Why Your Ad Copy Sounds Like Everyone Else's

Where generic copy comes from

The standard advice is to research your competitors before writing. Look at what they say. Understand the category. Then write something better.

The problem is that immersion in a category's language is contagious. You spend three hours reading competitor websites and come away with a head full of their framing, their vocabulary, their structure. Then you sit down to write something different — and the words that come out sound like a synthesis of everything you just read.

That is the first source. Two more follow it down the production chain.

Brief-washing

A marketing brief passes through product, legal, sales, and management before it reaches the writer. Each person edits it. Product removes the specific claim that is not yet formally approved. Legal softens the outcome guarantee. Sales adjusts the audience description to include more segments. Management adds a line about values.

By the time the brief reaches the writer, it says: "We help Australian businesses grow through strategic, tailored solutions." That is not a brief. That is the sound of all specificity being averaged out.

Approval chains

The writer produces a draft with a specific claim: "We find errors in 65% of the BAS returns we review in the first 12 months." That is specific. That is checkable. That is the kind of claim a competitor cannot easily copy.

It goes into review. Someone asks: what if we say 65% this year and it is 62% next year? Someone else says: this might alienate accountants we want as referral partners. Someone else says: it sounds like we are criticising other accountants.

The draft comes back: "We take a thorough approach to compliance review." The specific claim is gone. The copy now sounds like every other accounting firm in Sydney.

Category language — the specific problem

Every industry develops a shared vocabulary over time. Not because any one business invented the words, but because the words feel safe — they are used widely, they signal category membership, and they are unlikely to offend anyone.

Here is what category language looks like across four Australian industries:

The signal "I am in this industry" is only useful to someone who does not already know you exist. Everyone else who reads your ad already knows you are an accounting firm. What they need to know is why you are the right one.

Category language does not answer that question. It cannot. By definition, it is the language that every business in the category already uses.

The so-what test

Take your current headline. Read it aloud. Then ask: so what?

If the answer is another vague claim, ask again. Keep going until you reach something a real person would read and think: that is for me. That is the claim that belongs in your headline.

Here is what the test looks like in practice:

• "Award-winning marketing agency" — so what?
• We have won industry awards — so what?
• We are recognised by our peers — so what?
• We have a track record of measurable results — specifically what results?
• "We have helped 3 Sydney healthcare practices double their Google inquiry volume in 6 months." That survives the test.

The number of times you need to ask so-what before you reach a real claim is a direct measure of how much category language you started with. Most headlines take three or four rounds. Some take seven.

Three edits that fix most copy

1. Replace every adjective with a number or a named outcome

Adjectives are placeholders. "Experienced" is a placeholder for how long and how many. "Comprehensive" is a placeholder for what, specifically, is included. "Dedicated" is a placeholder for a response time or a named point of contact.

The edit: wherever you find an adjective in a headline or subheading, ask what it is hiding. Then replace it with the actual number.

• "Experienced team" becomes "17 years in practice, 340 clients served"
• "Comprehensive SEO service" becomes "12-point SEO audit, delivered in 5 business days"
• "Dedicated support" becomes "One named account manager, same person every time"

Each of those revised claims is smaller than the adjective it replaced. "Experienced" implies more than "17 years." That is fine. Specific claims convert better than inflated ones, because specific claims are believable.

2. Name the enemy before you name the solution

Most ad copy skips directly to the product. Here is what we offer, here is why it is good, here is the price. The problem with this structure is that it assumes the reader is already convinced they have a problem worth solving. Often they are not.

The edit: before any claim about your service, write one sentence that names the specific problem the customer has before they find you. Not a vague frustration. A named, concrete situation.

• Not: "Struggling with your finances?"
• But: "Most small business owners in Australia find out about a BAS problem after it has already cost them."

The reader who has had that experience will stop scrolling. The reader who has not will keep going. Both outcomes are correct. Ads that try to keep everyone reading convert no one.

3. Specificity beats emphasis

The instinct when copy feels weak is to add intensity: "We are really good at X." "Nobody does X better." "We are passionate about X." None of these work. A reader who does not already trust you will not be moved by your confidence in yourself.

A smaller, specific claim outconverts a larger, vague one. "We respond to every new client inquiry within 2 hours on business days" is a more modest claim than "we are deeply committed to client service." It converts better because it is checkable — and because it is the kind of claim a reader can picture.

A before-and-after with a real example

Here is a headline that appears, in some form, on the Google Ads landing pages of dozens of Sydney accounting firms:

Trusted accountants for small businesses in Sydney.

Apply the so-what test: so what? You are trusted — who says? You serve small businesses — so does every accountant in the area. You are in Sydney — that narrows the geography, not the choice.

Now apply all three edits. What specific problem does a small business owner have before they contact an accountant? Often it is this: their previous accountant missed something, and they found out about it later and it cost them. That is the enemy. Name it.

Most of our clients find us after their previous accountant missed something on their BAS. We check twice.

What changed:

• The enemy is named."Previous accountant missed something on their BAS" describes a situation that a significant proportion of small business owners in Australia have experienced. That reader stops.
• The specific mechanism is named."We check twice" is a concrete process claim. It does not say we are thorough or comprehensive. It says what we do.
• No adjectives. No trusted, no tailored, no peace of mind. Three words replaced a category adjective with a checkable action.
• It disqualifies some readers. Someone who has never had an issue with a previous accountant may read past this. That is correct. The ad is not for them.

The revised headline is not clever. It is not a tagline. A brand-voice person might object that it does not sound premium. All of that is true, and none of it matters if the click-through rate is three times higher.