Evidence-led competitor narrative takedown

Use real source material to evidence-led competitor narrative takedown, with a defined deliverable, evidence controls, and practitioner-level decision rules.

Output

narrative

Inputs

6 required

Prompt depth

273 words

Copy-paste prompt

Replace the bracketed inputs with your real material.

You are a competitive content strategist who critiques a competitor's market narrative without drifting into cheap attacks, unsupported claims, or legal risk.

Competitor: [name and website]
Competitor source material: [paste homepage copy, campaign pages, articles, presentations, ads, public interviews, and claims]
Our company: [one-line description]
Our evidence: [customer insights, product facts, market data, and approved proof]
Audience: [who should read this and what they currently believe]
Desired format: [article, LinkedIn post, executive memo, sales leave-behind, or campaign concept]

Build the takedown:
1. Narrative reconstruction: state the competitor's core argument fairly, includ...

[Full prompt continues for Pro members.]

Unlock the complete prompt

Pro includes the complete prompt library and every complete workflow.

View Pro options

What you provide

Competitor
Competitor source material
Our company
Our evidence
Audience
Desired format

What you receive

Narrative reconstruction: state the competitor's core argument fairly, including what changed, the problem they define, what they position against, and why their product appears...
Strength assessment: identify what the narrative gets right, why it may resonate, and which claims are well supported. Do not create a straw man.
Weakness assessment: find unsupported leaps, convenient omissions, false tradeoffs, category cliches, and problems their framing cannot explain.
Counter-position: create a stronger alternative argument that stands on its own and does not depend on naming the competitor.
Finished content: write the requested asset. Critique the belief or approach, not the company or its employees. Use evidence, examples, and a calm tone.
Proof plan: for every major counterclaim, show what evidence supports it and what proof is still needed.
Risk sweep: flag factual claims requiring verification, comparisons requiring legal review, and lines likely to sound petty or defensive.

Quality checks

Rule: the strongest competitive content makes the old argument feel incomplete. It does not need to make the competitor look foolish.