There's a distinct pattern I've noticed whenever someone asks an AI to generate copy: the immediate retreat to bullet points. It's as if these systems have an inbuilt aversion to crafting genuine narratives, instead preferring to spew disconnected fragments of thought onto the page.
The Bullet Point Epidemic
Ask ChatGPT, Claude, or any other AI writing assistant to create content, and watch what happens. Almost invariably, you'll receive something that looks like this:
- Key point one about your topic
- Supporting evidence with a statistic
- Another perspective to consider
- Something vaguely actionable
This structured, segregated approach to information delivery isn't just boring—it fundamentally misunderstands how humans best absorb and process information.
Why Narratives Matter
Narratives aren't just a stylistic choice; they're the most natural form of human communication we have. Our brains are wired for stories, not disjointed facts. When we communicate through narrative, we're engaging with the oldest and most powerful tool in human intellectual history.
Stories flow in a linear fashion, mirroring how we experience time and causality. This isn't coincidental—it's a reflection of our cognitive architecture. Our minds don't naturally organise information into neat, categorised bullet points. We understand the world through sequences, relationships, and contexts that unfold over time.
The Human Connection
When AI writing leans heavily on bullet points, it's not just aesthetically disappointing—it's intellectually diminishing. A narrative requires the writer to construct a coherent thread that pulls the reader along, demanding both critical and creative thinking to maintain that thread's integrity.
Bullet points, by contrast, allow both writer and reader to disengage from this deeper process. They encourage skimming rather than engagement, fragmentation rather than synthesis.
Beyond the Dot Points
True human communication is messy, connected, and contextual. It contains digressions that illuminate the main point rather than distracting from it. It builds tension and release. It acknowledges that information doesn't exist in isolation but is part of a web of meaning that extends far beyond the page.
AI writing tends to flatten this richness into easily digestible chunks that, while immediately comprehensible, fail to exercise our minds in the way a well-crafted narrative does.
Writing that Works
The irony isn't lost on me that even articles criticising bullet points often employ them. But that's precisely the point—they're a tool, not a default. Great writing knows when to use structural elements and when to let ideas flow naturally through narrative.
If we want AI to truly augment human communication rather than diminish it, we need to demand more sophisticated approaches that respect the power of narrative. Until then, AI writing will continue to suck—not because the information it provides is necessarily wrong, but because the way it's delivered fails to engage the full spectrum of human thought.
Our minds deserve better than dot points. They deserve stories.