Nobody wants a perfect apple: Why flawless content fails

You've probably heard of the Turing Test.

If not, it was Alan Turing’s 1950s thought experiment about whether a machine could fool us into thinking it was human.

He nicknamed it "The Imitation Game".

It sounds pretty easy, right? We all know the difference between flesh and blood and nuts and bolts.

At the time, machines didn’t stand much of a chance.

But today, with the rise of Large Language Models (LLMs), we're quickly realising that the imitation game isn’t a game anymore. 

The machines are starting to win. 

I mean seriously win. 

Like, “77% of people fooled” win. 

Scary stuff. 

I’ve been thinking about this and, as a copywriter surrounded by ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and every other LLM that starts with a curly letter, it’s brought one very strong question to mind…

Am I a robot? 

Okay, I don’t really think I’m a robot. 

In fact, I asked my Mum. And she’s pretty certain I’m not, and I trust her – so that kinda puts that question to rest. 

But it has made me wonder, if I’m not a robot, then why do these robots sound so much like me? 

And if AI can sound human, what’s left for humans themselves?

The wrong question we keep asking

Look, the basics are that AI was trained to write properly. 

Clear, structured, concise. There’s no fluff or waffle, no winding thoughts. And no massive, bulky paragraphs. 

Just nice and clean copy, packaged with a neat little ribbon.

But I (and every other copywriter out there) was also trained to do exactly that. 

Awkward. 

So it’s left writers asking how they can compete with AI or how they can prove they’re the better option. 

But the framing of these questions is inherently flawed. 

Because (I’m sorry to say), in a battle with AI, you are not going to come out on top. 

You’re not going to be faster. You’re not going to be clearer. You’re not going to be more polished. 

And that’s a good thing. 

The problem isn’t that AI sounds Turing-passingly human.

It’s that it sounds like the most sanitised version of one. 

The kind of person who has brown toast for breakfast and white toast for dessert.

And nobody likes that guy. 

That's right Mark, we're looking at you.

People are getting sick of AI content, and it’s easy to see why

Now, with everyone and their uncle churning out AI-generated content, déjà vu is becoming a daily occurrence. 

“In the ever-changing world of…” 

“This isn’t just X, it’s Y.” 

“ — ”

“It’s a quiet evolution…” 

These are just a few of the classic hallmarks of AI that you’ve probably seen a million times. 

But there’s a big old flaw in immediately flagging these patterns as non-human.

And that flaw is me. 

I used to start blog posts with “In the ever-changing world of…”, I used to love throwing an antithesis into the mix, and the mighty en- and em-dash are practically grammar royalty. 

At its very root, the problem isn’t that these phrases or grammar are robotic. It’s that you now see them everywhere. And ‘common’ at a global scale becomes absolutely exhausting. 

So here’s the dirty secret: 

AI didn’t invent blandness. It learned it from us.

Our desire to not rock the boat. From writers and brands who want to stay on solid, steady ground. 

Because bland is efficient. It’s easy to produce, unlikely to offend, and way easier to get an entire room of picky stakeholders to sign off on.

And sure, that’s fine.

But when everything is soft, solid, and steady – that’s when the cracks appear. 

Let’s be fair here: This is what AI is really, really good at

I don’t want to be mean to AI (mainly because I want it to treat me kindly when it becomes our supreme ruler), so I’m going to give it its flowers. 

AI is crazy good at a lot of things that us humans are rubbish at.

Because humans overexplain, go off on tangents (like I have, and will continue to do), add asides (I don’t do that), change tone mid-paragraph, reiterate previously articulated statements, repeat themselves, get slightly too emotional, WRITE SENTENCES THAT RUN ON FAR LONGER THAN THEY SHOULD BECAUSE SOMETIMES IT JUST FEELS IMPORTANT TO KEEP GOING AND BELIEVE IN YOURSELF EVEN WHEN A FULL STOP WOULD PROBABLY BE BETTER and then follow them up with one-word fragments. 

Oops. 

Whereas AI is smooth like butter. 

It rounds those rough human edges, eliminates awkwardness, and optimises every single syllable to be nice and digestible.

Basically, it makes everything pristine and coherent. 

But the issue is right there: humans are not pristine, coherent machines. 

We’re beautifully, wonderfully, and ever so gorgeously flawed.

Our imperfections are what make (and keep) us human

Have you ever met someone who is just perfect?

Perfect face, perfect smile, perfect job, perfect life. 

Let’s be honest…

You kinda hated them, didn’t you? (It’s okay, you can admit it.) 

Humans like flaws. And the same goes for copywriting, or building a brand. 

We trust people who sound real. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUG9qYTJMsI

I never miss a chance to showcase this ad from Dollar Shave Club. It might be from 13 years ago, but my god, it is still so so good – and so relevant. 

It’s a brilliant example of an authentic brand voice. 

They’re not taking themselves too seriously and embracing imperfection. It doesn’t sound optimised, it doesn’t sound overly polished, and it definitely sounds like a person. 

But being imperfect doesn’t have to be overt and silly. 

Here’s an example. What’s the one thing you notice straight away, but never think too much about, when you look at the Apple logo? 

Interesting apple.

Yeah, that’s right, it has a big gnarly chunk taken out of it.

Of course, you could argue the bite is there to make the silhouette distinct, so you wouldn’t mistake it for any old apple. 

But really, it’s a tiny slice of imperfection. And it makes the branding stick in your mind. 

Boring apple.

This just looks wrong, right?

Stupid perfect apple. 

It’s this sanitised neutrality that feels low-risk, low-personality, and low-commitment. 

And low-commitment rarely converts. 

Where human copywriters beat AI

I’ve done a lot of talking, so here’s the juicy bit. 

AI is amazing at a lot of things. But if you overrely on it, like it or not, you’re going to get bland, whole apples that don’t stick in people’s minds or hearts. 

The future of successful marketing isn’t going to be an AI-generated sphere of sameness. It’s going to be a world where sharper opinions win eyes. A world where specific, lived examples are the ones that win people over. 

Where a sentence can be slightly too long. Where rhythms are jagged. Where grammar rules are broken, remade, then broken again. 

And this won’t be seen as sloppiness.

It’ll be seen as intentional texture. 

Does the future of writing belong to imperfect humans?

So what does this all mean?

Basically, this isn’t whether or not you should use AI. It’s about how to use AI in marketing without sanding down the very things that make your writing or your brand memorable. 

Because maybe the real test isn’t whether machines can pass as human. 

But whether humans are brave enough to stop sounding like machines. 

When we embrace our flaws, we come out on top. 

Human copywriting isn’t better because it’s the best at following the rules – AI has that sorted. 

It wins because humanity lives in the cracks. Sure, AI-generated content can replicate what good writing looks like, but it can’t replicate what good writing feels like. 

So use that em dash, say something is ‘quietly’ happening, talk about the ever-evolving world of whatever. 

But please, please, please. 

Don’t be a perfect apple. 

---

If you want to have a go at the Turing Test, you can play it here. I beat it. Reckon you can?

P.S. If you spot any errors in this piece, they were 100% intentional. I promise. 

Just call me Alan.