You Can’t Automate Taste.. Why AI Can’t Fix Your Cringey Brand Voice

AI can generate. You still need to edit. And no, adding ‘delight’ doesn’t make it funnier.

It started innocently enough. A marketer logs into ChatGPT and types:
“Write a fun, quirky headline about our software that helps teams collaborate faster.”

Three seconds later:
“Unleash the Power of Synergistic Teamwork - Now With Extra Sparkles!”

And just like that, another brand voice dies a little inside.

AI tools can whip up a thousand variations of any sentence. But whether those sentences land with charm or clang like a corporate kazoo solo? That still depends on you. No algorithm can save you from poor taste, try-hard tone, or the cardinal sin of B2B marketing - trying to sound “human” and ending up sounding like a human LinkedIn post circa 2019.

The Rise of the AI-Copywriter Intern Army

Let’s give credit where it’s due: generative AI has obliterated blank page syndrome.
Need 10 versions of an email subject line before your sandwich arrives? Done.
Want a week’s worth of tweets that all sound like a TED Talk title had a baby with a BuzzFeed listicle? Say no more.

And so, a thousand brand managers breathed a sigh of relief.
“We’ve cracked it,” they said. “No more copywriters ghosting us. No more deadline stress. This thing writes like a machine!”

Which, well, is the problem.

Because the output does sound like a machine. One that trained on every Medium article ever written and can’t decide if it wants to be inspirational, folksy, or ‘delightful’. You ask for snark, it gives you dad jokes. You ask for punchy, it gives you platitudes. And worst of all, when asked to be “quirky”? It delivers the exact same voice every other startup is already using.

You know the one:

• “We’re not just a tool. We’re your sidekick.”
• “Say goodbye to [obvious pain point]. Say hello to [obvious solution]!”
• “Let’s do this thing 💪✨🔥🚀”

It’s not that AI is bad at writing. It’s that AI is bad at knowing what not to write.

Vibe ≠ Voice

Brand voice isn’t just tone and adjectives - it’s point of view.
It’s what you sound like when you're not trying too hard.
It’s knowing when to whisper instead of shout, when to joke and when to shut up.

AI, bless it, doesn’t know how to read the room.

For instance:
A cybersecurity startup tried to use GPT-4 to write their homepage copy. They prompted it to be “relatable and slightly edgy.” The result?

“Hackers suck. We don’t.”
Followed by:
“Security that slaps.”

Which might work if you’re selling memes to Zoomers. Less so if your average buyer wears suits and reads The Economist.

This isn’t a one-off. The AI default voice - especially when trying to sound fun - tends to regurgitate the same slangy, overcompensating personality that sounds like it’s been doomscrolling Twitter for 9 hours straight.

Humor becomes hashtags. Wit becomes word salad. And ‘delight’? It’s just a placeholder for actual taste.

Taste Is a Skill, Not a Style

Here’s the bitter pill: taste can’t be prompt-engineered.

You can’t teach a model to have restraint. You can’t fine-tune it on vibes. You can’t ask it to stop trying so hard unless you, the human in charge, know what “trying too hard” actually looks like.

This is why the best brand writers still feel essential, not obsolete. Not because they write faster (AI wins there), but because they know when to cut that third emoji. They know when to zig while every other headline zags. They know that “delight” isn’t a strategy - it’s an effect. One that comes from tastefully executed tone, not forced whimsy.

They also know the difference between:

• Funny because it’s clever
• Funny because it’s weird
• And not funny at all because it’s desperately trying to be both

AI, left to its own devices, has no clue. Like a friend who just discovered GIFs and now sends 12 a day, the enthusiasm is there - but so is the cringe.

Real Humans Still Know the Line Between Bold and Bonkers

Let’s do a little taste-test, shall we?

Prompt: “Write a quirky tagline for a scheduling tool.”
AI response:
“Get your shift together.”

Now, this one feels edgy, and it might get a chuckle in Slack. But use it in an actual ad campaign and someone’s mum in HR is calling you in for a chat. Bold? Sure. On-brand? Maybe not.

Brand voice requires context - cultural, emotional, industry-specific context. Knowing what a joke implies. Who it excludes. Who it annoys. What it says about your company’s values. And you can’t just hope your AI model learned that from 10 million Reddit threads and an old copy of Everybody Writes.

You’ve still got to be the adult in the room.

What AI Can Do for Brand Voice (If You're Not Lazy)

All right, we’ve bullied the bots enough.
They’re not useless - far from it. But they need a leash.

Here’s what AI can do well, if you’re using your taste instead of outsourcing it:

• Voice exploration playground: Prompt it to write in 10 tones and then pick the one that doesn’t make you gag. Use the others as cautionary tales.
• Tone calibration testing: Ask it to take your existing copy and make it “25% more playful” or “10% more serious.” You’d be surprised how useful that slider can be.
• Variations galore: Get 15 bad taglines fast so you can quickly eliminate the ones that smell like marketing student group projects.
• Persona mashups: Tell it to write like if Jerry Seinfeld were your product manager. Use the absurdity to jog your own creativity.

But none of this is plug-and-play. It’s prompt, judge, edit, repeat. The writing isn't done when the model outputs something - it’s just getting started.

When Brands Try Too Hard to Be “Relatable”

Let’s talk about the root of most brand voice disasters: desperation.
Specifically, the desperation to sound “relatable” or “fun” when your product is, let’s face it, not.

Think: compliance software trying to be sassy. Or B2B logistics firms pretending they’re a skateboard brand. Somewhere out there, an AI is being asked to “make our timesheet app sound like Glossier.”

And look, nobody expects you to be Patagonia or Duolingo on day one. But you do need to stop asking your AI to sprinkle ‘magic’ on a bland identity. Because all you’ll get is a confused, inauthentic voice that neither your users nor your internal team believe in.

Relatability comes from clarity. From saying something useful, helpful, and yes - sometimes funny - but never out of character.

Cringe Check vs. Cool Copy

A quick table for your editing pleasure:

Feel that? That’s taste. One version respects the reader. The other is performing for imaginary internet points.

What Happens When You Actually Get It Right

When a brand nails its voice - truly nails it - you can feel it in your gut.
It’s not that every line is a zinger. It’s that the whole thing holds together. There’s rhythm. There's restraint. There's a point of view that feels intentional.

Whether it’s Mailchimp being gently sarcastic, or Notion being earnestly helpful, or Slack being brisk but breezy - these voices work because they’re consistent, not gimmicky. They reflect the product, not distract from it.

And that kind of coherence?
It doesn’t come from pressing 'Regenerate'.
It comes from knowing what your brand is not - and editing everything else out.

AI Doesn’t Know What Your Audience Cringes At

You do.
You’ve cringed at brands that try to meme their way into relevance. You’ve rolled your eyes at forced emojis and puns. You’ve watched “delight” get used like garlic salt on bland pasta.

So why are you letting AI talk like that on your behalf?

Use AI to speed things up, sure.
But when it comes to brand voice, don’t skip the human taste test.
That’s the part you can’t automate.

Want better brand copy? Start by writing something you’d actually say out loud. Then feed it to AI, not the other way around.

1. Can AI really write brand copy that sounds human?
AI can mimic human-like phrasing, tone patterns, and grammar, but it doesn’t truly understand intent, audience nuance, or cultural subtext. It predicts what a “funny” or “friendly” brand might sound like based on patterns in its training data - which means it often leans into clichés, overused phrases, or tone-deaf quirk. Without human oversight, the results are more imitation than identity.

2. Why does AI-generated brand copy often sound generic or cringey?
Because generative models are trained on vast public datasets - including ads, blog posts, and social media copy - they absorb and reproduce the most statistically common tropes. This leads to overuse of things like emojis, puns, "delight"-laden phrases, and startup-speak that feels familiar but lacks originality. It’s pattern recognition without taste filtering.

3. What is ‘taste’ in brand writing, and why can’t AI replicate it?
Taste is the human judgment of what feels right, fresh, or appropriate in a specific context. It involves cultural literacy, aesthetic sensitivity, restraint, and strategic intent. AI can’t “feel” cringe or “sense” that a line might alienate your target buyer - it can only produce what looks probable based on prior data. Taste is selective; AI is generative.

4. How should marketers use AI responsibly in brand content creation?
Use AI as a brainstorming or drafting tool, not as a voice-of-brand replacement. Let it generate raw ideas, tone experiments, or first drafts. But always bring in a human editor who understands the brand’s strategy, customer psychology, and industry tone. Think of AI as a helpful intern, not a stand-in for your creative director.

5. Can AI help define a brand voice?
Not entirely. AI can assist in exploring tonal ranges by generating variations (e.g., playful, formal, sarcastic), which can help clarify what resonates or repels. But defining brand voice requires foundational work - audience insights, values, positioning, and tone principles - that only humans can interpret and codify in a meaningful way.

6. What are some signs a brand voice has been over-AI'd?
Look out for tone inconsistency, reliance on generic filler words (“delightful,” “seamless,” “next-gen”), forced whimsy, overuse of emojis or exclamation points, and a general sense that the copy is trying too hard to be liked. If all your headlines sound like BuzzFeed meets LinkedIn, your AI’s been left unsupervised.

7. Is it ever okay for a brand to use humor or quirk in AI-generated content?
Yes - but sparingly and intentionally. Humor in brand voice works when it aligns with the audience’s expectations and the product’s context. If you’re in regulated or high-trust industries (like fintech or healthcare), misplaced levity can hurt credibility. AI can offer joke structures, but someone with actual comic timing should decide whether to use them.

8. How can brands keep their voice consistent if using AI across teams?
Create a living brand voice guide with clear do’s and don’ts, preferred tone examples, and sample copy blocks. Use AI prompts that reference this guide, and have a human editor ensure every piece meets the same bar. You can also train custom AI models on approved brand content, but they still require oversight to avoid drift or weirdness.

9. What’s the risk of relying too much on AI for creative writing?
Over-reliance on AI can erode differentiation. If every SaaS landing page sounds like a ChatGPT template, customers start tuning out. The risk isn’t just sounding bland - it’s sounding like everyone else. Long-term, it also weakens your internal creative muscles and reduces team accountability for tone, strategy, and quality.

10. Will AI ever be able to fully replicate great brand writing?
Unlikely. Brand writing is not just sentence construction - it’s emotional resonance, contextual judgment, and taste. AI might become more assistive and context-aware over time, but as long as brand identity is tied to human connection, creativity, and culture, there will always be a role for sharp, opinionated humans in the loop.