When we turn to large language models (LLMs) to help us write faster or improve our work, something important can get lost. The unique voice that makes us human often fades away. These AI tools are trained on tons of online content—think of all those comments, articles, and posts you’ve made or read. It’s like they’re learning from the internet’s endless chatter. But even with all that data, AI-generated text still feels off. It’s not quite human.

Many people are noticing this. On platforms like LinkedIn, there’s a growing dislike for AI writing. Bryan Cantrill, CTO of Oxide Computing, says the AI writing he sees “sucks.” He points out that it often sounds grating—especially with overused punctuation like em-dashes. Even OpenAI’s Sam Altman recently fixed some of these quirks. But the bigger issue remains: in trying to make our lives easier, AI might be making everyone else’s communication duller.

The core of the problem is that AI doesn’t truly understand us. It mimics styles but doesn’t feel or think. When we read a piece, we want to see ourselves reflected. We want to connect with someone’s personality, their quirks, their emotions. That’s what makes writing compelling. If AI replaces that human touch, our words become bland, uniform, and less engaging.

This isn’t a new phenomenon. If you’ve ever read UK newspapers, you’ve noticed they have a distinct voice. They’re opinionated, direct, and often witty. It’s part of their style. For example, The Guardian isn’t shy about sharing its views. It’s honest about its biases. Over in the US, publications tend to aim for neutrality, even if they’re subtly biased. The headlines and writing often sound more neutral or sanitized.

A good example of UK-style journalism is The Register. It’s known for sharp, punchy headlines and analysis that doesn’t pretend to be impartial. When I worked there, I remember headlines like “IBM trades cold comfort for hot air in Microsoft-AWS slugfest” or “Craptastic analysis turns 2.8 zettabytes of Big Data into 2.8 ZB of FAIL.” These headlines are playful, provocative, and grab your attention. They’re not formulaic; they’re crafted by writers with a voice and personality.

In contrast, many US outlets aim for a more balanced tone. They try to flatten out perspectives, which can make the writing feel less lively. For instance, headlines like “With GitHub acquisition, Microsoft wants to make Azure the default cloud for developers” are factual but lack personality. It’s like trying to sound neutral at the cost of personality.

Now, AI-generated content tends to lean toward the American style—more neutral, less provocative. That’s not great because it strips away the character that makes writing interesting. Cantrill argues that LLMs are “lousy writers” because they’re not you. They can produce text quickly, but they don’t have your voice, your style, or your perspective. That human element is what persuades and connects with others.

Think about classic literature like Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath. People read it not just for the story but to feel what those characters feel. It’s authentic because Steinbeck’s voice is genuine. You don’t need to be a great writer to do that, but if your writing sounds generic and dull, then maybe it doesn’t matter if it took a second or an hour to produce.

Some companies have used AI to create sales materials, thinking it’s a way to cut costs. A friend once told the author that an AI-generated sales pitch was better than what junior staff could produce. But if hardly anyone reads it, what’s the point? Using AI to churn out worthless content isn’t a real solution. It’s better to create meaningful, targeted content than to fill space with generic words.

The same goes for press releases and marketing. They often sound robotic anyway. It’s tempting to let AI handle them, but that risks losing the human touch that makes messages believable and persuasive. Good PR isn’t just about putting out words; it’s about understanding the bigger picture and connecting authentically.

In software, AI can handle boilerplate code because machines don’t mind reading repetitive stuff. But humans do. When it comes to writing that persuades, inspires, or makes someone feel something, your genuine voice is irreplaceable. Take a look at Donald Trump’s online persona—his style is odd, but it’s real. That authenticity is what draws people in.

Muhammed Shaphy, CEO of Talentz.ai, points out that “AI made your writing smooth, but it erased your voice.” That’s the key point. Don’t be just another faceless writer. Be yourself. Use AI as a tool, not a crutch. Your personality, your perspective—that’s what makes your writing stand out and resonate.

In the end, AI can be helpful for quick drafts or boilerplate tasks. But it shouldn’t replace your unique voice. Keep your personality in your writing. That’s what makes your words compelling and memorable. Don’t let the robot voice drown out what only you can say.

Inspired by

• https://www.infoworld.com/article/4090589/the-rebellion-against-robot-drivel.html

Sources

• gmpg.org
• theguardian.com
• theregister.com
• theregister.com
• theregister.com