Avoiding Common Pitfalls: Generic Copy, Data Sensitivity, and Over-Reliance

1) Why AI Outputs Become Generic (and How to Fix It)

Generic copy usually isn’t a “bad model” problem—it’s an input problem. When your prompt lacks context, constraints, or differentiators, the safest output is bland, widely applicable language. Use the three fixes below as daily guardrails.

A. Missing context → Add a compact context block

If the model doesn’t know who you’re talking to, what you’re selling, and what the reader should do next, it will default to broad claims (“boost productivity,” “save time,” “best-in-class”).

Fix: Provide a minimal context pack (short, structured, reusable):

• Audience: role, sophistication, primary pain
• Offer: what it is + what it replaces
• Use case: the specific moment they need you
• Goal: what the copy must achieve (click, reply, trial, demo)
• Channel: email, landing page, ad, in-app, etc.

Context pack (paste before the task):
Audience: Ops managers at 50–500 employee logistics firms; busy, skeptical.
Offer: Route optimization software that reduces late deliveries.
Use case: After a week of missed SLAs and customer complaints.
Goal: Get them to book a 15-min demo.
Channel: Cold email (120–150 words).

B. Weak constraints → Add boundaries, format, and “do/don’t” rules

Without constraints, AI tends to over-explain, hedge, and use common marketing clichés. Constraints force specificity and make the output usable without heavy editing.

Fix: Add constraints that shape the writing:

Continue in our app.

You can listen to the audiobook with the screen off, receive a free certificate for this course, and also have access to 5,000 other free online courses.

Or continue reading below...

Download the app

• Length: word count, character limit, number of bullets
• Structure: AIDA, PAS, problem→proof→CTA, etc.
• Style rules: active voice, short sentences, no hype
• Forbidden phrases: “game-changer,” “best-in-class,” “revolutionary”
• Reading level: e.g., “plain English, no jargon”

Constraints:
- 130–150 words
- Structure: Problem (1–2 lines) → Proof (1 line) → How it works (2 bullets) → CTA (1 line)
- Tone: calm, practical, slightly witty
- Avoid: game-changer, seamless, cutting-edge, leverage, world-class
- Use 6th–8th grade readability

C. Lack of differentiators → Supply “decision-grade” inputs

AI can’t invent credible differentiation. If you don’t provide proof points, it will substitute generic benefits. Your job is to feed it differentiators that a buyer would actually use to choose you.

Fix: Provide differentiators in three categories:

• Mechanism: what you do differently (method, workflow, model, process)
• Proof: numbers, benchmarks, customer outcomes, constraints you handle
• Trade-offs: what you intentionally don’t do (builds trust)

Differentiators to include:
- Mechanism: updates routes every 15 minutes using traffic + driver hours + delivery windows
- Proof: median 18% fewer late deliveries in 60 days (n=42)
- Trade-off: not designed for same-day courier fleets
- Compliance: SOC 2 Type II; data retained 30 days max

2) Data Handling Rules: What Not to Paste (and How to Anonymize)

Day-to-day marketing work often includes sensitive information. Treat AI tools like a public workspace unless your organization has explicitly approved a specific tool, plan, and configuration for sensitive data. Use the rules below to reduce risk.

What not to paste into prompts

• PII (personally identifiable information): names tied to personal emails/phones, home addresses, ID numbers, customer support transcripts with identifying details, HR info.
• Customer confidential data: contract terms, pricing exceptions, renewal dates, usage logs, private feedback that can identify an account.
• Company confidential strategy: internal forecasts, pipeline by account, board materials, unreleased positioning, M&A discussions.
• Unannounced launches: product codenames, embargoed features, launch dates, partner announcements, press drafts.
• Credentials and access details: API keys, tokens, passwords, private links to dashboards.

How to anonymize or abstract (step-by-step)

When you need help with messaging, structure, or rewriting, you can usually remove sensitive details and still get a high-quality output.

1. Replace identifiers with placeholders: [Customer A], [Industry], [Region], [Product Tier].
2. Generalize numbers: use ranges or relative change (e.g., “~20%” or “double-digit lift”) if exact figures are confidential.
3. Summarize instead of pasting raw text: convert a transcript into bullet themes (“Top objections: integration time, security review”).
4. Remove dates and unique timing: “Q2 launch” instead of “May 14th.”
5. Abstract the strategy: describe the decision, not the plan (“We’re entering a new vertical” vs. “We’re targeting hospitals in Texas with Partner X”).

Before (too sensitive):
"Hi, I’m Sarah Chen at Northwind Health. Our renewal is Aug 31 for $148,000. We’re unhappy because feature X failed in our Dallas clinic..."

After (safe abstraction):
"B2B customer in healthcare is renewing soon (mid-year). They’re unhappy due to reliability issues in one location. Draft a renewal email that acknowledges the issue, offers a remediation plan, and proposes a call."

Quick “safe prompt” checklist

• Would I paste this into a shared Slack channel? If not, don’t paste it here.
• Can a competitor infer our roadmap, pricing, or customer list from this? If yes, abstract.
• Does it contain anything that identifies a person or account? If yes, remove or replace.

3) Human-in-the-Loop Expectations: When AI Helps vs. When Humans Must Lead

Responsible use means knowing which tasks are “AI-assisted” and which require subject matter expertise (SMEs), legal review, or analytics validation. Use this as a practical routing guide.

Use AI when the task is primarily about speed, structure, or variation

• Drafting from known inputs: turning a set of approved points into copy options.
• Formatting: converting one message into multiple channel formats (email → social → landing page sections) using provided constraints.
• Ideation within boundaries: headline variations, CTA options, subject lines—when you supply differentiators and guardrails.
• Editing support: clarity, brevity, tone alignment, removing repetition.

Rely on SMEs when accuracy depends on domain nuance

• Technical claims: performance, security, compliance, integrations, “how it works.”
• Industry-specific language: regulated verticals, clinical/financial terminology, safety-critical contexts.
• Competitive comparisons: feature parity, “best,” “only,” “#1” style claims.

Practical workflow: have SMEs provide a short “approved facts” block (mechanism + limits + proof) that you reuse in prompts, rather than asking AI to infer details.

Involve legal/compliance when copy creates obligations or risk

• Pricing, guarantees, warranties, refunds
• Regulated claims: health outcomes, financial returns, employment outcomes
• Privacy statements and data processing language
• Testimonials and endorsements: permissions, disclosures

Guardrail: AI can draft, but legal should approve final language when it affects commitments, compliance, or regulated claims.

Use analytics when the question is “what’s true?” not “what sounds good?”

• Performance interpretation: why conversion dropped, which segment drove results, attribution questions.
• Experiment decisions: whether a lift is meaningful, what to test next based on data.

Guardrail: AI can help you write hypotheses and test plans, but decisions should be grounded in your actual metrics and measurement approach.

4) Create a Personal Prompt Library (Reusable Snippets)

A prompt library reduces generic outputs because you stop starting from scratch. Build a small set of reusable blocks you can paste into any request. Keep them in a doc or notes app and update them as your brand evolves.

Library block #1: Voice and style rules

Brand voice:
- Clear, direct, and practical
- Confident but not hypey
- Short sentences; active voice
- Prefer concrete examples over adjectives
- Avoid clichés: seamless, cutting-edge, game-changer, world-class
- If a claim needs proof, ask for the proof or soften the claim

Library block #2: Product facts (approved)

Product facts (approved):
- What it is: [1 sentence]
- Who it’s for: [roles + company type]
- Primary outcomes: [3 bullets]
- Mechanism: [how it works in plain language]
- Proof: [stats, case study outcomes, certifications]
- Limits/trade-offs: [what it’s not for]
- Compliance/security: [approved statements only]

Library block #3: Channel formats

Create “templates” for your common deliverables so the model knows exactly what to output.

Cold email format:
- Subject line (5–7 words)
- Opener: relevant problem (1 sentence)
- Proof: 1 credible metric or constraint handled (1 sentence)
- Value: 2 bullets (benefit + mechanism)
- CTA: 1 low-friction ask
- Signature: [name, role]

LinkedIn post format:
- Hook (1 line)
- 3 short paragraphs (max 2 sentences each)
- 3 bullets with examples
- Soft CTA question at the end

Library block #4: Differentiator checklist (paste when outputs feel generic)

Include at least:
- 1 mechanism detail (how it works)
- 1 proof point (number, benchmark, certification, or constraint)
- 1 trade-off (who it’s not for / when it’s not ideal)
- 1 specific example (scenario, workflow step, or before/after)

Activity: Rewrite a Generic Paragraph Using Differentiators + Proof + Voice Constraints

Step 1: Start with a generic paragraph (example)

Generic draft: “Our platform helps businesses streamline their operations and improve productivity. With powerful features and an easy-to-use interface, teams can save time and focus on what matters. Get started today to see better results.”

Step 2: Add inputs (differentiators, proof, and voice constraints)

• Differentiators: updates routes every 15 minutes using traffic + driver hours + delivery windows; handles multi-stop scheduled routes.
• Proof: median 18% fewer late deliveries in 60 days (n=42).
• Trade-off: not designed for same-day courier fleets.
• Voice constraints: calm, practical, slightly witty; no clichés; short sentences; include one concrete scenario.

Step 3: Rewrite (example output)

Improved draft: “Late deliveries don’t come from ‘bad drivers.’ They come from plans that don’t survive real traffic. Our route optimization software rebuilds multi-stop schedules every 15 minutes using live traffic, driver hours, and delivery windows. Customers saw a median 18% drop in late deliveries within 60 days (n=42). It’s built for scheduled fleets—not same-day courier runs. If you want, I can share a 2-minute walkthrough and a sample route plan for a typical week.”

Step 4: Make it your own (fill-in worksheet)

Rewrite worksheet:
1) Audience + scenario: "When [role] is dealing with [specific situation]..."
2) Mechanism detail: "We do this by [how it works]..."
3) Proof: "Typical results: [metric + timeframe + sample size/source if allowed]"
4) Trade-off: "Not ideal for [who/when]"
5) Voice rules: [3–5 bullets]
6) CTA: "Would you like [low-friction next step]?"