Write On Time - Newsletter | George Blackman

Write On Time

Create more engaging videos with simple, actionable scriptwriting tips.

Join 5000+ scriptwriting nerds reading “Write On Time”. Insights from writing for multi-million subscriber YouTubers sent to your inbox every Friday.

"I started a Chess channel and applied some things from your newsletter. In the first month I'm doing over a million views on long form content and have 3 videos cracking the 100k views mark."

Chess Nuke

@chessnuke

30k+ Subcribers

Subscribers

YouTube is 31x more efficient at generating leads for my business than Instagram.

(And it's got a lot to do with how easy it is to write an effective CTA.)

Let me explain:

22 weeks ago, I started my business Instagram with the intention of replacing the traffic I used to get from Twitter.

(Miss u, Twitter xxxx)

The perceived "lower effort" of writing and filming a Reel (vs a YouTube video) drew me in.

But, after figuring out a more efficient system for writing YouTube scripts in less time (a combination of my YTSP scriptwriting system and the advice I give in this video)...

...I re-launched my YouTube channel as well.

So this week, I wanted to crunch the numbers.

Even at this early stage, I wanted to know:

Which platform had been more effective at generating leads.
How much time input was required per lead?

(I mean, between you and me, I knew YouTube was going to win... 👀)

...but the extent of the victory shocked me 😆

In the below stats, a "lead" is somebody who joined this newsletter via a lead magnet promoted by the piece of content.

Instagram (started 22 weeks ago)

Videos: 11
Views: 4500
Leads: 4
Average time to script + film one video: 70 minutes

Average time input per lead: 192.5 minutes

YouTube (started 3 weeks ago)

Videos: 4
Views: 2300
Leads: 79
Average time to script + film one video: 120 minutes

Average time input per lead: 6.1 minutes

Ok, so... let's address the elephant in the room.

"You only made 11 Reels and gave up."

True. But is it any surprise?

Instagram nerds will tell you that, to properly grow on Instagram, you need to post daily.

So, assuming you only have 3-4 hours per week to write and film content...

...Instagram is a non-starter.

YouTube, on the other hand? 😍

3-4 hours per week is plenty of time for most channels to write and film a video (again, combining my writing system + advice hyperlinked above).

And approx. 1 video per week has already had a non-trivial impact on newsletter sign ups and even sales.

And my channel is still tiny.

Some of you, reading this, will already know exactly how impactful YouTube can be at 100x these numbers.

But why is there such a disparity?

My business is just a single example, but I don't think it's atypical.

And I believe it comes down to two key factors across both platforms that grossly affect how many leads they generate:

1/ How easily can you convince the viewer to click?

YouTube: Viewers build more trust from a single piece of content. When you're delivering 10 minutes of value, the viewer has more patience to listen to a 15 second plug.
Instagram: Viewers have less time to build trust. Plus, while already trying to cram a tonne of information and nuance to a short video, you probably only have 3-5 seconds to include a plug.

Takeaway: Long-form YouTube content, as a medium, is just better set up to build trust and allow you space to script a convincing plug.

2/ How physically easy is it for the viewer to click?

YouTube: QR codes on-screen allow TV viewers to "click", and links in your description + pinned comment make it way easier for PC and mobile viewer to click.
Instagram: Viewer can navigate to your link in bio, or a third party tool like ManyChat can be used (but these require the viewer to comment to receive the lead magnet).

Takeaway: YouTube viewers can access your links with a single click. For Instagram users, there's more friction.

All that being said... I still have a presence on Instagram.

My partner, Julia, converts all my newsletters into carousels, and we double-post those on LinkedIn as well.

There's no harm in keeping a presence elsewhere, if it doesn't distract you from the highest leverage platform (YouTube).

So... if you want to see my highest-converting lead magnet so far, check out this video:

Watch the video here.

The cool part is... I never explicitly tell the viewer to click the link.

But, because of the natural trust-building format of long-form YouTube content, a simple link at the top of the description is sufficient.

That's all for this week.

Any questions? You can to reply to this email and I'll get back to you.

Speak soon,
George 👋

Business of Scriptwriting

Today, I've got something essential to keep in mind when writing your next hook.

Specifically, if your hook ends with a "rule of three".

A rule of three usually appears at the end of a hook and sounds like this:

"So in this video, we're going to cover:

[Topic 1]
[Topic 2]
And [topic 3]"

Having a video that answers multiple questions like this is great because:

We can really sell the amount of value in our video.
We can set up the video's structure, which is essential to keeping the viewer oriented and engaged later.

But here's the problem:

The choice of which three things you mention is more important than you'd think.

It's not as simple as choosing "the most interesting three topics from the video".

And I've seen channels with 100k+ subscribers get this wrong (and their retention has suffered because of it).

For example, let's imagine a video called "Best laptop for small businesses in 2025".

In the past, I've seen channels who made the mistake of writing something like this at the end of their hook:

"So in this video, we're going to cover:

The huge problem with Sony laptops in 2025.
The unexpected realities of Apple's new M5 chips.
And which laptop is right for small business owners in 2025."

But... why is this a problem?

All three bullet points sound exciting and, more importantly, relevant to the topic.

But here's the issue:

While it might feel like a good idea to pick the three most exciting topics from your video and mention those at the end of your hook, this can actually disrupt the viewer’s sense of the video’s structure.

(And, remember, structure is key to retention - and setting up that structure in the hook is essential.)

By putting three equally important topics side-by-side, it makes it more difficult for the viewer to latch on to the primary question.

The primary question is the reason they clicked - and it's probably the question expressed in the title (in this case, "which laptop should I buy as a small business?")

Instead, the rule of three should include two supporting questions and then the primary question.

In our laptop example, it might look like this:

"So in this video, we're going to cover:

The key features of each laptop.
How their spec will affect your day-to-day workflow.
And, ultimately which laptop is right for small business owners in 2025."

As our video progresses, we want our viewers to retain complete clarity about why they're watching.

And muddying the waters in the hook by expressing three equally important-sounding ideas makes it more likely they'll lose that clarity later on.

That's not to say that our laptop video can't include discussions about "the problem with Sony laptops in 2025", or "the unexpected realities of Apple's new M5 chips"... but we should avoid using these in our "rule of three" during the hook.

I've got two more quickfire examples below if you're still not 100% clear on what a "good" vs "bad" rule of three looks like, but first...

New Video Just Dropped

7 YouTube Scriptwriting Hacks (from 40m Views)

After launching my channel two weeks ago, video #4 just dropped. Feel free to check it out!

Watch It Now

Quickfire Examples: "Good" vs "Bad" Rule of Three

Title: How to Stop Procrastinating and Actually Get Things Done

❌ Bad rule of three:

“So in this video, we’ll talk about:

The best productivity advice I ever received.
The daily habits of highly successful people.
How to stop procrastinating and actually get things done.”

All three sound like different videos, and I might even be more compelled by the first bullet than the third.

✅ Good rule of three:

“So in this video, we’ll talk about:

The common triggers that cause procrastination.
What’s really happening in your brain when you procrastinate.
How to stop procrastinating and actually get things done.”

The first two ideas flow naturally into the third.

Title: THIS Is Why You Can't Build Muscle Consistently

❌ Bad rule of three:

“So in this video, we’ll talk about:

How sleep impacts your metabolism.
Why you're probably tracking your workouts wrong.
How to finally start building muscle consistently.”

As above, my attention is pulled equally to bullets 1 and 2 as it is to bullet 3.

✅ Good rule of three:

“So in this video, we’ll talk about:

How to set effective calorie targets during your training.
How to avoid overtraining so you don't waste your progress.
And, ultimately, how to start building muscle consistently.”

The first two ideas flow naturally into the third.

That's all for this week.

Any questions? You can to reply to this email and I'll get back to you.

Speak soon,
George 👋

Hook

Business of Scriptwriting

Assuming you're reading this on Friday… my YouTube channel just went live!

But this isn't a "go watch my video!" type email.

Instead, I want to share the weird launch strategy I’m using, and how you can steal parts of this approach even if you've already uploaded hundreds of videos.

How I combined two strategy ideas to create my own:

Inspiration for this launch strategy came from these two fellas:

Nate Black → his recent “content wall” strategy: stop uploading for a month, then drop 3 videos simultaneously to reset YouTube’s idea of who your audience is.
Ed Lawrence → Ed launched his current channel with 3 videos as well (one of which I wrote), and I remember him tactically linking 2 of them together with end-screen CTAs.

Both smart, both effective. But I wanted to push it further...

The "Whirlpool" Strategy

While I'm posting all 3 videos simultaneously (just like Nate and Ed), I wanted to create a truly bingable experience for my viewers.

That's why, using end-screens...

Video 1 links to Video 2.
Video 2 links to Video 3.
Video 3 links back to Video 1.

That means, no matter which video viewers land on, they'll get pulled into a cycle that should (if the videos are good enough) get them to watch all 3.

Whereas one of Ed's videos linked back to his main channel... mine form a complete "circle".

And whereas Nate's technique relies on YouTube suggesting the three videos in the suggested tab... I've constructed end-screen CTAs intentionally to ensure viewers get pulled through all 3 videos.

But it doesn’t stop there.

I've already written and filmed videos 4, 5 and 6 - and each of those videos keep the chain going...

Video 6 → links back to 5
Video 5 → links back to 4
Video 4 → links back to 3...

...at which point, they enter THE WHIRLPOOL!

What you can steal from this:

Whether you’re launching a brand-new channel or simply want to increase the value you're able to provide to your audience:

✅ Use end screen call-to-actions intentionally to guide viewers between videos.
✅ Try funnelling your viewers down to a small series of “whirlpool content”. If you’re launching your channel, follow the approach explored above. If you’ve already got several videos, identify 3 existing videos, and add end-screens which link between them.
✅ The videos you choose should be at the core of what you teach. (In my case, the 3 videos cover hooks, script structure, and end-screens.)

Want to watch the "whirlpool strategy" in action?

Ok fine - just a small plug :) I recommend starting here 👇

Click here to watch!

Free Live Session + Q&A With Me

Learn to write ready-to-record YouTube scripts in under 90 minutes.

While we're talking about the launch...

...I'd been "planning to start" my own channel for over two years.

But even with all my time-saving scriptwriting frameworks, I could never find enough time to make it happen.

So, after finding every excuse in the book, this year something finally clicked.

And with a cheeky little system and a few simple guardrails, I'm now writing and recording at a rate of one video per week.

Without it, I would not have been launching my channel today. (Let alone with another 3 videos in the can!)

I'm sharing that writing system with you for free on October 15th, at 5pm BST.

It won't be recorded, so if you want an inside look at how I write scripts for my channel (to help you write faster and upload more) make sure to sign up below:

Send me the Zoom link!

That's all for this week.

Any questions? You can to reply to this email and I'll get back to you.

Speak soon,
George 👋

Scripting Frameworks

After announcing my upcoming talk at VidSummit...

...I'm pleased to follow up with the news that I'll also be joining a panel called The Impacts of AI on Content Creation, alongside Roberto Blake, Matt Wolfe and Murray Frost.

With that said, I want to ask you something that might directly influence what I say on stage.

Because here's the truth:

Two years ago, I was still resisting AI.

But today, I use it daily, I sell an AI-based product, and I'm now going on stage (twice!) at the world's biggest YouTube conference as an "expert" on the topic 🤯

It got me thinking: it's amazing how much my attitude to AI has changed in a short span of time.

And I'll bet yours has too.

Maybe not in the same way, or at the same speed... but I'll bet it has.

And here's the coolest thing:

You and I are part of a pretty unique group, [FIRST NAME GOES HERE].

After all, the YouTube community is enormous...

...yet you, me, and 5700 other creators have specifically chosen to take scriptwriting more seriously.

And, as someone who made the investment in the AI Scriptwriting Toolbox, you're already thinking tactically about how to integrate AI into your scripts.

So, at a time when more and more people are asking questions like:

Where should I use AI to make scripting easier?
Can AI write whole scripts yet?
How do I use AI without sucking the personality out of my channel?

Well... we're the people who are actually testing this stuff, figuring out how to integrate AI usefully into our workflow, and seeing what it's really capable of.

Which puts us in a pretty unique position.

So, with that in mind, I want to ask you 3 simple questions:

How often do you use AI to help with scriptwriting?
What do you use it for, specifically?
When did you first start using it?

Click here to answer (takes 30s).

I'm putting everyone who answers into a hat and 2 random winners will get a prize:

If you've never bought anything from me, you'll get lifetime access to the AI Scriptwriting Toolbox. (Value: $150)
If you've bought the AI Scriptwriting Toolbox, you'll get lifetime access to the YouTube Scriptwriting Playbook (Essential tier). (Value: $397)
If you're already a YTSP Essential member, you’ll get 6 months free Pro tier access (join the community). (Value: $599)
If you're already a Pro tier member, you'll get a free 1-1 call. (Value: $1000)

I'm only invited to speak on a stage like this because of YOU!

So I want to get your voice heard while I'm up there:

Click here to answer (takes 30s).

That's all for this week.

Any questions? You can to reply to this email and I'll get back to you.

Speak soon,
George 👋

First up, a quick announcement I'm very excited to share:

🙏 Next month, I'm giving a talk at VidSummit 🙏

The talk is called: How to Script YouTube Videos Using AI (Without Losing Your Soul)

I've been thinking about this topic a lot since releasing the AI Scriptwriting Toolbox earlier this year.

To be given the chance to share my thoughts at the biggest industry event in the YouTube calendar is mad.

(And it's thanks to you reading my newsletter that I'm able to keep sharing what I learn with more and more folks, so thank you 🙏)

If you're heading out to Texas for the conference, I'd love to see you there! Either at the talk, or at the bar afterwards where I'll be "settling my post-talk nerves" 🍻

See the full speaker lineup here.

You're (probably) using YouTube "chapters" wrong - here's how to fix it:

When I started out as a YouTube scriptwriter in 2021, I thought chapters were supposed to make it as clear as possible what each part of the video was about.

And, in a way, that's true.

But there are some major caveats every YouTuber needs to keep in mind if you don't want your chapter titles to wreck your retention.

Because, honestly, I look back on chapter titles I wrote in 2021 and feel guilty that I inflicted stuff like this on one of my earliest clients:

So, here are the 4 rules of YouTube chapter titles...

#1 - Don't spoil the payoff.

In the example above, I literally give the audience everything they need to know about the video from the chapter titles.

"Why do sponsorships go wrong?", the viewer asks as they land on the video.

"Oh", they realise the instant they hover their mouse over the timeline and read the chapter titles. "I should remain calm, trust my gut, and make sure I follow up. Cool."

Of course, your video will go into more detail about each topic, but if the viewer thinks they've understood the gist, they'll leave.

Instead, to disguise the payoffs:

Use simple chapter names, like: "Step 1, Step 2, Step 3"
Create intriguing (but abstract) nicknames for each tactic, like: "Mind Mode", "The Gut Protocol" or "Simple Email Trick".

#2 - "Chapter" does not equal "segment".

As you may know, I teach the "setup, tension, payoff" approach to script structure.

Each time you set up your next point, build tension as you explain it, and pay off that curiosity... that's a segment.

But that doesn't mean one segment = one chapter.

Some topics might take 5+ minutes to explore fully, which means you'll need to include more than one payoff in that time.

But... if it's still covering the same topic... it's probably only one chapter.

So don't get stuck thinking a longer chapter can only contain one payoff at the end.

You can put multiple segments in a single chapter.

#3 - Dont make chapters toooo long.

Despite what I said about rule #2... there is a limit.

If a viewer starts to get bored, they'll do one of two things:

Click away and watch something else. (Not a lot we can do.)
Skim ahead to a later point in the video they might still be interested in. (Here, we can help them.)

In scenario 2, we want it to be as easy as possible for them to hover over the timeline, check out a few chapter titles, and become re-intrigued by one of them.

But if your entire video is made up of just 2-3 MASSIVE chapters, it creates the impression that the video isn't structured intentionally, which makes it harder for the viewer to find a new jumping-on point.

Ergo, they're more likely to click away.

#4 - Test rapid-fire chapters (in some niches).

If your videos go in-depth about complex topics, or you know your audience watches your content to get a highly specific answer to a highly specific question...

...consider testing "rapid-fire" chapters.

These chapters might be as little as 15-20 seconds in length, depending on each topic.

If your channel matches the description I gave above, your viewers are more likely to appreciate being able to dip in and out of your content, get what they need, and leave again.

This might sound bad - people watching for less time?

But the long-term play is always viewer satisfaction.

And if your audience knows your videos always have the answers they're looking for and it's easy to navigate to those answers because of your rapid-fire chapters...

...they'll come back to your videos time and time again.

That's all for this week.

Any questions? You can to reply to this email and I'll get back to you.

Speak soon,
George 👋

Scripting Frameworks

This week, one of my students shared a hook he was working on for a new script.

Alongside it, he shared an AI rewrite of the same hook.

His question was simple: "Which do you prefer?"

A few of us debated this in the comments underneath, and something unexpected happened:

None of us agreed.

I thought his version was significantly better.
He thought AI's version was better than his own.
Another student preferred elements of the AI's version, and elements of his.

This lack of consensus intrigued me, so I decided to discuss the topic on my podcast, Making It.

My co-hosts, Jamie and Gwilym, are two YouTube strategy people, and I wanted to know whether they'd be able to reach a consensus.

So I created a little game for them 😈

I broke down each version of the hook - the human version, and the AI version - into 7 key "moments".

My co-hosts had two tasks:

Guess which version was written by AI.
Decide which they preferred.

Their responses were... incredibly revealing 👀

Firstly, they correctly identified the AI sentences in 7/7 scenarios.
Secondly, they preferred the "human" sentences in 6/7 scenarios.

This was pretty much what I'd expected.

AI outputs have plenty of little "tells" that reveal a human didn't write it, so I wasn't surprised they'd correctly identified then.

But then something happened that I really didn't expect.

To finish the episode, we read both hooks, one after the other, in full.

And despite having overwhelmingly preferred the human writing in the individual sentences...

...when taken as a whole, they actually preferred the AI version.

Even though its its individual sentences felt clunky, the flow of the AI - the way it was structured - made it feel like a more complete package.

My takeaway:

Use AI to help create structure. It’s good at turning a messy brainstorm into something that flows.
Don't let AI write your scripts line-by-line. It constantly slipped into annoying jargon and buzzwords.
Always do a "human pass" at the end. However and wherever you've used AI in the process - always do a final check. Read it aloud. Throw in your own turn of phrase. Make sure it's saying what you actually think, not a lesser version.

That's all for this week.

Although, I'm curious... from the example I shared, can you tell which is AI-written?

Hit reply and let me know!

Speak soon,
George 👋

I finally cracked a sustainable writing + filming system that allows me to write word-for-word scripts in under 90 minutes (consistently).

Below, you’ll find two screen recordings showing you the entire process.

But let me quickly break down the steps here so you can understand what’s going on.

Using a table-format script, this is the rinse-and-repeat system I use every week.

Write payoffs (word for word).
Write setups (word for word).
Write tension (bullet points).

The result? A script that looks something like this:

But this only works under two conditions.

Create accountability - I schedule weekly group scriptwriting sessions inside my scriptwriting community. Feel free to join us here, or simply arrange a time with a friend to write together.
Block time - that two hour block in my calendar is immovable, because I know my students might turn up. What’s more, I also schedule 1 hour filming the day after.

One important thing I learned from Ali Abdaal (not that this was the lesson he was trying to teach us), is that your excitement for an idea rapidly depletes after the initial moment of inspiration.

So it’s important that filming happens no more than 48 hours after the scripting is done.

With that being said, here are the screen recordings of two recent writing sessions.

There’s no commentary (I was in the zone!) and no editing.

Watch on 2x speed, skip around a bit, and notice whether watching this approach helps you overthink scripting a little less.

Writing Session 1:

Watch Here

Writing Time: 65 minutes.
Length: 1350 words, Level 2.5.
Estimated video duration: 6-8mins
GPTs used: CTA Writer

Notice how, by plotting the payoffs first, I end up with a clear script skeleton. This makes it much easier to spot structural problems early.

Writing Session 2:

Watch Here

Writing Time: 75 minutes.
Length: 2500 words, Level 3.
Estimated video duration: 12-15mins.
GPTs used: ScriptHook; CTA Writer

Here, I converted a newsletter into a script. I highly recommend this approach - if you’ve written about a topic before, in a newsletter, blog post, or even just a tweet… save yourself some brain power!

Foundations of Creation Podcast

I recently sat down with a student of mine, Ethan, to discuss how a background in comedy helped me grow my business - check it out!

Watch the episode!

That's all for this week.

Any questions? You can to reply to this email and I'll get back to you.

Speak soon,
George 👋

Scripting Frameworks

I’ve spent a lot of time writing word-for-word scripts.

For past clients.
For my own videos.
Heck, even for my 30,000+ word YouTube course.

Theoretically, the reason I wrote word-for-word was to make filming easier and to create sharper, more engaging videos.

But, this week, I realised I’d been wasting my time.

And it's explains why I look so miserable in videos like this:

Ok, hear me out...

Have you ever recorded a video where you…

Had the script open just off camera.
Memorised the paragraph you were about to deliver.
Delivered the paragraph as best you could.
Realised you'd forgotten half of it, or riffed your way into a weird tangent.
Re-memorised the paragraph, and repeated steps 3 and 4 until you eventually got it right.

This is how I had always recorded videos.

But the fact was, no matter how closely I squeezed my laptop to the underside of my camera’s lens…

…I wasn’t “reading” the script.

I was memorising it in tiny chunks.

No wonder recording always felt so stressful.

But since using a teleprompter… I love recording.

No memorisation. No guesswork. No risk that I miss a crucial detail I deliberately included in the script.

Quick caveat:

I’m not about to say you have to buy a teleprompter.

But here’s what I realised:

If you don’t have a teleprompter, there is very little point writing a word-for-word script.

The value of putting that extra time into nailing every last word is that you unlock a degree of precision and accuracy that bullet point riffing doesn’t allow.

But if you’re not actually reading the script, you will stray from it. You will go on tangents. You will riff.

And riffing is ok!

But trust me… riffing off a series of bullet points feels so much more natural.

It allows you to properly relax into it, and speak from the heart.

It’s intentional riffing.

But riffing unintentionally, because you tried and failed to memorise your script in chunks… that doesn’t feel very good at all.

And the resulting video will almost certainly be worse, because viewers will read the stress in your body language.

Here's me, about 20,000 words into recording my course - sweaty, stressed, and mentally exhausted from all that "chunk memorisation"...

But here's me earlier this week, happily reading every. single. delicious. word.

(From a teleprompter.)

So take this as your permission to do one of two things:

If you have the means and are serious about incorporating scriptwriting into your YouTube workflow... invest in a teleprompter.
If not, or if you simply prefer to be a little more off the cuff… script less, and enjoy the feedom of riffing from well-structured bullet points.

That's pretty much it for this week! Glad to be back after a lovely vacation.

That's all for this week.

Any questions? You can to reply to this email and I'll get back to you.

Speak soon,
George 👋

Scripting Frameworks

No results found.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!

Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

YouTube is 31x more efficient at generating leads for my business than Instagram.

(And it's got a lot to do with how easy it is to write an effective CTA.)

Let me explain:

22 weeks ago, I started my business Instagram with the intention of replacing the traffic I used to get from Twitter.

(Miss u, Twitter xxxx)

The perceived "lower effort" of writing and filming a Reel (vs a YouTube video) drew me in.

But, after figuring out a more efficient system for writing YouTube scripts in less time (a combination of my YTSP scriptwriting system and the advice I give in this video)...

...I re-launched my YouTube channel as well.

So this week, I wanted to crunch the numbers.

Even at this early stage, I wanted to know:

Which platform had been more effective at generating leads.
How much time input was required per lead?

(I mean, between you and me, I knew YouTube was going to win... 👀)

...but the extent of the victory shocked me 😆

In the below stats, a "lead" is somebody who joined this newsletter via a lead magnet promoted by the piece of content.

Instagram (started 22 weeks ago)

Videos: 11
Views: 4500
Leads: 4
Average time to script + film one video: 70 minutes

Average time input per lead: 192.5 minutes

YouTube (started 3 weeks ago)

Videos: 4
Views: 2300
Leads: 79
Average time to script + film one video: 120 minutes

Average time input per lead: 6.1 minutes

Ok, so... let's address the elephant in the room.

"You only made 11 Reels and gave up."

True. But is it any surprise?

Instagram nerds will tell you that, to properly grow on Instagram, you need to post daily.

So, assuming you only have 3-4 hours per week to write and film content...

...Instagram is a non-starter.

YouTube, on the other hand? 😍

3-4 hours per week is plenty of time for most channels to write and film a video (again, combining my writing system + advice hyperlinked above).

And approx. 1 video per week has already had a non-trivial impact on newsletter sign ups and even sales.

And my channel is still tiny.

Some of you, reading this, will already know exactly how impactful YouTube can be at 100x these numbers.

But why is there such a disparity?

My business is just a single example, but I don't think it's atypical.

And I believe it comes down to two key factors across both platforms that grossly affect how many leads they generate:

1/ How easily can you convince the viewer to click?

YouTube: Viewers build more trust from a single piece of content. When you're delivering 10 minutes of value, the viewer has more patience to listen to a 15 second plug.
Instagram: Viewers have less time to build trust. Plus, while already trying to cram a tonne of information and nuance to a short video, you probably only have 3-5 seconds to include a plug.

Takeaway: Long-form YouTube content, as a medium, is just better set up to build trust and allow you space to script a convincing plug.

2/ How physically easy is it for the viewer to click?

YouTube: QR codes on-screen allow TV viewers to "click", and links in your description + pinned comment make it way easier for PC and mobile viewer to click.
Instagram: Viewer can navigate to your link in bio, or a third party tool like ManyChat can be used (but these require the viewer to comment to receive the lead magnet).

Takeaway: YouTube viewers can access your links with a single click. For Instagram users, there's more friction.

All that being said... I still have a presence on Instagram.

My partner, Julia, converts all my newsletters into carousels, and we double-post those on LinkedIn as well.

There's no harm in keeping a presence elsewhere, if it doesn't distract you from the highest leverage platform (YouTube).

So... if you want to see my highest-converting lead magnet so far, check out this video:

Watch the video here.

The cool part is... I never explicitly tell the viewer to click the link.

But, because of the natural trust-building format of long-form YouTube content, a simple link at the top of the description is sufficient.

That's all for this week.

Any questions? You can to reply to this email and I'll get back to you.

Speak soon,
George 👋

Today, I've got something essential to keep in mind when writing your next hook.

Specifically, if your hook ends with a "rule of three".

A rule of three usually appears at the end of a hook and sounds like this:

"So in this video, we're going to cover:

[Topic 1]
[Topic 2]
And [topic 3]"

Having a video that answers multiple questions like this is great because:

We can really sell the amount of value in our video.
We can set up the video's structure, which is essential to keeping the viewer oriented and engaged later.

But here's the problem:

The choice of which three things you mention is more important than you'd think.

It's not as simple as choosing "the most interesting three topics from the video".

And I've seen channels with 100k+ subscribers get this wrong (and their retention has suffered because of it).

For example, let's imagine a video called "Best laptop for small businesses in 2025".

In the past, I've seen channels who made the mistake of writing something like this at the end of their hook:

"So in this video, we're going to cover:

The huge problem with Sony laptops in 2025.
The unexpected realities of Apple's new M5 chips.
And which laptop is right for small business owners in 2025."

But... why is this a problem?

All three bullet points sound exciting and, more importantly, relevant to the topic.

But here's the issue:

(And, remember, structure is key to retention - and setting up that structure in the hook is essential.)

By putting three equally important topics side-by-side, it makes it more difficult for the viewer to latch on to the primary question.

The primary question is the reason they clicked - and it's probably the question expressed in the title (in this case, "which laptop should I buy as a small business?")

Instead, the rule of three should include two supporting questions and then the primary question.

In our laptop example, it might look like this:

"So in this video, we're going to cover:

The key features of each laptop.
How their spec will affect your day-to-day workflow.
And, ultimately which laptop is right for small business owners in 2025."

As our video progresses, we want our viewers to retain complete clarity about why they're watching.

And muddying the waters in the hook by expressing three equally important-sounding ideas makes it more likely they'll lose that clarity later on.

I've got two more quickfire examples below if you're still not 100% clear on what a "good" vs "bad" rule of three looks like, but first...

New Video Just Dropped

7 YouTube Scriptwriting Hacks (from 40m Views)

After launching my channel two weeks ago, video #4 just dropped. Feel free to check it out!

Watch It Now

Quickfire Examples: "Good" vs "Bad" Rule of Three

Title: How to Stop Procrastinating and Actually Get Things Done

❌ Bad rule of three:

“So in this video, we’ll talk about:

The best productivity advice I ever received.
The daily habits of highly successful people.
How to stop procrastinating and actually get things done.”

All three sound like different videos, and I might even be more compelled by the first bullet than the third.

✅ Good rule of three:

“So in this video, we’ll talk about:

The common triggers that cause procrastination.
What’s really happening in your brain when you procrastinate.
How to stop procrastinating and actually get things done.”

The first two ideas flow naturally into the third.

Title: THIS Is Why You Can't Build Muscle Consistently

❌ Bad rule of three:

“So in this video, we’ll talk about:

How sleep impacts your metabolism.
Why you're probably tracking your workouts wrong.
How to finally start building muscle consistently.”

As above, my attention is pulled equally to bullets 1 and 2 as it is to bullet 3.

✅ Good rule of three:

“So in this video, we’ll talk about:

How to set effective calorie targets during your training.
How to avoid overtraining so you don't waste your progress.
And, ultimately, how to start building muscle consistently.”

The first two ideas flow naturally into the third.

That's all for this week.

Any questions? You can to reply to this email and I'll get back to you.

Speak soon,
George 👋

Assuming you're reading this on Friday… my YouTube channel just went live!

But this isn't a "go watch my video!" type email.

Instead, I want to share the weird launch strategy I’m using, and how you can steal parts of this approach even if you've already uploaded hundreds of videos.

How I combined two strategy ideas to create my own:

Inspiration for this launch strategy came from these two fellas:

Nate Black → his recent “content wall” strategy: stop uploading for a month, then drop 3 videos simultaneously to reset YouTube’s idea of who your audience is.
Ed Lawrence → Ed launched his current channel with 3 videos as well (one of which I wrote), and I remember him tactically linking 2 of them together with end-screen CTAs.

Both smart, both effective. But I wanted to push it further...

The "Whirlpool" Strategy

While I'm posting all 3 videos simultaneously (just like Nate and Ed), I wanted to create a truly bingable experience for my viewers.

That's why, using end-screens...

Video 1 links to Video 2.
Video 2 links to Video 3.
Video 3 links back to Video 1.

That means, no matter which video viewers land on, they'll get pulled into a cycle that should (if the videos are good enough) get them to watch all 3.

Whereas one of Ed's videos linked back to his main channel... mine form a complete "circle".

But it doesn’t stop there.

I've already written and filmed videos 4, 5 and 6 - and each of those videos keep the chain going...

Video 6 → links back to 5
Video 5 → links back to 4
Video 4 → links back to 3...

...at which point, they enter THE WHIRLPOOL!

What you can steal from this:

Whether you’re launching a brand-new channel or simply want to increase the value you're able to provide to your audience:

✅ Use end screen call-to-actions intentionally to guide viewers between videos.
✅ Try funnelling your viewers down to a small series of “whirlpool content”. If you’re launching your channel, follow the approach explored above. If you’ve already got several videos, identify 3 existing videos, and add end-screens which link between them.
✅ The videos you choose should be at the core of what you teach. (In my case, the 3 videos cover hooks, script structure, and end-screens.)

Want to watch the "whirlpool strategy" in action?

Ok fine - just a small plug :) I recommend starting here 👇

Click here to watch!

Free Live Session + Q&A With Me

Learn to write ready-to-record YouTube scripts in under 90 minutes.

While we're talking about the launch...

...I'd been "planning to start" my own channel for over two years.

But even with all my time-saving scriptwriting frameworks, I could never find enough time to make it happen.

So, after finding every excuse in the book, this year something finally clicked.

And with a cheeky little system and a few simple guardrails, I'm now writing and recording at a rate of one video per week.

Without it, I would not have been launching my channel today. (Let alone with another 3 videos in the can!)

I'm sharing that writing system with you for free on October 15th, at 5pm BST.

It won't be recorded, so if you want an inside look at how I write scripts for my channel (to help you write faster and upload more) make sure to sign up below:

Send me the Zoom link!

That's all for this week.

Any questions? You can to reply to this email and I'll get back to you.

Speak soon,
George 👋

After announcing my upcoming talk at VidSummit...

...I'm pleased to follow up with the news that I'll also be joining a panel called The Impacts of AI on Content Creation, alongside Roberto Blake, Matt Wolfe and Murray Frost.

With that said, I want to ask you something that might directly influence what I say on stage.

Because here's the truth:

Two years ago, I was still resisting AI.

But today, I use it daily, I sell an AI-based product, and I'm now going on stage (twice!) at the world's biggest YouTube conference as an "expert" on the topic 🤯

It got me thinking: it's amazing how much my attitude to AI has changed in a short span of time.

And I'll bet yours has too.

Maybe not in the same way, or at the same speed... but I'll bet it has.

And here's the coolest thing:

You and I are part of a pretty unique group, [FIRST NAME GOES HERE].

After all, the YouTube community is enormous...

...yet you, me, and 5700 other creators have specifically chosen to take scriptwriting more seriously.

And, as someone who made the investment in the AI Scriptwriting Toolbox, you're already thinking tactically about how to integrate AI into your scripts.

So, at a time when more and more people are asking questions like:

Where should I use AI to make scripting easier?
Can AI write whole scripts yet?
How do I use AI without sucking the personality out of my channel?

Well... we're the people who are actually testing this stuff, figuring out how to integrate AI usefully into our workflow, and seeing what it's really capable of.

Which puts us in a pretty unique position.

So, with that in mind, I want to ask you 3 simple questions:

How often do you use AI to help with scriptwriting?
What do you use it for, specifically?
When did you first start using it?

Click here to answer (takes 30s).

I'm putting everyone who answers into a hat and 2 random winners will get a prize:

If you've never bought anything from me, you'll get lifetime access to the AI Scriptwriting Toolbox. (Value: $150)
If you've bought the AI Scriptwriting Toolbox, you'll get lifetime access to the YouTube Scriptwriting Playbook (Essential tier). (Value: $397)
If you're already a YTSP Essential member, you’ll get 6 months free Pro tier access (join the community). (Value: $599)
If you're already a Pro tier member, you'll get a free 1-1 call. (Value: $1000)

I'm only invited to speak on a stage like this because of YOU!

So I want to get your voice heard while I'm up there:

Click here to answer (takes 30s).

That's all for this week.

Any questions? You can to reply to this email and I'll get back to you.

Speak soon,
George 👋

First up, a quick announcement I'm very excited to share:

🙏 Next month, I'm giving a talk at VidSummit 🙏

The talk is called: How to Script YouTube Videos Using AI (Without Losing Your Soul)

I've been thinking about this topic a lot since releasing the AI Scriptwriting Toolbox earlier this year.

To be given the chance to share my thoughts at the biggest industry event in the YouTube calendar is mad.

(And it's thanks to you reading my newsletter that I'm able to keep sharing what I learn with more and more folks, so thank you 🙏)

If you're heading out to Texas for the conference, I'd love to see you there! Either at the talk, or at the bar afterwards where I'll be "settling my post-talk nerves" 🍻

See the full speaker lineup here.

You're (probably) using YouTube "chapters" wrong - here's how to fix it:

When I started out as a YouTube scriptwriter in 2021, I thought chapters were supposed to make it as clear as possible what each part of the video was about.

And, in a way, that's true.

But there are some major caveats every YouTuber needs to keep in mind if you don't want your chapter titles to wreck your retention.

Because, honestly, I look back on chapter titles I wrote in 2021 and feel guilty that I inflicted stuff like this on one of my earliest clients:

So, here are the 4 rules of YouTube chapter titles...

#1 - Don't spoil the payoff.

In the example above, I literally give the audience everything they need to know about the video from the chapter titles.

"Why do sponsorships go wrong?", the viewer asks as they land on the video.

"Oh", they realise the instant they hover their mouse over the timeline and read the chapter titles. "I should remain calm, trust my gut, and make sure I follow up. Cool."

Of course, your video will go into more detail about each topic, but if the viewer thinks they've understood the gist, they'll leave.

Instead, to disguise the payoffs:

Use simple chapter names, like: "Step 1, Step 2, Step 3"
Create intriguing (but abstract) nicknames for each tactic, like: "Mind Mode", "The Gut Protocol" or "Simple Email Trick".

#2 - "Chapter" does not equal "segment".

As you may know, I teach the "setup, tension, payoff" approach to script structure.

Each time you set up your next point, build tension as you explain it, and pay off that curiosity... that's a segment.

But that doesn't mean one segment = one chapter.

Some topics might take 5+ minutes to explore fully, which means you'll need to include more than one payoff in that time.

But... if it's still covering the same topic... it's probably only one chapter.

So don't get stuck thinking a longer chapter can only contain one payoff at the end.

You can put multiple segments in a single chapter.

#3 - Dont make chapters toooo long.

Despite what I said about rule #2... there is a limit.

If a viewer starts to get bored, they'll do one of two things:

Click away and watch something else. (Not a lot we can do.)
Skim ahead to a later point in the video they might still be interested in. (Here, we can help them.)

In scenario 2, we want it to be as easy as possible for them to hover over the timeline, check out a few chapter titles, and become re-intrigued by one of them.

Ergo, they're more likely to click away.

#4 - Test rapid-fire chapters (in some niches).

If your videos go in-depth about complex topics, or you know your audience watches your content to get a highly specific answer to a highly specific question...

...consider testing "rapid-fire" chapters.

These chapters might be as little as 15-20 seconds in length, depending on each topic.

If your channel matches the description I gave above, your viewers are more likely to appreciate being able to dip in and out of your content, get what they need, and leave again.

This might sound bad - people watching for less time?

But the long-term play is always viewer satisfaction.

And if your audience knows your videos always have the answers they're looking for and it's easy to navigate to those answers because of your rapid-fire chapters...

...they'll come back to your videos time and time again.

That's all for this week.

Any questions? You can to reply to this email and I'll get back to you.

Speak soon,
George 👋

This week, one of my students shared a hook he was working on for a new script.

Alongside it, he shared an AI rewrite of the same hook.

His question was simple: "Which do you prefer?"

A few of us debated this in the comments underneath, and something unexpected happened:

None of us agreed.

I thought his version was significantly better.
He thought AI's version was better than his own.
Another student preferred elements of the AI's version, and elements of his.

This lack of consensus intrigued me, so I decided to discuss the topic on my podcast, Making It.

My co-hosts, Jamie and Gwilym, are two YouTube strategy people, and I wanted to know whether they'd be able to reach a consensus.

So I created a little game for them 😈

I broke down each version of the hook - the human version, and the AI version - into 7 key "moments".

My co-hosts had two tasks:

Guess which version was written by AI.
Decide which they preferred.

Their responses were... incredibly revealing 👀

Firstly, they correctly identified the AI sentences in 7/7 scenarios.
Secondly, they preferred the "human" sentences in 6/7 scenarios.

This was pretty much what I'd expected.

AI outputs have plenty of little "tells" that reveal a human didn't write it, so I wasn't surprised they'd correctly identified then.

But then something happened that I really didn't expect.

To finish the episode, we read both hooks, one after the other, in full.

And despite having overwhelmingly preferred the human writing in the individual sentences...

...when taken as a whole, they actually preferred the AI version.

Even though its its individual sentences felt clunky, the flow of the AI - the way it was structured - made it feel like a more complete package.

My takeaway:

Use AI to help create structure. It’s good at turning a messy brainstorm into something that flows.
Don't let AI write your scripts line-by-line. It constantly slipped into annoying jargon and buzzwords.
Always do a "human pass" at the end. However and wherever you've used AI in the process - always do a final check. Read it aloud. Throw in your own turn of phrase. Make sure it's saying what you actually think, not a lesser version.

That's all for this week.

Although, I'm curious... from the example I shared, can you tell which is AI-written?

Hit reply and let me know!

Speak soon,
George 👋

I finally cracked a sustainable writing + filming system that allows me to write word-for-word scripts in under 90 minutes (consistently).

Below, you’ll find two screen recordings showing you the entire process.

But let me quickly break down the steps here so you can understand what’s going on.

Using a table-format script, this is the rinse-and-repeat system I use every week.

Write payoffs (word for word).
Write setups (word for word).
Write tension (bullet points).

The result? A script that looks something like this:

But this only works under two conditions.

Create accountability - I schedule weekly group scriptwriting sessions inside my scriptwriting community. Feel free to join us here, or simply arrange a time with a friend to write together.
Block time - that two hour block in my calendar is immovable, because I know my students might turn up. What’s more, I also schedule 1 hour filming the day after.

So it’s important that filming happens no more than 48 hours after the scripting is done.

With that being said, here are the screen recordings of two recent writing sessions.

There’s no commentary (I was in the zone!) and no editing.

Watch on 2x speed, skip around a bit, and notice whether watching this approach helps you overthink scripting a little less.

Writing Session 1:

Watch Here

Writing Time: 65 minutes.
Length: 1350 words, Level 2.5.
Estimated video duration: 6-8mins
GPTs used: CTA Writer

Notice how, by plotting the payoffs first, I end up with a clear script skeleton. This makes it much easier to spot structural problems early.

Writing Session 2:

Watch Here

Writing Time: 75 minutes.
Length: 2500 words, Level 3.
Estimated video duration: 12-15mins.
GPTs used: ScriptHook; CTA Writer

Foundations of Creation Podcast

I recently sat down with a student of mine, Ethan, to discuss how a background in comedy helped me grow my business - check it out!

Watch the episode!

That's all for this week.

Any questions? You can to reply to this email and I'll get back to you.

Speak soon,
George 👋

I’ve spent a lot of time writing word-for-word scripts.

For past clients.
For my own videos.
Heck, even for my 30,000+ word YouTube course.

Theoretically, the reason I wrote word-for-word was to make filming easier and to create sharper, more engaging videos.

But, this week, I realised I’d been wasting my time.

And it's explains why I look so miserable in videos like this:

Ok, hear me out...

Have you ever recorded a video where you…

Had the script open just off camera.
Memorised the paragraph you were about to deliver.
Delivered the paragraph as best you could.
Realised you'd forgotten half of it, or riffed your way into a weird tangent.
Re-memorised the paragraph, and repeated steps 3 and 4 until you eventually got it right.

This is how I had always recorded videos.

But the fact was, no matter how closely I squeezed my laptop to the underside of my camera’s lens…

…I wasn’t “reading” the script.

I was memorising it in tiny chunks.

No wonder recording always felt so stressful.

But since using a teleprompter… I love recording.

No memorisation. No guesswork. No risk that I miss a crucial detail I deliberately included in the script.

Quick caveat:

I’m not about to say you have to buy a teleprompter.

But here’s what I realised:

If you don’t have a teleprompter, there is very little point writing a word-for-word script.

The value of putting that extra time into nailing every last word is that you unlock a degree of precision and accuracy that bullet point riffing doesn’t allow.

But if you’re not actually reading the script, you will stray from it. You will go on tangents. You will riff.

And riffing is ok!

But trust me… riffing off a series of bullet points feels so much more natural.

It allows you to properly relax into it, and speak from the heart.

It’s intentional riffing.

But riffing unintentionally, because you tried and failed to memorise your script in chunks… that doesn’t feel very good at all.

And the resulting video will almost certainly be worse, because viewers will read the stress in your body language.

Here's me, about 20,000 words into recording my course - sweaty, stressed, and mentally exhausted from all that "chunk memorisation"...

But here's me earlier this week, happily reading every. single. delicious. word.

(From a teleprompter.)

So take this as your permission to do one of two things:

If you have the means and are serious about incorporating scriptwriting into your YouTube workflow... invest in a teleprompter.
If not, or if you simply prefer to be a little more off the cuff… script less, and enjoy the feedom of riffing from well-structured bullet points.

That's pretty much it for this week! Glad to be back after a lovely vacation.

That's all for this week.

Any questions? You can to reply to this email and I'll get back to you.

Speak soon,
George 👋

Create more engaging videos with simple, actionable scriptwriting tips.

Join 5,000+ scriptwriting nerds reading “Write On Time”. Insights from writing for multi-million subscriber YouTubers sent to your inbox every Friday.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!

Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Create more engaging videos with simple, actionable scriptwriting tips.

30k+ Subcribers

Latest Issues

YouTubers: don't let Instagram distract you

But why is there such a disparity?

The hook mistake made by 100k+ channels

7 YouTube Scriptwriting Hacks (from 40m Views)

Quickfire Examples: "Good" vs "Bad" Rule of Three

I spoke at YouTube's biggest insider conference!

Today, I simply want to thank you 🙏

Revealing the "whirlpool" YouTube launch strategy

How I combined two strategy ideas to create my own:

The "Whirlpool" Strategy

What you can steal from this:

Want to watch the "whirlpool strategy" in action?

Learn to write ready-to-record YouTube scripts in under 90 minutes.

How much do you use AI?

You're using YouTube "chapters" wrong.

You're (probably) using YouTube "chapters" wrong - here's how to fix it:

#1 - Don't spoil the payoff.

#2 - "Chapter" does not equal "segment".

#3 - Dont make chapters toooo long.

#4 - Test rapid-fire chapters (in some niches).

Which YouTube script was written by AI?

My takeaway:

I screen-recorded how I write YouTube scripts (watch here)

Writing Session 1:

Writing Session 2:

Foundations of Creation Podcast

Stop writing word-for-word scripts, unless...

Have you ever recorded a video where you…

Quick caveat:

YouTubers: don't let Instagram distract you

But why is there such a disparity?

The hook mistake made by 100k+ channels

7 YouTube Scriptwriting Hacks (from 40m Views)

Quickfire Examples: "Good" vs "Bad" Rule of Three

I spoke at YouTube's biggest insider conference!

Today, I simply want to thank you 🙏

Revealing the "whirlpool" YouTube launch strategy

How I combined two strategy ideas to create my own:

The "Whirlpool" Strategy

What you can steal from this:

Want to watch the "whirlpool strategy" in action?

Learn to write ready-to-record YouTube scripts in under 90 minutes.

How much do you use AI?

You're using YouTube "chapters" wrong.

You're (probably) using YouTube "chapters" wrong - here's how to fix it:

#1 - Don't spoil the payoff.

#2 - "Chapter" does not equal "segment".

#3 - Dont make chapters toooo long.

#4 - Test rapid-fire chapters (in some niches).

Which YouTube script was written by AI?

My takeaway:

I screen-recorded how I write YouTube scripts (watch here)

Writing Session 1:

Writing Session 2:

Foundations of Creation Podcast

Stop writing word-for-word scripts, unless...

Have you ever recorded a video where you…

Quick caveat:

Create more engaging videos with simple, actionable scriptwriting tips.