I've been reviewing a lot of AI-assisted copy lately and there's a pattern that keeps showing up. The writing is technically correct but it feels flat. No personality, no rhythm, no punch. It reads like everyone else's content because it basically is. Here's what I keep seeing: Every sentence is the same length. Around 15-20 words each. No variation. Human copy has a rhythm to it. Short punchy lines. Then a longer one that builds momentum and carries the reader somewhere unexpected. The transitions are all textbook. 'Moreover'. 'Furthermore'. 'Additionally'. Nobody talks like this. Good copy uses 'But', 'And', 'Look', 'Here's the thing' or just starts the next thought with no connector at all. The vocabulary is too safe. AI picks the most predictable word every time. 'Utilize' instead of 'use'. 'Facilitate' instead of 'help'. It never picks the slightly unexpected word that makes a sentence stick. Zero opinion. AI hedges everything. Good copy takes a stance. Says 'this is wrong' or 'most people get this backwards'. AI says 'it could be argued that there are multiple perspectives to consider'. I A/B tested two versions of the same landing page copy. Version A was AI-polished. Version B was rewritten to sound like an actual person with opinions. Version B converted 23% better. The fix isn't complicated but it's tedious to do manually on every piece. Anyone else noticing this with AI-assisted copy? What's your editing process?   submitted by   /u/Altruistic_Cream4771 [link]   [comments]