A Quick AI Summary Test Jason Feifer

Jason Feifer just wrote a short post about a long post -

https://www.dhirubhai.net/posts/jasonfeifer_this-person-unsubscribed-from-my-newsletter-activity-7155579891168468993-uZWa?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop

My comment: Why not take the feedback and produce content that suits a larger audience instead of celebrating the loss of a subscriber as "just not my target"?

And, it's not that hard to do - It took me all of 30 seconds to generate a succinct version of this post using Chat GPT - I don't think it would be 'cheating' to write a long-form article 'by hand' suited for people craving detail, and using AI to draft a quick summary of the article for those who don't want to engage at that level.

Here's the long-form article: (477 words, 2.4-minute read)

https://jasonfeifer.beehiiv.com/p/make-a-lasting-impression-here-s-the-two-part-formula-for-great-content-sales-and-relationships

And Here's GPT's well-crafted summary: (169 words, 55-second read)

Creating content that keeps your audience coming back is an art. It requires a fine balance between two key elements: predictability and surprise.

Take Beth, a nutrition coach struggling to grow her client base. Her social media is a mix of nutrition tips, political opinions, real estate, and crypto. This eclectic mix confuses her audience, who can't pinpoint what to expect from her.

Here's the secret: People subscribe to content when it consistently offers something valuable (predictability) but also provides unexpected insights or delights (surprise). Too much predictability becomes dull, while excessive surprise can disorient or alienate your audience.

This principle doesn't just apply to content creation. It's relevant in relationships, business, and other areas of life. Ask yourself: What do people expect from me (predictability), and how can I deliver it in a unique or surprising way (surprise)?

In conclusion, strike the right balance. Be reliable yet refreshing. That's the key to making a lasting impression.

I would love to understand Jason's thinking here, why not try to understand the comment instead of dismissing it? Why not look at it opportunistically?