Blog

Why are so many brands getting the basics wrong?

Written by Method Marketing

Spelling mistakes, rogue apostrophes and Americanisms on British websites – we’ve all seen them. But do they really matter? And how much damage can a dodgy bit of copy do?

In this episode, which kicks off Season 4 of the Content Conversations podcast, Lucy Mowatt is joined by content strategist James Gill to explore the impact of poor copy, the rise of generative AI, and why proofreading is still worth its weight in gold. We’re talking misplaced em dashes, AI content saturation, and data from the  State of Content survey 2019.

Whether you’re a marketing pro, a copywriter, or just a stickler for good grammar, this one’s for you. Hit play, read on, or catch the highlights below.

Why are so many brands getting the basics wrong?

Listen now

Follow us on Spotify

In this episode...

The State of Content Survey 2025

Lucy kicks off the episode by revisiting her State of Content survey, originally launched in 2019 to find out whether spelling, grammar and language mistakes in marketing copy really bother people. The results? They do – overwhelmingly so. Highlights from the original survey include:

  • 94% of respondents were less likely to buy from brands that make errors.

  • 93% were less likely to trust them.

  • 84% noticed mistakes in marketing copy.

The pair agree that despite increased use of generative AI tools, mistakes are still prevalent – and in some cases, becoming more Americanised. This includes unwanted US spelling and the overuse of stylistic elements like em dashes and Oxford commas.

The discussion dives into the emotional response people have to poor copy, especially in high-trust industries like finance, education and law. Both hosts highlight the danger of brands appearing sloppy or careless, especially when poor copy undermines their professionalism.

Gill makes the point that while generative AI and tools like Grammarly can help catch errors, they often strip out tone and voice – reinforcing the need for human proofreading. Lucy agrees, arguing that good writing isn’t just about technical accuracy, but also about authority, nuance and audience connection.

The generative AI paradox

The episode goes on to explore the rise of AI-generated content. While tools like ChatGPT can produce copy quickly, Lucy and Gill argue that the ease of creation has raised the baseline to “five-out-of-ten” copy – generic, repetitive and lacking originality.

Gill stresses that competitive advantage now lies in content that goes beyond the average – using human writers to inject insight, tone and specificity. Lucy adds that well-crafted content speaks directly to a brand’s expertise and values, which AI alone can’t replicate.

Fame, SEO and AI discovery

They wrap up with a look at how AI tools are affecting website traffic and SEO. Gill shares insights from a client whose site ranks highly on Google but doesn’t appear in generative AI outputs – highlighting the importance of brand recognition and broader web presence (or “fame”) in shaping AI responses.

They also touch on how generative AI might be reshaping search behaviour, with tools like Perplexity offering citations and deeper research opportunities – something Lucy particularly appreciates for its transparency and user control.

The takeaway

While tools like ChatGPT and Grammarly have their place, Lucy and Gill agree that high-quality content still depends on human input – particularly when it comes to brand tone, attention to detail, and originality. If your copy is riddled with errors or indistinguishable from AI-generated filler, it’s likely doing more harm than good.

Listen to the full episode wherever you get your podcasts, or contact Lucy via hello@methodmarketing.org to share news and topics for a future discussion.

Share this post