Substance comes before refusal

Whenever I read “Built for X”, I instantly think AI. It’s a shame that’s the case, but AI has trained me and many others to think that way. I’ve seen it not only across competitor brands, but all across e-commerce in general. So I made the decision to steer clear of it. Avoiding it made my copy feel safe because it was less like AI, but it didn’t make it any more on-brand. It didn’t make my copy any better. It just made it less bad.

To be fair, refusal rules do something useful. They give you confidence when writing. They also play a part in something bigger, which is consistency, the cornerstone of brand identity. Brands are always lured by the shiny new toy, but as Mark Ritson argues, staying consistent pays off in the long term. It helps you cultivate an organic, evergreen side of your brand rather than chasing after trends and ad spend. Refusals don’t create that consistency, but they do protect it once substance exists.

So what happens if you take a generic product description and strip out every AI tell? No “Built for X”, no em dashes, none of the usual giveaways. It’s still empty. Removing the tells doesn’t add the substance. At best, the copy is free from AI slop, but it’s no closer to sounding like your brand.

Think of it like medicine. If you’re sick, medicine stops you being unhappy, but it doesn’t make you happy. Refusal rules are the medicine. They stop your copy being bad, but they can’t make it good.

Where does the substance come from, then? People. Matt started Fractel after realising the benefits of being outdoors and running. I get it. For me, it comes down to what it does for my mental health. How good does a run make you feel, or a surf in the ocean. Our customers share that same love, and they notice the small things, like the high ponytail hole on our E-Series. That detail only comes from listening to runners. That’s what replaces “Built for X”. You describe what runners actually notice.

AI can help shape that message, but only once the substance is there. Think of it like a marathon. You can’t fake it on race day. You need to put in a solid training block, strengthened by research into nutrition, taking care of your body and buying the right gear for you. AI output works the same way. You can’t magically use it to find the formula. It needs preparation in the form of data and iterations, just like a running coach gives you feedback, or your body lets you know how it’s feeling in response to your training load and sessions.

The best refusals come from those beliefs. Finisterre refuses to speak to the masses. Its gear is functional, designed for its own climate and where it comes from, and it talks about it simply, without jargon. The weakest refusals are just style tics. If I’m honest, my “Built for X” rule is closer to the second kind.

This is where brands split. Brands chasing efficiency lean on AI and weak refusals, which only defends them from being labelled AI slop. How boring. Brands that give their teams the space, resources and time to be creative are always on the attack. They drive their own story and steer the narrative.

This is me thinking out loud, and none of it is anti-AI. I use AI, I notice it everywhere, and like everyone else, I’m still working out its role in business and in life.