| name | advertorial-writer |
| description | Generate RMBC-structured advertorial and native ad copy that reads like editorial content but drives direct response conversions. |
| model | sonnet |
| user-invocable | true |
advertorial-writer
Purpose
Generate advertorial copy that looks and feels like editorial content but sells. Advertorials are the bridge between paid traffic and a sales page — the prospect clicks an ad, lands on what looks like a news article or blog post, and by the end they're ready to buy. The key tension: it must feel editorial (not salesy) while still deploying RMBC persuasion structure. Traffic source context matters — native ad platforms (Taboola, Outbrain) have different compliance and style requirements than social traffic.
Inputs
| Input | Required | Description |
|---|
product_description | Yes | What the product is, what it does, key features/ingredients/components |
target_audience | Yes | Who the prospect is — demographics, pain points, desires, sophistication level |
angle | Yes | The editorial angle — the "news peg" or story that frames the product (e.g., "new study reveals...", "local mom discovers...") |
traffic_source | Yes | One of: native (Taboola/Outbrain), facebook, google, email, organic |
key_mechanism | No | The product's unique mechanism (output from /mechanism-ideation) |
tone | No | One of: news, personal_story, investigative, listicle (default: personal_story) |
Execution Protocol
Step 1 — Load Framework Context
Read rmbc-context/SKILL.md to load RMBC framework definitions. Advertorials deploy RMBC through an editorial lens — the Research phase becomes "reporting," the Mechanism becomes the "discovery," and the Brief structures the narrative arc.
Step 2 — Select Advertorial Format
Based on tone input:
| Format | Structure | Best For |
|---|
| News | Headline → dateline → discovery → expert quotes → mechanism → product mention → CTA | Health, finance, tech |
| Personal Story | "I" narrative → problem → failed attempts → discovery → results → recommendation | Weight loss, beauty, self-improvement |
| Investigative | Question headline → industry exposé → hidden truth → mechanism → solution → CTA | Supplements, skincare, finance |
| Listicle | Number headline → tips/facts → mechanism woven in → product as #1 solution → CTA | Broad audiences, social traffic |
Step 3 — Write the Advertorial
Structure (all formats):
- Headline — Must look editorial, not like an ad. Include the angle. No price, no "buy now."
- Byline + Date — Author name, publication-style date. Adds credibility.
- Lead (100-150 words) — Open with the angle. Story, stat, or news hook. No product mention yet.
- Problem Section (150-200 words) — Establish the problem through the editorial lens. Use data, quotes, or story details.
- Failed Solutions (100-150 words) — Why conventional approaches fall short. Builds frustration.
- Mechanism Reveal (200-300 words) — The "discovery" — present the mechanism as news, not as a sales pitch. Use expert language, study references, analogies.
- Product Introduction (100-150 words) — Natural transition from mechanism to product. "One company has figured out how to..."
- Social Proof (150-200 words) — Testimonials framed as interviews or case studies. Editorial voice.
- CTA Section (100-150 words) — Soft sell. "Learn more" framing, not "Buy Now." Include link placement.
Step 4 — Compliance Check
Verify against traffic source requirements:
- Native: No before/after claims, no income claims, disclaimer required
- Facebook: No personal attributes ("Are you overweight?"), no exaggerated claims
- Google: No superlatives without substantiation, landing page must match ad
- Email/Organic: More latitude, but maintain editorial voice
Flag any lines that may trigger platform rejection.
Output Format
## Advertorial: [Headline]
**Angle:** [editorial angle]
**Format:** [news | personal_story | investigative | listicle]
**Traffic Source:** [platform]
**Word Count:** ~X,XXX
---
**[Byline]** | [Date]
[Full advertorial copy with section markers]
---
## Compliance Notes
- [Any flagged lines or platform-specific concerns]
- [Suggested disclaimer text if needed]
## A/B Test Variants
### Headline Variant A
[Original headline]
### Headline Variant B
[Alternative headline — different angle or hook type]
### Lead Variant
[Alternative opening paragraph]
Quality Criteria
-
Must read like real editorial content — if it obviously reads as an ad, it fails
-
No product mention in the first 30% of copy
-
Mechanism section must educate, not pitch
-
CTA must feel like a natural next step, not a hard close
-
Headline must work as a native ad thumbnail — curiosity-driven, not salesy
-
Social proof must be framed editorially (interviews, case studies) not as testimonial blocks
-
Specificity gate: Every claim in the copy must include a number, name, or timeframe — no "get results" or "improve your business"
-
Mechanism quantification: When referencing the mechanism, include at least one specific data point (number, timeframe, study reference)
-
Audience journey: The copy must reference where the reader IS (what they've tried, what's failing) — not just who they are demographically
-
Proof diversity: Use at least 2 different proof types (testimonial, statistical, authority, case study) — do not rely on a single proof mode
-
Objection handling: The copy must address at least 2 likely objections with concrete responses (ROI math, proof of similar result, risk reversal)
Related Skills
- Run
/mechanism-ideation to develop the mechanism "discovery"
- Run
/hook-battery for headline and angle options
- Run
/unified-research-synthesizer for audience language and data points
- Feed advertorial traffic to landing pages built with
/lander-copy
- Validate with
/rmbc-copy-audit
Attribution
Generated using RMBC framework by Stefan Georgi.
Learn more: copyaccelerator.com/join
