Summary: The phrase “There is no story to extract from the provided text” may sound like a bland technical comment, but it reveals a deeper disconnect between human communication and system design. At first glance, it refers to a JSON error—data code, not a narrative—but the message behind it signals a breakdown in both expectations and design thinking. This post explores what happens when technologists hand off cold, insensitive feedback to business users expecting clarity, context, and some semblance of empathy—or at least logic.
The Non-Story: What JSON Doesn’t Tell You
The text in question contains a JSON response indicating an error: insufficient account balance. And indeed, JSON is structured for machines, not humans. But people are still on the receiving end of these messages. So when software responds to human interaction with, “There is no story to extract,” the subtext becomes a barrier:
- It assumes users are looking for a “story,” when in fact they’re probably just trying to understand what went wrong.
- It creates emotional frustration by presenting technical indifference.
- It forfeits an opportunity to educate the user or guide them toward resolution.
That’s where the war starts between user satisfaction and developer convenience. It’s a symptom of a deeper issue: engineers optimizing for systems efficiency but not for communication. What results is tone-deaf design hiding behind technical accuracy.
Why Error Messages Matter More Than You Think
Let’s not overlook the elephant here—error messages are marketing. Every user interaction with your system reinforces or damages trust. If someone hits a payment failure, they aren’t just dealing with a transaction—they’re painfully reminded of how little the company seems to care about clarity or user outcomes.
An error that states “insufficient funds” should do more than reflect a failed calculation. It should suggest a path forward. Can the user retry with another method? When will funds be available? Is there a support line available?
The emotional tone of this digital dead-end creates hesitation. That friction is expensive: cart abandonment, churn, and lower customer lifetime value.
No Story = No Support
The phrase “There is no story to extract” reveals an interesting problem: the language assumes that the absence of story is equivalent to the absence of relevance. But for the user, there’s always a story—especially if their payment just failed. The system, however, strips it of context and treats it as data noise. That’s lazy product thinking.
And now we’ve walked into something most companies don’t want to hear: clarity isn’t just a UX feature—it’s a cost-saving mechanism, a sales tool, and a reputation builder. When systems don’t respect the user’s psychological state—yes, even during failure—they hurt conversion and trust.
Chris Voss Would Call This a Missed “No”
From a negotiation standpoint, this technical auto-response misses the power of “No.” What the user is trying to say when they reload the widget, re-enter their card, or scream at the screen is: “No, this didn’t work. Help me understand why.”
If your system can’t hold that objection, hear it, and guide the user to the next step, you’ve already lost the negotiation. As Chris Voss teaches, “No” is not the end—it’s the beginning of real dialogue. But silence—or worse, misleading jargon—kills that entirely.
The Business Cost of Meaningless Errors
Let’s get practical. What does an error like this cost your business? Here’s what we see across systems where user logic and machine logic don’t align:
- Increased customer support requests
- Payment friction leading to lower revenue
- Damage to brand reputation among users who feel “blamed” for a system issue
Could this be avoided? Absolutely. But it requires a culture shift among engineers and product managers to treat communication as part of the deliverable—not just data processing.
Designing Errors for Human Brains
A good error message isn’t just readable—it reflects the user’s reality. It does four things instantly:
- Confirms what went wrong
- Acknowledges emotional frustration without sounding condescending
- Outlines next steps clearly
- Provides support direction if needed
This isn’t about fluffing things up—it’s about minimizing abandonment and converting frustration into persistence. We gain loyalty by respecting confusion, not dismissing it. And that includes technical users too—they may not need handholding, but they do need reliability.
So What Should We Do Instead?
Every mistake is a chance to build trust. Rewrite messages to open the door for user re-engagement. Don’t sanitize your errors—humanize them. Use everyday language, subtle mirroring of user pain, and actual instructions. Turn a cold rejection into a practical path forward.
Ask questions such as: “What were you hoping would happen when you clicked submit?” “Where were you stuck?” Let your feedback, not just customer service, invite dialogue. Because there’s always a story—your system just wasn’t listening.
The goal isn’t correctness. It’s communication.
#UXWriting #ProductDevelopment #ErrorMessaging #TechDesign #CustomerExperience #MarketingByDesign #TrustThroughClarity
Featured Image courtesy of Unsplash and Markus Winkler (-q8MdTL2998)
