Good manipulation vs. bad manipulation

Let me introduce you to one of Hollywood’s top creators:

A man who has won an Academy Award, a BAFTA Award, five Primetime Emmy Awards, and three Golden Globes.

A man who’s worth about $90 million.

A man whose words, stories, and ideas have been consumed, willingly, eagerly, by hundreds of millions of people around the world.

You may know his name. It’s Aaron Sorkin. He’s the creator of shows like The West Wing and Newsroom, and the screenwriter behind movies like A Few Good Men and The Social Network.

Sorkin was asked once about the difference between language that convinces and language that manipulates. He replied:

===​​

There’s no difference. It’s only when manipulation is obvious, then it’s bad manipulation.

​​What I do is every bit as manipulative as some magician doing a magic trick.

​​If I can wave this red silk handkerchief enough in my right hand, I can do whatever I want with my left hand and you’re not going to see it.

​​When you’re writing fiction, everything is manipulation. I’m setting up the situation specifically so that you’ll laugh at this point or cry at this point or be nervous at this point.

​​If you can see how I’m sawing the lady in half, then it’s bad manipulation. If you can’t see how I did that, then it’s good.

===

​​Maybe you don’t agree with Sorkin. And you don’t have to. I’m not trying to convince you, or manipulate you, into accepting this idea.

I’m just sharing this idea because of an occasional objection I’ve gotten to my Copy Riddles program. Specifically, the objection has to do with the following bullet I tease on the sales page:

“The sneaky 7-word phrase Gary Bencivenga used to get away with making extreme promises. Gary Bencivenga was famous for providing proof in his copy… but this has nothing to do with proof. It’s pure A-list sleight-of-hand.”

A few people have written me over the years, saying they like the sound of Copy Riddles, think it might be for them, but worry that program is somehow teaching them techniques of manipulation.

Which is absolutely true.

Like Sorkin says, when you write copy, everything is manipulation.

You create an emotional experience, and guide people along to your desired goal.

If you want to go Dale Carnegie, you call that influence. If you want to go Robert Greene, you call it seduction. If you want to go Aaron Sorkin, you call it manipulation.

Now about manipulation, the good vs. the bad:

One thing that Copy Riddles does show you is the good kind of manipulation. Meaning, manipulation that’s not obvious.

Because direct response copywriting doesn’t have to be AMAZING or filled with SECRETS that THEY DON’T WANT YOU TO KNOW. Yes, that stuff can work. But it’s not required, and in many places, it’s not even helpful.

The good news is, direct response copywriting can also be subtle, under the radar, and not obvious.

​​And as evidence of that, take Gary Bencivenga, the copywriter I mentioned above. Gary wrote copy that most copywriting newbies would say is weak — because it didn’t read like most direct response. And yet, Gary’s words sold millions of dollars of helpful, quality products.

Maybe you’d like to learn how to do the same. If so, maybe take a look at the following page:

https://bejakovic.com/cr/