Your you-ness is your magic ✨ 🪄

Published almost 2 years ago • 2 min read

Hello Reader,

After writing my newsletter last week, I was chatting with my case study writer, Nailah (of the Content Witches) and mentioned that I had a lot of fun writing last week's newsletter and that "AI can't compete with my silly stories." And I told her that I was tempted to ask one of the Generative AI tools to write a similar email newsletter and see what it could produce.

So I did.

And I gave it a good try—I wanted to see if I could feed Bard (Google's tool) enough info that it would make something engaging, personal, and connective. (Because I follow my own Discover - Connect - Believe philosophy.)

Spoiler alert: It failed.

It was deeply, profoundly mediocre.

And very un-Sarah.

And that's the thing, right? We all want to connect with other humans. We see something in their stories that inspires us, reminds us of our own experiences, tells us something new, and it's a head and heart connection.

If we break down my newsletter versus the one that Bard wrote, we can see the differences immediately—my version contained the following:

✅ A personal story that set the context for the piece

✅ Silly jokes that are extremely on-brand

✅ More "you" language rather than formal business speak

Now, I know that a lot of people out there would say that I haven't spent enough time "training" the tools to sound like me—but I'm not convinced that 1) that's a good use of time, but more importantly 2) that it's actually possible.

❓Does Bard or ChatGPT know why, for example, I started watching the Tour de France?

❓Does it know to include that I'd never seen a bike race because that's just not something people in rural Oregon paid attention to ever?

❓Would Bard know my Sarah-isms, references to past newsletters, and asides that my community would recognize?

I suppose I'd rather hear less from people than feel like I'm not actually hearing from them.

I referenced this in the article above, but a friend of mine recently sent me an update from Medium in which they shared that their community also feels this way:​

“Over the last few years, our members have told us in no uncertain terms that they are tired of clickbait and content mills, want ‘get rich quick’ siloed into a constrained area, don’t want stories that are generated by AI, and, in particular, want to read human stories that deliver actual human wisdom. The rest of the Internet is filled with cheap, attention grabbing content. We are most proud Medium can deliver our members something different. One of the keys to doing that is how we incentivize and reward the authors here."

And then we have the rise in Substack newsletters written by real people that folks pay for (I subscribe to several paid newsletters from folks whose work I admire).

So many signs point to "Yes, I want to hear from real people, with their messy grammar, unique stories, imperfect phrasing, and the magic that makes them... them." Even in business contexts.

Now, this is a reminder that this isn't a manifesto decrying these tools—I see some value in them, particularly in the ideation phase of content creation. I want to be crystal clear on that. No, it's that I believe there's something deeper here, and I keep picking up on signs that we're going to see two very distinctive, diverging forks in the road when it comes to content on the internet.

What do you think? Do you want more connection? More human stories? Are you seeing signs that you're not alone in this?

Hit reply and let me know!

Warmly,

Sarah

P.S. This is my semi-regular reminder that the calendar at SM&Co is getting really full for fall. If you're thinking about working with us, reach out sooner to set up a call to talk through your options!

Subscribe to Sarah Moon