The Most Important Word in Copywriting: YOU

by guest author Jeff Sexton

It happens to the best of us - literally, as it’s only the good copywriters who try to move past schlocky “we-we” copy and who sometimes fall into what I call the “over-presumptuous use of You” trap.

Here’s an example:

“You don't need to sort through another pile of "qualified" resumes. You need three, maybe five strong Candidates. You don't just want talent. You need people who share your vision and will help you realize it.

You don't want a lot of "viable" options. You need people who will blend with your culture and add energy and value. You need people who routinely outperform their job descriptions. You need to find people who aren't looking for you.

You need professionals, not professional interviewers.”

This copy, taken from the home page of a magnetagency.net, was written by the Grok’s brilliant former editor, Robert Gorell.  And overall, I like how it immediately addresses the “why do business with us” question; there’s no question that Robert is a good writer.  But the consistent use of “you” bugs me. 

I don’t like being told what I want, or think, or need.  And it’s not just me,  Most people don’t like web copy that presumes to “know” or “speak” for them.  All of which is triggered by the repeated “You” statements. 

See how much cleaner the copy reads with the “you” eliminated:

Stop sorting through piles of "qualified" resumes and the merely "viable" options.

Spend your time on the 3-5 strong candidates that matter; the people who will blend with your culture and routinely outperform their job descriptions.

We can help you find these people – the ones who aren't looking for you and who won’t show up in your pile of “usual suspects.”

So I replaced the explicit “You” with an implied “you” by using imperative verbs in the first two sentences.  But the thing about those imperative verbs is that most people read them as offers rather than commands, so they come off as far more inviting (and less presumptuous) than the explicit you.  It’s a trick similar to the one Jay McKinerney used in the first few lines of his novel Bright Lights, Big City:

IT’S SIX A.M.  DO YOU KNOW WHERE YOU ARE?

“You are not the kind of guy who would be at a place like this at this time of the morning.  But here you are, and you cannot say that the terrain is entirely unfamiliar, although the details are fuzzy.  You are at a nightclub talking to a girl with a shaved head.  The club is either the Heartbreak or the Lizard Lounge.  All might come clear if you could just slip into the bathroom and do a little more Bolivian Marching Powder.  Then again, it might not.  A small voice inside you insists that this epidemic lack of clarity is a result of too much of that already…”
                      - Jay McInerney, Bright Lights, Big City

And here’s what Colleen Mariah Rae had to say about this brilliant opening in her book Movies in the Mind:

“With the choice of second person, McInerney brings the reader as close into the story as it’s possible to do…We’re not watching this character; we are this character.  And notice how McInerney does this.  He creates an alter ego for the reader: ‘You are not the kind of guy who would be at a place like this at this time of the morning.’    Instead of triggering the usual “not me” reaction he would have gotten if he’d said, ‘Here you are; the club is either the Heartbreak or the Lizard Lounge,’ he lets the reader enter the story by saying, in essence, ‘In know you would never be here.’  It’s like having diplomatic immunity.  You can say, do, think, feel, be anything you want because it’s not really you”   [Bolding mine]

Did you get that?  The “Not me reaction” that’s triggered by too directly or presumptuously using “You.” 

Ms. Rae is right: McInerney softened it just enough to avoid the reaction.  And the same can be said for dropping the presumptuous “You” in Robert’s copy in favor of more friendly imperative verbs: it softens the messaging just enough to get around the “Not me” reaction.

Comments

[Susan Weinschenk]

It might make for smoother prose to leave out the word YOU, but the word YOU captures the attention of the "old" brain. That's what makes it seem so annoying to read (because it keeps grabbing your attention, making it hard to keep reading on), but that is also why it's so powerful. I write about it in Neuro Web Design: What makes them click (www.neurowebbook.com).

[Susan Weinschenk]

It might make for smoother prose to leave out the word YOU, but the word YOU captures the attention of the "old" brain. That's what makes it seem so annoying to read (because it keeps grabbing your attention, making it hard to keep reading on), but that is also why it's so powerful. I write about it in Neuro Web Design: What makes them click (www.neurowebbook.com).

[Susan Weinschenk]

It might make for smoother prose to leave out the word YOU, but the word YOU captures the attention of the "old" brain. That's what makes it seem so annoying to read (because it keeps grabbing your attention, making it hard to keep reading on), but that is also why it's so powerful. I write about it in Neuro Web Design: What makes them click (www.neurowebbook.com).

[Jeffrey Eisenberg]

I agree that Robert may be too generous in his use of "you". Jeff's copy is smoother but loses the personal impact Robert achieved. I don't have the time to rewrite a third time but using elements of both would make for better copy.