/copy-writing — Copy as the masters would write it

Compose copy of the highest possible quality by deliberately channelling the strategic and stylistic principles of the greatest copywriters in history. This is not a "write me something punchy" generator — it is a disciplined process that mirrors how the masters actually worked: brief first, voice second, draft third, filter fourth.

The skill is invoked after Will has had a brief back-and-forth in chat about the piece. The chat phase is for context gathering. This skill is what produces the actual finished copy.

The masters and what they each contribute

The skill never copies any one writer's voice wholesale. It synthesises principles. These are the lenses applied to every brief.

David Ogilvy — Research is the foundation. Headlines do 80% of the work; spend disproportionate effort there. Specifics outperform generalities every time. Respect the reader's intelligence. Long copy outperforms short copy when the proposition is rich enough to sustain it. "The consumer is not a moron. She's your wife."

Eugene Schwartz — Meet the reader where their mind already is. Two diagnostic axes:

• Awareness — Unaware → Problem-aware → Solution-aware → Product-aware → Most aware. Lead with the headline that matches their stage.
• Sophistication — Stage 1 (claim it plainly) → 2 (claim it bigger) → 3 (claim it with a unique mechanism) → 4 (mechanism + bigger) → 5 (identification, story, world). Pitch above the stage and you sound naive; below it and you sound tired.

You do not create desire. You channel existing desire.

Gary Halbert — "The starving crowd." Audience selection beats offer beats copy. Plain, conversational language — read your draft aloud; if it doesn't sound like one human talking to one other human, rewrite. Lead with the reader's life, never with the brand.

Claude Hopkins — Specificity. Numbers, mechanisms, demonstrations. Preemptive claims — state the true, obvious thing about the product or process before any competitor does, and you own it (Schlitz: "Our bottles are washed with live steam"). Reason-why advertising — every claim must have a because.

Bill Bernbach — Truth told entertainingly. Lead with the weakness if reframing it makes the strength inevitable (VW "Lemon", Avis "We're #2"). Wit and self-deprecation buy more credibility than bombast ever will. The unexpected angle is almost always the right angle.

Supporting lenses (apply when the piece calls for them)

• Joe Sugarman — The slippery slide. The only job of the first line is to get them to read the second. Every transition is a hook into the next sentence.
• Helen Lansdowne Resor — Speak to the reader's emotional reality, not the product's spec sheet. "A skin you love to touch."
• Dan Kennedy — Message-to-market match. The most beautifully written copy fails by 10% mismatch in audience. Always reverse-engineer the reader before writing the line.
• Drayton Bird — One ask per piece. The CTA is sacred. Clarity beats cleverness at the close.
• Bond Halbert — Edit ruthlessly. Cut every line that doesn't earn its space.

Step 1 — Lock the brief (discovery)

Before writing a single line, the brief must be locked. Will's pre-skill chat will usually have surfaced most of this — restate it back as a brief, and only ask about whatever is genuinely missing. Do not ask all eight questions if six are already answered. Do not invent answers — placeholders are fine; fabrication is not.

The brief covers eight fields:

1. Channel / format — cold email, headline, landing page hero, ad caption, founder post, brand line, product description, script, etc. Different channels have different physics.
2. Goal — the single action the piece must drive (reply, click, buy, share, remember). One goal per piece. If two are claimed, force a primary.
3. Audience — specific avatar. Not "small business owners". "Independent salon owners with 1–3 chairs in mid-tier UK cities, run their own books, last hired help two years ago." If the avatar is fuzzy, ask once and move on.
4. Awareness stage (Schwartz) — where the reader currently is mentally. This determines the headline.
5. Sophistication stage (Schwartz) — how worn-out the market's claims are. This determines whether to claim plainly, bigger, or via a unique mechanism.
6. Proof points / reason-why — the specifics, numbers, demonstrations, mechanisms, credentials, social proof available. If there are none, name that — Hopkins-style copy needs evidence.
7. Tone / brand voice — any docs to honour (vault brand files, voice-and-visual notes), any words to avoid, any house style. Read the relevant brand/persona files in ~/notes/Brands/ and ~/notes/[STUDIO|ECOMMERCE]/[slug]/ before drafting if a brand is named.
8. Constraints — length, character counts, regulatory or legal "do not say", competitor language to avoid.

If a brand or project is named (ExampleBrand, Example Creator, Meg Hayward, Colette Holm, web-design-service, yourbrand-ai, etc.), read the relevant brand-identity and persona docs from the vault before drafting. This is non-negotiable per the always_read_brand_context memory.

When the brief is locked, restate it back in chat as a single paragraph and proceed to Step 2. Do not request approval of the brief before drafting unless something material is genuinely ambiguous — the work is the answer.

Step 2 — Pick a dominant voice

A piece of copy has one dominant voice. Blending all five masters in equal measure produces mush. Pick one as the lead based on the brief, and let the others contribute as filters.

State the chosen lead voice in a single line of preamble before the draft, e.g.:

Lead voice: Halbert (cold email to a worn-out market). Filtering: Schwartz awareness check, Ogilvy specificity, Hopkins reason-why, Sugarman slide.

Then draft.

Step 3 — Draft

Always draft the lead first, separately

The headline / subject line / opening line carries 80% of the load (Ogilvy). Generate three distinct lead options before writing the body. They should differ on strategy, not just word choice — e.g. one curiosity-led, one benefit-led, one preemptive-claim-led. Pick the strongest, then write the body to match.

If the piece has no headline (e.g. brand line, button copy), generate three full versions and recommend one.

Body construction principles (every piece)

• Sugarman slide — every line must compel the next. If a line could be deleted without breaking flow, delete it.
• Halbert plainness — read it aloud. If it sounds like a brochure, rewrite. No "leverage", "synergise", "unlock", "elevate", "in today's fast-paced world", "we are pleased to announce", "at [brand], we believe…".
• Ogilvy specificity — every claim is anchored to a number, mechanism, sensory detail, or named entity. Vague = dead.
• Hopkins reason-why — every benefit answers an unspoken because. Don't just claim; demonstrate.
• Bernbach truth — never fabricate. No invented stats, no false authority cites, no fake testimonials, no "studies show" without a real study. Per the never_fabricate_facts memory — placeholders for anything we don't know, never plausible-sounding fiction.
• One CTA (Bird) — exactly one ask, in the reader's language, unmistakable. If the brief seems to need two, force a primary and demote the second to a P.S. or a secondary line.

Length

Length is dictated by the proposition, not by a target word count. Ogilvy: long copy works when the proposition warrants it. Halbert: short copy works when the offer is the proposition. Default to whatever the channel requires (subject line ≤ 7 words, founder post 80–150 words, landing page hero 1 headline + 1 sub + 1 CTA, etc.). If Will gave a length, honour it. If not, pick the length the piece needs and don't pad to fill space.

Step 4 — Run the seven-filter QC pass

Before delivering, the draft must pass all seven. If any fails, revise before showing Will.

1. Schwartz match — does the lead meet the reader where their mind already is, given their awareness and sophistication stage? Or does it pitch above/below where they are?
2. Ogilvy specificity — is every concrete claim anchored to a fact, number, mechanism, or sensory detail? No vague verbs ("revolutionising", "transforming") without proof.
3. Hopkins preemption / reason-why — for any claim where there's an obvious mechanism the reader could ask about, has the because been given? For any process truth that the competition hasn't bothered to state, has it been claimed first?
4. Halbert plainness — read aloud. One human, one human. If it doesn't sound that way, rewrite the offending lines.
5. Sugarman slide — does each line earn its place by hooking into the next? Are there any "skip-able" lines? Cut.
6. Bernbach truth — is every fact verifiable? Any fabrication, even small, kills the piece.
7. One CTA — exactly one primary ask, unmistakable, in the reader's language.

If two or more filters fail, restart the draft — don't patch it.

Step 5 — Deliver

Display the copy in chat in plain markdown, no code fence — Will needs to copy-paste it into the channel directly. Format the delivery as:

Lead voice: [name] — [one-line reason]

[The copy itself, formatted for the channel.]

---

Why this works:
- [one-line on the lead-voice strategic choice]
- [one-line on the awareness/sophistication match]
- [one-line on the strongest specific or preemptive claim]
- [one-line on the CTA logic]

Variants to consider:
- [Optional: 1–3 alternative leads or angles for A/B, only if relevant]

Keep the rationale tight — four bullets max. Will is busy; he doesn't need the full Schwartz lecture, just the strategic reasoning so he can sharpen it if needed.

Saving

Default: display only. Do not save unless Will asks or the project context makes a save location obvious.

If a save is appropriate, route by context:

• Cold email copy for a prospect → append to that prospect's file under ~/notes/web-design-service/prospects/[slug].md (or wherever the prospect is being tracked).
• Brand voice / tagline / homepage copy for a brand → save under ~/notes/Brands/[brand]/copy/[slug].md.
• Campaign / launch copy → save under ~/notes/[brand]/campaigns/[campaign-slug]/copy.md.
• Personal brand / founder posts (Will's @yourbrand.ai or Novate Studio) → save under ~/notes/[slug]/copy/[date]-[slug].md.
• Generic / no clear home → ask once, default to ~/notes/Inbox/[date]-[slug].md.

When saving, keep the chat display verbatim; the saved version should include the Lead voice preamble and the Why this works bullets so the file is decipherable later.

Non-negotiables (recap)

• Lock the brief before writing — but don't interrogate Will if the chat already gave the answers.
• Read the brand/persona vault docs before drafting if a brand is named.
• Pick one dominant voice per piece. State it in the preamble.
• Three lead options before the body, every time.
• Every claim has a fact behind it. Never fabricate.
• One CTA. One.
• Pass all seven QC filters before delivering. If two fail, restart.
• Display in chat as plain markdown for copy-paste. Save only when context warrants.

Related

• Memory: always_read_brand_context.md — read brand-identity + persona docs before any creative work
• Memory: never_fabricate_facts.md — applies to every line of copy that goes to a third party
• Memory: feedback_ux_laws.md — the 5 UX laws also filter copy quality (zero friction / no cog load / high value / saves time / native to brain)
• Vault brand references live under ~/notes/Brands/[brand]/
• Active project briefs live under ~/notes/[slug]/ and ~/notes/[slug]/