One draft, two prompts, three AI models. Did they improve my writing?

How do you write content people will actually read?

Start by thinking about the texts you enjoy reading yourself. Substantial, clear, structured, interesting from the first line, able to hold your attention, entertaining or informative. Ideally, both. The world around us is so saturated with content that capturing and holding attention has become quite a challenge. This is where tried-and-tested journalism and editing techniques can help.

When I read content on company websites, whether it’s blog posts, landing pages, core website pages, or case studies, I immediately notice when the opening has no substance. It starts with “once upon a time”, the history of the internet, or a very general description of problems everyone already knows about.

This can happen because of clumsy use of AI, or because the writer doesn’t understand how to edit these texts or how people read and consume information. As a result, potentially good material with valuable insights becomes boring from the first few lines. I’m patient, but even I’m quick to close the tab.

Sometimes a clear structure with subheadings you can scan quickly can save it. But even that is often a luxury. Then reading becomes painful, and nobody likes pain. Well, almost nobody.

My favourite is something like: “In today’s fast-paced digital world, technology is evolving rapidly, and businesses need to adapt to stay competitive.” You’ve seen clichés like this, surely? They make my eyes bleed.

After the headline, the lead or introduction is the writer’s main opportunity to grab the reader’s attention and get them interested. And it doesn’t have to be super short. Sometimes even several paragraphs are justified if they’re needed to establish the topic and offer an important insight or a hook.

So how do you make a text interesting and readable? There are a few fairly simple techniques.

Please improve this draft for a blog aimed at marketers and business leaders. Make it clear, engaging, and easy to read. Improve the flow, remove unnecessary wording, and keep it conversational rather than corporate. Use British English.

Return the edited text and briefly explain the main changes.

Draft: [Insert the original draft here.]

Edit the draft below for a blog aimed at marketers and business leaders. Apply journalistic and editorial techniques to make the argument clearer and the writing tighter while preserving the author’s voice.

The material is about how structure and editing help writers get their point across. Edit the supplied passage, not an imagined full article. Do not add new sections or a conclusion to complete it.

Editorial instructions:

1. Identify the main point. Check whether the opening communicates it or gives the reader a concrete reason to continue. Remove generic introductory material that adds nothing. Preserve a story or problem-led opening when it serves the piece; do not automatically force an inverted pyramid.

2. Put the ideas in a logical order. Move paragraphs where necessary, remove duplication, and preserve the connections between ideas. Leave effective wording alone.

3. Cut ruthlessly. Remove empty phrases, repetition, and explanations of the obvious. Prefer wording that says more with fewer words. Stop when another cut would remove useful meaning, context, a necessary qualification, humour, or the author’s voice. Do not replace repetition with synonyms and leave it in place.

4. Keep the language conversational, direct, and specific. Preserve the author’s sharp phrasing and personal observations. Check for awkward phrasing, repetitive sentence patterns, and unnecessarily choppy sentences. Use natural transitions. Avoid corporate language, stock phrases, and rhetorical questions added just to create suspense.

5. Preserve factual meaning and the strength of each claim. Do not turn “may” into “will”, an association into a cause, or an observation into a universal rule. Do not invent facts, statistics, quotations, sources, or the author’s experiences. Flag missing evidence rather than supplying it.

6. Use British English and Oxford commas.

Before returning the edit, compare it with the original: check that you have not lost a substantive point, changed a claim, or added unnecessary explanation.

Return:

• The edited passage.
• A brief explanation of the main changes.
• Any unresolved questions or evidence gaps, if needed.

<draft>
Insert the original draft here.
</draft>

I counted the edited passage, including internal subheadings, but excluded the main headline, output labels, and explanations. Contractions and hyphenated words count as single words; percentages are rounded. Gemini omitted the headline in its Editorial response, so I excluded headlines consistently. Missing spaces after punctuation in the saved documents do not merge words in this count.

Edited passage

How do you write content people will actually read?

Think about the content you enjoy reading. It’s clear, well-structured and engaging from the first line. It has something worthwhile to say and holds your attention. It might be entertaining, informative or, ideally, both.

We’re surrounded by so much content that getting people’s attention — and keeping it — is harder than ever. That’s where tried-and-tested journalism and editing techniques can make a real difference.

When I read content on company websites — blog posts, landing pages, case studies or even core website pages — I often notice the same problem: the opening says almost nothing.

Instead of getting to the point, it starts with a lengthy backstory, a brief history of the internet or a generic description of a problem everyone already knows about.

Sometimes it’s the result of clumsy AI use. Other times, the writer simply hasn’t thought enough about editing or how people actually read and consume content.

Either way, potentially useful material with valuable insights becomes boring within the first few lines. And while I consider myself a patient reader, even I’m quick to close the tab.

A clear structure and a few well-placed subheadings can sometimes save the day. But often, even those are missing. Reading becomes a chore, and nobody likes a chore. Well, almost nobody.

One of my personal favourites is:

“In today’s fast-paced digital world, technology is evolving rapidly, and businesses need to adapt to stay competitive.”

Sound familiar? Clichés like this make my eyes bleed.

After the headline, the opening is your best chance to give readers a reason to keep going. It needs to spark curiosity, offer something useful or make them feel they’ve come to the right place.

That doesn’t mean every introduction has to be short and punchy. Sometimes a few paragraphs are exactly what you need to set the scene, establish context and introduce an interesting idea. The key is to make every sentence earn its place.

So how do you make your content more interesting and easier to read?

A few simple techniques can go a long way.

Model’s explanation

Made the opening more direct. Replaced the list of adjectives with a more natural description of what makes content worth reading.

Improved the flow. Created clearer transitions between the problem of information overload, weak website copy, common causes and practical solutions.

Cut repetition and unnecessary wording. Tightened sentences without losing the original argument or examples.

Kept your personality. Preserved the conversational tone, first-person observations, dry humour and the memorable “make my eyes bleed” line.

Strengthened the key points. Gave the criticism of empty introductions more impact and clarified what a good opening should achieve.

Improved the transition to the next section. The ending now leads more naturally into the practical techniques that presumably follow.

One editorial choice worth highlighting: I kept the argument that introductions don’t always have to be short. It’s an important distinction: good editing isn’t simply about cutting words, but about making sure every sentence gives the reader a reason to continue.

Edited passage

How do you write content people will actually read?

When I read content on company websites, whether it’s blog posts, landing pages, core website pages, or case studies, I immediately notice when the opening has no substance. It starts with “once upon a time”, the history of the internet, or a general description of problems everyone already knows about.

My favourite is something like: “In today’s fast-paced digital world, technology is evolving rapidly, and businesses need to adapt to stay competitive.” You’ve seen clichés like this, surely? They make my eyes bleed.

This can happen because of clumsy use of AI, or because the writer doesn’t understand how to edit or how people read and consume information. As a result, potentially valuable material becomes boring from the first few lines. I’m patient, but even I’m quick to close the tab.

Sometimes a clear structure with subheadings you can scan quickly can save it. But even that is often a luxury. Reading becomes painful, and nobody likes pain. Well, almost nobody.

Think about the texts you enjoy reading yourself. They’re substantial, clear, well-structured, and interesting from the first line. They hold your attention and entertain or inform. Ideally, both. With so much content competing for attention, tried-and-tested journalism and editing techniques can help.

After the headline, the opening is the writer’s main opportunity to capture the reader’s attention and give them a reason to keep reading. It doesn’t have to be super short. Even several paragraphs can be justified if they establish the topic and offer an important insight or a hook.

So how do you make a text interesting and readable? There are a few fairly simple techniques.

Model’s explanation

Moved the author’s observation to the opening. The original began with general advice about what makes content readable. The revised version starts with a recognisable problem on company websites, giving marketers and business leaders a more immediate reason to care.

Brought the cliché closer to the criticism. The “fast-paced digital world” example now follows the description of empty introductions. It demonstrates the problem rather than arriving several paragraphs later.

Removed repetition and tightened sentences. Cut overlapping references to capturing attention, unnecessary qualifiers, and wordy constructions. For example, “potentially good material with valuable insights becomes boring” becomes “potentially valuable material becomes boring”.

Improved the progression. The passage now moves from the problem, to a concrete example, to possible causes and consequences, then to what effective writing looks like and how editorial techniques can help.

Preserved the author’s voice. Kept “They make my eyes bleed”, the observation about closing the tab, “Well, almost nobody”, and the conversational questions. These give the piece personality without undermining its argument.

Kept the qualification about length. The point isn’t that all introductions should be short, but that they should earn the reader’s attention. The revised passage preserves that distinction.

Unresolved questions or evidence gaps

There are no factual claims that require evidence for this passage to work as a personal, observation-led introduction.

The suggestion that weak openings can result from clumsy AI use or poor editing remains an observation, not a proven causal relationship. The wording retains that qualification.

One editorial consideration: the passage promises “a few fairly simple techniques”. The material that follows should deliver specific, practical advice on structure and editing. Otherwise, the introduction risks making the same mistake it criticises: promising value without delivering it.

Edited passage

How do you write content people will actually read?

Think about the things you enjoy reading. They’re probably clear, well structured and interesting from the first line. They hold your attention because they either entertain or inform you, ideally both.

That’s harder to pull off than ever. We’re drowning in content, and grabbing someone’s attention (let alone keeping it) is a real challenge. This is where a few tried-and-tested techniques from journalism and editing can help.

The problem with most openings

When I read content on company websites, whether it’s blog posts, landing pages, core pages or case studies, I can tell straight away when an opening has nothing to say. It starts with “once upon a time”, a potted history of the internet, or a vague description of problems everyone already knows about.

My personal favourite goes something like this: “In today’s fast-paced digital world, technology is evolving rapidly, and businesses need to adapt to stay competitive.” You’ve seen it. We all have. It makes my eyes bleed.

Sometimes this is down to clumsy use of AI. Sometimes the writer simply doesn’t know how to edit, or how people actually read online. Either way, the result is the same: material that might contain genuinely useful insights turns dull within a few lines. I’m a patient reader, but even I close the tab.

A clear structure with subheadings you can scan can sometimes rescue a piece. Often, though, even that’s missing. Reading becomes painful, and nobody likes pain. Well, almost nobody.

Make your introduction earn its place

After the headline, your introduction (or “lead”, as journalists call it) is your best chance to hook the reader. It doesn’t have to be short. Sometimes several paragraphs are justified, as long as they set up the topic and offer a real insight or a reason to keep reading.

So how do you make your writing interesting and readable? Here are a few simple techniques.

Model’s explanation

Tighter opening. I replaced the list of adjectives (“substantial, clear, structured…”) with two short sentences, so the piece starts with energy rather than a catalogue.

Reordered for flow. The cliché example now sits right after you describe weak openings. It’s the perfect illustration of that point, and in the original it arrived two paragraphs later and felt detached.

Cut wordiness. For example, “The world around us is so saturated with content that capturing and holding attention has become quite a challenge” became “We’re drowning in content…”, and “how people read and consume information” became “how people actually read online”.

Added subheadings. The piece argues for scannable structure, so it helps if it practises what it preaches. Drop them if your blog format doesn’t suit them.

Kept your voice. The humour (“nobody likes pain. Well, almost nobody”, “makes my eyes bleed”) stays, with a little extra rhythm (“You’ve seen it. We all have.”).

British English and conventions. “Favourite” is kept, and the phrasing follows UK usage (“potted history”, “straight away”). If your house style uses single quotation marks, swap the doubles.

Edited passage

How do you write content people will actually read?

Think about the texts you enjoy reading: substantial, clear, structured, and interesting from the first line. Entertaining or informative. Ideally, both. With so much content competing for attention, capturing and holding it has become a real challenge. This is where tried-and-tested journalism and editing techniques can help.

When I read content on company websites, whether blog posts, landing pages, core pages, or case studies, I notice straight away when the opening has no substance. It starts with “once upon a time”, the history of the internet, or a general description of problems everyone already knows about.

My favourite is something like: “In today’s fast-paced digital world, technology is evolving rapidly, and businesses need to adapt to stay competitive.” You’ve seen clichés like this, surely? They make my eyes bleed.

Sometimes it’s clumsy use of AI. Sometimes the writer doesn’t understand how to edit or how people read and consume information. Either way, potentially good material with valuable insights becomes boring within the first few lines. I’m patient, but even I’m quick to close the tab.

A clear structure with scannable subheadings can sometimes save it, but even that is often a luxury. Then reading becomes painful, and nobody likes pain. Well, almost nobody.

After the headline, the lead is the writer’s main opportunity to grab the reader’s attention. It doesn’t have to be super short. Several paragraphs can be justified if they’re needed to establish the topic and offer an important insight or hook.

A few fairly simple techniques can make a text interesting and readable.

Model’s explanation

Opening: I kept your reader-centred opening, because it sets up the standard you go on to apply. I trimmed the list of qualities: “able to hold your attention” repeated “interesting from the first line”. I also replaced “The world around us is so saturated with content” with a shorter clause that makes the same point.

Order: I moved the “In today’s fast-paced digital world” example up so it sits directly after your description of weak openings. That way the reader gets the concrete example before the explanation of why it happens. Previously it appeared after the subheadings point, which broke the thread.

Causes paragraph: I split “This can happen because of… or because…” into two short parallel sentences and added “Either way” to link them to the consequence.

Cuts: I removed “yourself”, “very”, “or introduction”, “and get them interested” (already covered by “grab the reader’s attention”), and “And” before “it doesn’t have to be”. I changed “from the first few lines” to “within”, which reads more naturally with “becomes boring”.

Final line: I turned the closing rhetorical question into a statement so the passage leads straight into the techniques without a suspense question. If you prefer the question as a deliberate signpost, it works fine to restore it.

Voice preserved: I kept “make my eyes bleed”, “I’m patient, but even I’m quick to close the tab”, “Well, almost nobody”, “super short”, and your rhetorical “surely?”. These carry your personality.

Open questions

Headline or first line? I’ve treated “How do you write content people will actually read?” as the headline. If it’s meant to be the first sentence of the body, consider replacing it with something more specific, since the piece itself warns against generic openings.

“Once upon a time”: Is this literal, or shorthand for long-winded backstory? If it’s shorthand, a real example like your cliché quote would land harder.

AI claim: Blaming clumsy AI use is presented as your observation, which is fine. If you want it to carry more weight with business readers, an example or source would help.

Ending: The passage ends by promising techniques it doesn’t list. I haven’t added them, as you asked. Just make sure the next section follows immediately.

Edited passage

How do you write content people will actually read?

Start by thinking about what holds your own attention. It is usually writing that has substance, gets straight to the point, and offers genuine insight—ideally entertaining, informative, or both. In a market flooded with noise, earning a reader’s focus has never been harder. This is where classical journalism and sharp editorial instincts make all the difference.

Yet far too much B2B copy—from blog posts to case studies—falls flat before it even begins. You know the type: an opening that recites the history of the internet, waffles through obvious background, or serves up a lifeless corporate cliché:

“In today’s fast-paced digital world, businesses must adapt to stay competitive.”

We’ve all seen it. It’s filler, and it’s an immediate signal to close the tab.

This usually happens for two reasons: clumsy AI prompting, or a writer who hasn’t considered how busy professionals actually consume information. Brilliant insights get buried beneath throat-clearing prose, and expecting a reader to wade through fluff is wishful thinking.

Your headline earns the click, but your opening paragraph earns the read. It doesn’t have to be artificially brief—a longer setup works if every sentence builds momentum and delivers value—but it must earn its keep.

So, how do you hook an audience and keep them reading? Here are a few straightforward techniques to sharpen your copy.

Model’s explanation

Tightened the pace and eliminated filler: Removed redundant phrasing (such as “the world around us is so saturated” and “texts you enjoy reading yourself”) to reach the core argument much faster.

Separated the cliché for impact: Pulled out the generic “fast-paced digital world” quote into a blockquote so it immediately resonates as a cautionary example.

Replaced hyperbole with grounded authority: Swapped overly dramatic phrasing like “makes my eyes bleed” with punchy, peer-level observations that feel natural rather than exaggerated.

Refined the messaging on introductions: Articulated the editorial function of the lead clearly (“Your headline earns the click, but your opening paragraph earns the read”), making the advice more actionable for marketing and business leaders.

Unified tone and British spelling: Adjusted sentence cadence to maintain an engaging, editorial voice that avoids both corporate jargon and casual rambling.

Edited passage

When I read content on company websites—whether blog posts, landing pages, or case studies—I immediately notice when an opening lacks substance. It starts with ‘once upon a time’, the history of the internet, or a generic description of problems everyone already knows about.

My favourite: ‘In today’s fast-paced digital world, technology is evolving rapidly, and businesses need to adapt to stay competitive.’ You’ve seen clichés like this, surely? They make my eyes bleed.

This can happen because of clumsy use of AI, or because the writer doesn’t understand how to edit or how people consume information. As a result, potentially valuable material becomes boring from the first few lines. I’m patient, but even I’m quick to close the tab.

After the headline, the lead is the writer’s main opportunity to capture the reader’s interest. It does not have to be brief; several paragraphs are justified if they establish the topic and offer an important insight or hook.

A clear structure with scannable subheadings can sometimes save a piece, but even that is often a luxury. Without it, reading becomes painful, and nobody likes pain. Well, almost nobody.

Writing content that people will actually read comes down to a few tried-and-tested journalism and editing techniques.

Model’s explanation

Eliminated Generic Throat-Clearing: Removed the opening rhetorical question, the prompt to “think about texts you enjoy”, and the cliché about a “content-saturated world”. These added no new information and delayed the argument. Opening immediately with the author’s critique gives the reader a concrete problem to engage with.

Reordered Ideas for Narrative Logic:

Moved the cliché example (“In today’s fast-paced digital world…”) directly below the description of hollow openings, rather than leaving it isolated after the discussion of structure.

Grouped the critique of the lead, the root causes (AI and lack of editing), and the editorial standard for leads together, before transitioning into body structure (subheadings). This follows the reader’s natural journey down a page: headline lead structural layout.

Pruned Repetition and Wordiness:

Condensed “core website pages, landing pages…” to remove overlapping site categories.

Removed tautologies such as “grab the reader’s attention and get them interested” and “read and consume”.

Converted “subheadings you can scan quickly” to “scannable subheadings”.

Preserved Voice and Conversational Tone: Kept personal, characterful touches intact, including the opening observation, the quip “They make my eyes bleed”, and the dry aside “Well, almost nobody.”

Applied British English and Oxford Commas: Standardised spelling (favourite), applied serial commas across lists, and used single quotation marks for referenced phrases.

Unresolved Questions & Evidence Gaps

The AI Claim: The draft asserts that weak openings can result from the “clumsy use of AI”. If this piece targets marketers and business leaders, briefly specifying what clumsy AI usage looks like here (e. g. unprompted corporate boilerplates or raw generic summaries) would strengthen the critique.

The Multi-Paragraph Lead: The author defends multi-paragraph leads if they deliver “an important insight or hook”. In digital business writing, long leads often increase bounce rates; clarifying how a longer lead maintains reader momentum (or providing a brief example) would support this claim.