Stop Letting AI Turn Your Writing Into Beige Slop: How to Actually Use the Robots Without Sounding Like a LinkedIn Bro

Let’s address the Monday-morning elephant in the room: AI writing tools are everywhere, and 99% of what they spit out reads like a press release for a vitamin supplement. Last week’s Ragan AI Communications Virtual Conference was just another parade of ‘prompt engineering’ hacks and the same tired advice—except Lorra M. Brown from UNC Chapel Hill had the nerve to say what most of these guru-clones won’t: if your workflow is just copy-paste from ChatGPT, you deserve every ounce of mediocrity you get.
Here’s the hard truth: AI is a co-writer, not your ghostwriter. If you’re slapping your company logo on a generic AI draft, you’re not ‘leveraging technology,’ you’re mass-producing landfill content. Brown’s method—using AI to challenge your structure, not to write your voice—was the only thing resembling a real strategy. Instead of asking the bot to ‘write a thought leadership post,’ she feeds it her actual draft and tells it to find the holes. That’s a workflow, not a shortcut.
But the cottage industry of AI prompt peddlers doesn’t want you thinking like this. They want you dependent on endless templates and magic commands. Look at every ’10x agency’ hawking ‘AI-powered editorial calendars’—they’re repackaging the same auto-generated mush, billing it at 5x markup, and calling it innovation. These are the same folks who said keyword stuffing was a ‘strategy’ back when TikTok was still about dancing.
If you want to keep your voice and not sound like a poorly localized SaaS landing page, the answer is uncomfortable but simple: write first, AI second. Use the bot to interrogate your logic, spot repetition, and flag where your arguments are limp. Never, ever let it draft your opening or closing. If your intro reads like it came from a menu at a WeWork, you’ve already lost the plot.
So here’s my back-to-school, post-conference recommendation, and it’ll make the AI consultant crowd squirm: ban raw AI output from first drafts. Force every writer—junior or C-suite—to put actual thought on the page before the machine gets a look. Treat AI like a ruthless editor, not a magic wand. You’ll ship fewer articles, but at least you won’t sound like everyone else’s Tuesday newsletter.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why does the article say AI-generated writing is bland?
The article argues that AI-generated writing is bland because it produces generic, formulaic content that lacks a unique human voice.
How does Lorra M. Brown recommend using AI in writing?
Lorra M. Brown recommends using AI to critique and improve the structure of human-written drafts, not to generate content from scratch.
What is the main criticism of ’10x agencies’ and AI consultants in the article?
The article criticizes ’10x agencies’ and AI consultants for selling generic, AI-generated content at inflated prices by repackaging it as innovative solutions.
What workflow does the article suggest for using AI in writing?
The article suggests writers should create an initial human draft first and then use AI as an editor to identify structural weaknesses and repetition.
What is the article’s stance on using raw AI output for first drafts?
The article advises banning raw AI output from first drafts and insists that writers should put their own thoughts on the page before involving AI.


