ChatGPT content is too clean and 7 more shortcomings

How you can recognize AI-generated content and do better

We're a few months into the AI hype, and ChatGPT has become a staple of the content tools. Here's what you need to know and identify ChatGPT and AI-generated content. So you can polish your content and do better.

Don't get me wrong; you're crazy if you don't embrace and use AI. Yet, use ChatGPT as your wingman, for research, ideation, and improving your writing. Not to do all the work for you.

This especially goes for the thought leadership content pieces, where the author claims knowledge. If they use ChatGPT to write all the content for them, they're busted and perceived as inauthentic and fake.

The eight elements on how to recognize ChatGPT copy.

1. No real intro; immediate dive into the listicle

The structure of AI written copy is almost always the same. You do the prompt, and ChatGPT provides the answer. Without an intro, context sketching, or personal note on why it matters.

2. Listicles or similar structure

Even if you remove the bullets, you recognize the listicle structure in the text. ChatGPT has a catalog-like way of giving information.

3. The text feels generic

This makes sense, as ChatGPT is based on probability and predictability. ChatGPT provides more or less the same answer to prompts. There's no personality or identity.

If you or I write the prompt, the answer is the same. However, if you to me write copy, it will be totally different.

4. No first-person point of view

ChatGPT copy is always written in a neutral, second or third-person view. Yet, most writers write in the first-person view, lacing the copy with personal thoughts and feelings.

Content, the power of a POV

5. No sources or credits

ChatGPT doesn't reveal its sources, nor can it give credits. So, if there are no references, you'll know enough.

Any honest and upfront thought leader will always refer to their sources and give credit where credits are due.

6. No bias or personality in the copy

As ChatGPT is unbiased, and that's also one of its strengths, the output lacks personality. As mentioned above, any good writer will tap into their own thoughts, feelings, and biased to write and share knowledge and insights.

I often hear that I write in the same way as I speak. I'll take that as a compliment that, one, my writing is on par, and two, my writing is personal.

7. Too clean copy

ChatGPT is quite a perfectionist when it comes to writing. No typos, no grammar flaws. It's like overusing Grammarly pro. Your copy becomes perfect in grammar and f*cking boring as hell.

Another thing is that ChatGPT uses very long sentences with little to no variation between them. All sentences are more or less the same length. Any seasoned writer knows you have to vary. Between short and long. To keep some variation and tension in the copy.

8. No consistency between the multiple posts

Usually, there's consistency between posts by the same writer. You recognize a brand voice by the specific tone of voice and words used.

If ChatGPT writes the copy for you, there's no identity. No identity means no consistency.

Final words: ChatGPT is your ally

That all said, yes, AI and ChatGPT have their shortcomings. If you are aware of them, you can use them to your advantage. There is nothing wrong with using AI; you're even crazy if you don't embrace it.

Please, do use ChatGPT as your wingman, for research, ideation, proofreading, and improving your writing.

ChatGPT-4 versus ChatGPT-3.5

The 4 is the paid version. Since a few weeks, I pay for ChatGPT-4. In the beginning, I was quite skeptical until I started asking more questions, diving into the matters, and using it for proofreading. That's when and where you really notice a difference in the output. It's more accurate, more to the point, and has better suggestions.

Still, when I ask ChatGPT-4 to write for me, it's the same as with 3.5. No matter how much I include my tone of voice in the prompt, it still doesn't sound like me. I prefer to write myself and use ChatGPT as my wingman, not as my producer.