Summary: This post examines a common misinterpretation that occurs when technical error messages—like JSON server responses—are mistakenly assumed to be source material for storytelling, branding, or web content analysis. In particular, we dissect why a JSON response indicating an insufficient account balance is not a narrative, why treating it as such is counterproductive, and how professionals can distinguish between machine outputs and human-readable copy. If you’re trying to make sense of what content is usable and what is just backend noise, you’ll want to read this carefully.
What This Really Is: A System Message, Not a Story
At first glance, many non-technical content marketers or digital team members stumble upon a response like:
{
"error": {
"code": "INSUFFICIENT_BALANCE",
"message": "Your account balance is too low to complete this request."
}
}
…and assume it requires rewriting, reformatting, or elaboration into a usable main story. That’s a category error. That block of text is not content; it’s a transactional system message from an API or backend responding to a failed request. There is no narrative to extract. No protagonist, no conflict in the literary sense, no context from which to derive value beyond troubleshooting.
Stop Trying to Rewrite System Errors into Brand Stories
The problem happens when web editors or content freelancers pick up these system messages from scraped code, CMS outputs, or API logs without understanding their technical nature. When you attempt to extract a “main story” from a JSON error, you’re having the wrong conversation. It’s the equivalent of trying to pitch a client based on a bank’s ATM insufficient funds message. It tells us only one thing: the machine didn’t execute the request because a balance threshold wasn’t met. Period.
So why do people try to make something meaningful out of this? Often, it’s pressure to show deliverables, produce content rapidly, or a lack of technical fluency. But trying to spin backend messages into stories quickly leads you to confuse internal signals with external narratives. That’s a recipe for bad strategy. Strong marketers know how to identify what matters and what doesn’t, and this distinction is foundational.
Don’t Waste Time on What Doesn’t Speak to Humans
Here’s the hard edge to this: Businesses hemorrhage time and money trying to make meaningful content from meaningless inputs. If a piece of text requires systemic context (e.g., an API call or a billing engine), it is not an editorial or marketing asset. It is feedback meant for the developer, product manager, or support team—not your audience. No customer needs a rewritten version of “Your account balance is too low.”
The better question here is: What output are you expecting from the system, and why did you receive this error instead? Answering that opens the door to legitimate content possibilities—like featuring why customers should fund their accounts adequately to maintain service continuity. Now, you’re working from a use case, not a backend log.
Ask Better Questions: What Is the Intent Behind the Message?
If you’re trying to turn technical outputs into editorial content, pause and ask:
- Who was this message originally intended for—machine or human?
- Is there a real story behind the reason this error happened?
- Can I speak directly to the user need this message points to—such as account replenishment, usage limits, or service access?
The way to add value is not to reword the machine’s complaint but to address the customer’s real-world stake in the transaction failing. That’s where the marketing conversation starts—at the “why it matters” level, not the “what the system said” level.
Empathy + Simplicity = Clarity
Let’s look at the deeper persuasion model here. This error represents a customer’s failure point. Instead of massaging the error text, we should confirm their suspicion: “Has my account balance dropped?” We acknowledge the struggle: “You aren’t alone—this happens more often than expected.” Then we give a path forward: “Here’s how to avoid this block next time.” That is real communication. That solves something. That builds trust.
Trying to turn a JSON payload into storytelling content is like rewriting the ingredients list on a bottle of aspirin. You’re addressing the wrong layer. Speak to the symptoms the user is feeling, not the system’s way of recording it internally. Remember, good marketing doesn’t start with “what text did I find?” It starts with, “What thread matters to a human being on the other side of the screen?”
The Takeaway: Value Lives in Context, Not Syntax
To wrap it tight: This isn’t raw website text. It isn’t a story. It’s a protocol rejection. Your job is not to rewrite it—it’s to interpret it, recontextualize it, and only then craft content that points to the receiver’s need, desire, pain, or confusion. That’s what distinguishes transactional throughput from persuasive messaging. Know the difference, and you’ll stop wasting cycles on text that was never meant to say anything in the first place.
Sometimes the smartest thing you can do in content production is say: “That’s not usable. What else do we have?” Knowing when to say no rewrites your entire marketing posture. You move faster. You put audience needs first. You stop making content for the sake of content and start creating impact where it counts.
#ContentStrategy #MarketingClarity #TechLiteracy #CopywritingWisdom #JSONErrors #BusinessCommunication #ClientFirst
Featured Image courtesy of Unsplash and Ilya Semenov (6uFROinaC3g)
