 31st"
(Actual deadline)

Honest:
"5 spots left in cohort"
(Genuine scarcity)

Honest:
"Price increases January 1st"
(Real policy)

NO URGENCY IF THERE ISN'T ANY:
Digital products are infinite.
Don't pretend they're scarce.
Value-based selling > pressure selling.

LEGITIMATE URGENCY:
- Event deadlines
- Limited cohort sizes
- Price changes (real ones)
- Seasonal relevance
- Launch windows

ILLEGITIMATE URGENCY:
- Fake countdown timers
- Artificial scarcity
- Evergreen "last chance"
- Manufactured deadlines

ALTERNATIVE TO URGENCY:
Sell on value, not pressure.
Make them want it, not fear missing it.
```

---

## 6. The Question Flood

**The Mistake:**
```
"Are you tired of wasting time?
 Want to get more done?
 Ready to change your life?
 Sick of the status quo?
 Looking for a better way?
 Wish there was an easier solution?"

Six questions. Zero answers.
Reader: "JUST TELL ME WHAT IT IS."
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Questions without answers frustrate
- Rhetorical questions are lazy
- One question can hook; six questions annoy
- Readers want information, not interrogation

**Better Approach:**
```
ONE QUESTION MAXIMUM:

Before (bad):
"Tired of messy spreadsheets?
 Want better reporting?
 Need more time?
 Ready to upgrade?"

After (good):
"Tired of messy spreadsheets?

 AutoReport builds your reports
 automatically, so you never touch
 another cell. See how it works."

QUESTION RULES:
- One question per section, max
- Always answer immediately after
- Make it specific to their pain
- Rhetorical questions need answers

QUESTION ALTERNATIVES:
Instead of: "Want faster results?"
Try: "Get results 3x faster."

Instead of: "Need more time?"
Try: "Save 4 hours every week."

STATEMENT > QUESTION:
Questions ask.
Statements tell.
Confidence converts.
```

---

## 7. The Copycat Copy

**The Mistake:**
```
Your copy:
"The all-in-one platform for
 modern teams. Simple. Powerful.
 Everything you need in one place."

Competitor 1: Same
Competitor 2: Same
Competitor 3: Same
Everyone: Same
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Generic copy is invisible
- If everyone says it, no one owns it
- You blend into the noise
- No differentiation = no reason to choose you

**Better Approach:**
```
FIND YOUR UNIQUE ANGLE:

WHAT MAKES YOU DIFFERENT?
- Specific feature?
- Specific audience?
- Specific approach?
- Specific outcome?

GENERIC:
"The project management tool for teams"

SPECIFIC:
"Project management for agencies
 that bill by the hour"
(Toggl)

"Project management for people
 who hate project management"
(Basecamp)

DIFFERENTIATION EXERCISE:
1. List everything competitors say
2. Don't say those things
3. Find what only YOU can claim
4. Lead with that

UNIQUENESS SOURCES:
- Your audience (who)
- Your approach (how)
- Your outcome (what)
- Your founder story (why)
- Your process (method)

GENERIC → SPECIFIC:
"Save time" → "Spend 4 fewer hours on emails"
"Better results" → "23% more qualified leads"
"Easy to use" → "Set up in 5 minutes, no IT needed"
```

---

## 8. The Kitchen Sink CTA

**The Mistake:**
```
Page ending:
[Start Free Trial]
[Book a Demo]
[Watch Video]
[Download Guide]
[Join Newsletter]
[Read Case Studies]
[Contact Sales]
[View Pricing]

Eight options.
User picks: None.
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Choice paralysis kills conversion
- Too many options = no clear action
- Confusion > decision
- Focus drives conversion

**Better Approach:**
```
ONE PRIMARY CTA:

Choose the ONE thing you want them to do.
Make it obvious.
Make it easy.

PRIMARY CTA:
[Start Free Trial]

SECONDARY (if needed):
[or Book a Demo]

NEVER MORE THAN TWO.

CTA BY PAGE TYPE:

HOMEPAGE:
Primary: Start Free Trial
Secondary: Watch Demo

PRICING:
Primary: Choose Plan
Secondary: Talk to Sales

FEATURE PAGE:
Primary: Try This Feature
Secondary: See All Features

CTA HIERARCHY:
Make one BIG and obvious.
Make alternatives small and quiet.
Don't let secondaries compete.

THE FOCUS TEST:
Cover all but one CTA.
Is the action still clear?
If yes, you might not need the others.
```

---

## 9. The Testimonial Graveyard

**The Mistake:**
```
Testimonial section:
"Great product!" - J.S.

"Love it!" - Anonymous

"Very helpful." - A Customer

"Would recommend." - User123

Generic praise.
Zero credibility.
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Vague testimonials could be fake
- No specifics = no credibility
- Anonymous = suspicious
- Generic praise doesn't persuade

**Better Approach:**
```
EFFECTIVE TESTIMONIALS:

STRUCTURE:
[Specific result]
[How it helped]
[Full name, title, company]
[Photo if possible]

EXAMPLE:

Bad:
"Great product!" - J.S.

Good:
"We reduced time-to-close by 40%.
 The automated follow-ups alone saved
 our team 15 hours a week."

 — Sarah Johnson
   VP Sales, Acme Inc.
   [Photo]

TESTIMONIAL QUESTIONS:
When collecting, ask:
- What specific result did you get?
- What was life like before?
- What's different now?
- What would you tell someone considering?

GET SPECIFICS:
"Save time" → "Save 10 hours/week"
"Better results" → "23% more leads"
"Easy to use" → "Set up in 5 minutes"

ATTRIBUTION MINIMUM:
- Full name
- Job title
- Company name
- Logo or photo (ideal)

NO ANONYMOUS.
NO INITIALS.
NO VAGUE PRAISE.
```

---

## 10. The Assumption Army

**The Mistake:**
```
"As you know, project management is hard."
"Obviously, you want better results."
"Of course, you're looking for a solution."
"Naturally, you understand the value."

Writer assumes agreement.
Reader feels talked down to.
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Assumptions can be wrong
- "Obviously" implies reader is slow
- "As you know" is condescending
- Creates defensive readers

**Better Approach:**
```
STATE, DON'T ASSUME:

Bad: "As you know, time is money."
Good: "Every hour on admin is an hour
       not spent with customers."

Bad: "Obviously, you need better tools."
Good: "Your current tools are slowing you down.
       Here's how to fix that."

BANNED PHRASES:
"As you know..."
"Obviously..."
"Of course..."
"Naturally..."
"Clearly..."
"Undoubtedly..."

ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES:

INSTEAD OF ASSUMING:
State the problem directly.
Let them recognize themselves.

"If you've ever lost a document in email..."
(Those who have → "Yes, that's me!")
(Those who haven't → No offense taken)

CONDITIONAL FRAMING:
"If you're struggling with..."
"You might have noticed..."
"Many teams find..."

This invites agreement without demanding it.
```

---

## 11. The Buzzword Bingo

**The Mistake:**
```
"Our synergistic, AI-powered, cloud-native
 solution enables digital transformation
 through innovative, cutting-edge technology
 that disrupts the paradigm and creates
 value-added outcomes for stakeholders."

Buzzword count: 9
Meaning count: 0
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Buzzwords are empty calories
- They signal lack of substance
- Readers are buzzword-fatigued
- If you can't explain simply, you don't understand

**Better Approach:**
```
BUZZWORD TRANSLATION:

Synergistic → Works well with
AI-powered → Uses AI to (be specific)
Cloud-native → Web-based
Digital transformation → (What are you actually doing?)
Innovative → New (or just describe the thing)
Cutting-edge → (Just describe what it does)
Paradigm → (Delete this)
Disrupt → (Delete this)
Value-added → (What value? Be specific)
Stakeholders → Customers/users/team

REWRITE:
"Our software uses AI to automate
 your reports, saving you 4 hours per week."

Same idea. No buzzwords. Clear value.

BUZZWORD TEST:
Read your copy without buzzwords.
Does it still mean something?
If yes, cut the buzzwords.
If no, you need more substance.

EVERY SENTENCE SHOULD:
Say one specific thing.
Be understood immediately.
Create value for reader.
```

---

## 12. The Disclaimer Dump

**The Mistake:**
```
"Results may vary. Not a guarantee of
 success. Individual experiences differ.
 See terms and conditions. Past performance
 is not indicative of future results.
 Your mileage may vary. Consult your
 physician before starting any program."

Legal covered everything.
Trust destroyed.
```

**Why It's Wrong:**
- Excessive disclaimers signal distrust
- They undermine your claims
- Readers assume the worst
- Legal protection ≠ conversion optimization

**Better Approach:**
```
DISCLAIMER PRINCIPLES:

NECESSARY:
Financial claims need legal protection.
Health claims need disclaimers.
Some things require legal review.

UNNECESSARY:
Defensive disclaimering of normal claims.
Covering every possible edge case.
Undermining your own value prop.

PLACEMENT:
Keep disclaimers away from CTAs.
Footer or separate page for legal.
Don't let legal language intrude on copy.

BALANCE:
Confidence in claims + Honesty about limits

Good: "Most users see results in 30 days"
(Honest without undermining)

Bad: "You'll see results in 30 days*
*Results may vary. Not guaranteed.
Individual experiences differ..."

LEGAL + MARKETING:
Work with legal on phrasing.
Find compliant ways to be confident.
Disclaimers exist—but shouldn't dominate.
```
