ATTENTION ALL COPYWRITERS, ART DIRECTORS, DESIGNERS, CREATIVE DIRECTORS, AEs and CLIENTS!

This blog is being interrupted by the horrid resurgence of one very old, very you-should-all-know-better Copy Sin.


I had planned on following “Dear Dimitri” with a piece on how traditional media copywriters can make the switch to digital. Then I drove to Atlanta and – on a lark – tuned in local FM radio on the Interstate, kept with it around town.


I got so sick of hearing it, on the way home I reset the radio dial to NPR. Cranked the CD player too darn loud and tried to get over it. When 300 miles of head bangers, classic C&W and intelligent discourse couldn’t erase it from my hard drive, I knew going digital would have to wait.


In today’s economy, I suppose I shouldn’t be so critical. But really, In today’s economy went out with the 1980’s.


Yet there it is. In a good half of all the radio spots three days of driving put into my ears. It’s all over print, too. I’ve even heard it on TV.


If it’s so popular, how could it be so wrong? The fact that it’s so popular is a big hint.


For those who’ve never taken one of my copywriting classes, let me explain the Kamikaze Copy Sins. They represent all that is overused, trite, boring, lazy, formatted and out-of-style. Everything that’s hackneyed, amateurish, stupid, illogical, forgettable or just plain awful. They are advertising’s worst written habits.


Copy Sins clutter, lengthen, steal time, reduce type size, stop readers cold and are so familiar, prospects don’t even hear/read them. Which means (do I hear Account Review?) they’re not paying attention to your client’s message.


In today’s economy, you can’t afford a big financial mistake, In today’s economy no one needs a big repair bill, In today’s economy $200 is too much to pay for a haircut, yadda yadda yadda. Because it’s a qualifier, In today’s economy implies at any other time, those things would be fine. Kinda like but, it negates everything that comes before it.


Then there’s the disconnect in logic. I don’t know about you, but in my book $200 is always too much for a haircut. A big financial mistake is never good, no matter when it happens. Ditto big repair bills. I personally don’t know anyone who doesn’t know the economy sucks. Why keep insulting me with stuff I already know?


Not only does In this economy. have a logic problem, it’s redundant. It says something we already know. And not in a way so original, it becomes new. It’s redundant now. It’s redundant again again again again and again.


What’s wrong with You can’t afford a big financial mistake? No one needs a big repair bill? $200 is too much to pay for a haircut? They work for me – faster, more immediate. Without extra letters/words to take up time/space.


I'm a Creative. My husband will tell you I’m not the most logical person in the world. Nor am I above repeating myself. In life, conversation, it never gets to a form I can re-read, edit and purge. Ad copy is something else.


Somehow, this awful, hackneyed, illogical, redundant line was approved. By the writer who wrote it. By the partner who didn’t give the writer a reality check. By the ACD, CD, ECD who let it get to the client. By the AE who did the same. By the Client who should expect – no, demand – better work for their money.


Is In this economy the only Kamikaze Copy Sin? Or even the worst? No, there are lots of them. Using so, and, therefore, etc. in place of a proper segue. Overused/ad words that just lay there like (does the car have something “like” seatbelts and airbags, or does it have seatbelts and airbags?), provide (if your client provides something, they just make it available. Big whoop.), convenient (for who/to what? If it’s convenient for me in Charlotte, is it convenient for Mitch in Austin?), designed to (is the product merely designed to do something – or does it do it?) are just the tip of the iceberg. As are clichés, illogical order, bad headline breaks, run-on sentences, ending a paragraph (or ad) with That’s why (or so) in front of a repeated headline. Heck, using That’s why period.


In fifteen years teaching copywriting, I’ve had one student (Merry Carole, take your bow) who never committed a Copy Sin in class. As handouts go, my list of Kamikaze Copy Sins is my most requested.


Just the other day I heard from the ECD of a Dallas agency telling me he still purges “that” from his copy. (Why is that a Copy Sin? Rarely, if ever, do you need it. I dare you – write something, find something written. Put your finger over that wasted word every time it appears. If the line doesn’t read just as well – if not better – without it, you have a structure problem to solve. Something no single, lazy word can solve. Don’t believe me? I wrote a few into this piece. Find them, cover them. Did you miss them? If you did, how was the structure of the line before it, after it, with it?)


With all those – and the rest of the list – to complain about, why am I so annoyed by In this economy? Why not At (company name here) we (do whatever)?* Frankly, because In this economy, it’s the one I hear the most/can’t get away from. Copywriters, ADs, ACDs, CDs, ECDs, AEs, Clients - you should know better. If you don’t, do not show your book to my former students/current ACDs, CDs and ECDs.  They do.






*At (insert company name here) we (insert statement of caring/strength/leadership here)”
Var: “A t_______ we don’t ________”


First of all, a company is never a place – so how can you be at it? Logic problem here. Then there’s the curse of the so-oft-repeated-its-no-longer-credible ad theme. What’s wrong with The people behind Microsoft, for example? Shorter, stronger, not hackneyed to the point of insincerity. I get annoyed when I read/hear at __ we __. Want to cry when I read it on the wall of an agency I’m showing my book to. Hit the wall when I find it one of my former student’s books.  But then, I have never said I love to write mediocre copy, either.