The Art of Introductions and Conclusions (and Why AI Can't Write Them)
What we’ve all come to understand about AI content in the short time since it has shot to prominence is that it lacks the human touch. Here, I run through practical examples of bad AI introductions and conclusions that I’ve seen, how I revamped them to humanise the writing, and the reasons why…
Much of my recent writing work has been revamping AI content. There has been a lot of discussion of whether AI is sounding the death knell for freelance writing, and indeed many other industries, and I’ve written about this as well, but further discussion of that can wait for another day.
I want to talk about introductions and conclusions. What we’ve come to understand about AI content in the short time since it has shot to prominence, is that it lacks the human touch. It’s missing that elegance, that imperfect but poetic turn of phrase that human writers can bring, that takes it from something mundane to something relatable.
I’ve always seen introductions and conclusions as an opportunity to express myself – a small window of space not bound by the straight-jacket of structure or references, where I can let my mind roam into the realm of ideas, and create something fanciful and inspiring.
If introductions and conclusions were part of a meal, they would be the presentation – the aesthetic first impression of a dish, that draws you in and makes you want more. If the dish is then poor quality or badly cooked, the first impression is quickly forgotten of course, but it’s an opportunity to impress, and once that can’t be wasted.
Here I am going to give some practical examples of bad AI introductions and conclusions that I’ve seen, how I revamped them to humanise the writing, and the reasons why. I write this primarily as a discussion piece for other writers and as an attempt to share good practice to drive up standards, which is essential if we want to separate ourselves from software and demonstrate the value copywriting still has in this fast-changing world.
Why is AI so bad at introductions and conclusions?
AI can be great at creating the building blocks of an article. It does the research you need – as long as you are happy with information circa 2021 – and then groups it into blocky chapters behind practical subheadings. This can be the foundation for your writing, provided you’re willing to re-draft and fact-check the work. Personally, I have never used AI to write an article, but I have edited existing AI content provided to me by clients.
This fact-driven outline to articles can be a useful starting point, but introductions and conclusions are where AI really struggles. Here is an example conclusion generated by Chat GPT on the subject of solar generators:
A quick glance tells us a great deal – there is simply no humanity here. No person writes with so little energy or nuance. No human would choose Conclusion as a subheading before a conclusion, and then begin the paragraph with ‘In conclusion...’ In the same vein, a good conclusion shouldn’t just summarise and regurgitate the article with the same words and phrases, which what we see here.
Briefly, here is what I want to achieve in a conclusion, to humanise it and give a great final impression of the article or piece:
1. Say something new – this can be taking the ideas in the article and bringing them together into a paragraph that expresses a new idea or opens up further discussion. No one wants a fence-sitter – use the facts that have been established in the article and come down on one side or the other, and elevate it to something bigger if you can. Make this not just about the dry subject of solar energy, but put it in the context of world events and the future of the planet. Elevating your writing in this way adds a sense of peril, a sense of history, and consequently, an emotional component that will draw the audience in. But most of all you are making it memorable.
2. Be flawed, be human – this means you don’t just repeat facts like a mathematical formula. In most cases, articles are about ideas. Ideas are moving, ever-changing, hard to conceptualise, and harder to pin down. They are imperfect and rooted in your own experience; your own bias. Take all this on board and show some humanity – be flawed and make things personal. This is the key to the audience relating to your work and making it memorable.
3. Be passionate – and show that you believe in something. Your article is not just some by-the-numbers content-mill churn, edited down to fit a narrow in-house style. You are an individual, you have a voice – use it. Let your language express your depth of feelings - you have one last opportunity to make an emotional connection with the audience, so let them see who you are and leave them on a high while you have their attention. There’s nothing sadder than a generic article summary that goes out with a whimper. It’s like saying something funny as you’re leaving a party, before then spending about 10 minutes umming and ahhing through additional mundane goodbyes. Leave on a high.
4. Appeal to Authority – which means, don’t be afraid to bring in new information or statistics. We want passion and originality, but sometimes context is needed for this to really resonate. If you want to talk about the bigger picture of climate change in your article, don’t be afraid to bring in new facts about the subject to give more authority to your conclusion. A 2021 study showed that if we carry on the way we are 99% of the planet will be underwater by next week… it’s time to make a change, etc. (Don’t panic… this particular stat was fabricated.)
With these points in mind, here is how I have changed the conclusion we looked at earlier, to humanise it, make it relatable, and elevate the article to something greater than it is:
Is this the best writing I’ve ever done? No, but for better or worse, this is a human conclusion written by a human writer. Whether you agree with the conclusion or not, you feel some authority in the way it’s written, as well as an emotional reaction to what is being said. It might not be perfectly factual or a completely informed view, but it has personality, it’s considered, and it’s real.
Our flaws are our humanity, and connect us to our audience
The four key tenants of conclusions that I listed above can also apply to introductions, with the main difference being that we’re not answering questions in the introduction, we’re posing them. But we’re doing so in a way that grabs attention, shows passion and humanity, and elevates the subject to something more grandiose than it actually is.
Here’s a recent introduction along the same lines, generated by AI:
Again, it’s a dry summary of what the article will explore, and it’s written in a way that makes me feel the conclusion has already been reached – that is to say, there is no real mystery here, because it is all plainly factual. As a human writer, you may go on a journey as you write content - maybe the research and the ideas that the writing provokes lead you somewhere new, and, by the end, the conclusion is something you didn’t expect. This introduction leaves very little space for this because it’s already so close to the conclusion and the body of the article. In short, it is unexciting, and there is no momentum, no feeling that we are going on a journey together.
Here is what I changed in this introduction to make it more engaging, and draw in the audience:
Again, I’m attempting to ground the writing in a universal experience – the desire to get away from the city and rediscover nature, which is what camping represents. I’m also elevating the subject matter by bringing in more existential ideas like the healing power of nature, and modern problems like the link between living in cities and poor mental health. The flow of the writing is more dynamic, and there’s an energy there. It’s not really saying anything about the article content yet, but it is interesting and enticing in a way the AI introduction utterly failed to be. From here I can tack on a linking paragraph to tie it back to the body of the article, which is solar energy devices, and it sets the tone for the piece as something interesting and fresh.
AI and the Future of Content Writing
People talk about AI as though it will cut swathes through entire industries, leaving masses of unemployed creatives in its wake. I still have my doubts. I have yet to see an article written by AI that doesn’t instantly rankle, and cause me to bounce out of the site instantly. Nowhere is this more apparent than in dry, robotic introductions and conclusions.
AI is capable of presenting a broad range of facts on a topic and linking them together with some intelligence, but it can’t fake the imperfect and emotive approach that humans bring to everything they do. These flaws are shared experiences between us – they’re how we express ourselves, relate to each other, and show our humanity. Without this, forming a connection with an audience is almost impossible, and that, after all, is what persuasive writing is there to achieve.
What do you think about the impact of AI on content writing in 2023? Are you as indifferent as I am? Tell me about it in the comments and I’ll probably respond. Otherwise, check out my recent articles below, and if you’re looking to hire a freelance copywriter, get in touch today.
