A cookie banner is a legal document, but most people consider it a design annoyance. The language has to describe what you set. It also has to explain that choice to someone who is not a specialist. Each side has to have a real choice.
Most banners follow this same pattern. A clear button to accept the terms, a link to preferences hidden deep somewhere, and a nonspecific sentence implying that your experience is somehow better with the service. This pattern has been successfully used by numerous companies, mostly to manipulate users, for which the regulators have had to fine several dozen companies.
This is the first thing a visitor encounters as they begin to engage with your marketing. It establishes a tone. Either you explicitly tell the visitor what data you collect and your reason, or you appear to be concealing data within three seconds. Your banner also shapes your analytics quality because data consent collected with an unusable banner is meaningless.
Generated banner copy usually sounds compliant but is often not. A statement to improve your experience and an accept button with a quiet link to settings is the most common pattern the technology has learned to structure and is therefore adopted. This banner copy talks about cookie categories your site never sets which makes the notice both inaccurate and unbalanced.
The writer begins with your actual cookie inventory because describing categories that you do not use is not just a waste of time, but actually a detriment. Each purpose has a sentence with an action a user can take: what it does, who receives the data, what happens when the user declines. The preference center then expands upon this beyond what a banner can offer.
We expect this will reach your counsel, and we write accordingly. The delivery separates stylistic wording from wording with legal implications, so a reviewer can do this with speed. Consent procedures can differ per jurisdiction and can be volatile. Therefore, we would like to reiterate that what we write does not provide any legal advice.
One rate, whatever the format: $10 per 100 words. You are paying for the writer’s time and judgement, so the price scales with the words rather than with a package tier.
| Typical cookie-banner copy | Words | Writing | Fee (1%) | You pay |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Banner and button copy | 100 | $10 | $0.10 | $10.10 |
| Banner plus preference center | 250 | $25 | $0.25 | $25.25 |
| Banner, preferences and policy summary | 500 | $50 | $0.50 | $50.50 |
The writer receives 100% of the writing price. Our 1% fee is added on top of it, and 0.5% is donated to tree planting. Full pricing breakdown.
We match the brief to a writer who has already worked in that subject area. If you have worked with an Articled writer before and want them again, name them and we will check their availability first.
Fill in the order form with your brief and email address. No account needed. You get a confirmation by email, then the finished piece as a document within 3 days.
No. We draft clear, accurate, unbiased wording and mark the choices with legal importance. However, no compliance can be guaranteed outside of your jurisdictions, vendors and your implementation. Your privacy counsel has authority to sign off on this. This document is intended to be concise and straightforward to review by your counsel.
A plain language summary of the full policy is located below the banner. The full policy (segmented into cookie tables and retention periods) is usually drafted from your technical inventory and reviewed by counsel rather than being developed as marketing copy.
Completely. Copyright transfers to you on delivery, with no attribution requirement and no licence back to us. Nothing written for you is resold, repurposed or republished.
Reviews from completed, paid orders in this category.
Solid first version. You positioned us as a design agency when we are more workshop oriented. It took four comments for you to pull this off. I would have liked to see this happen the first time. Two rounds have been budgeted, so I only needed to use the one. No hard feelings.
Most case studies rush their client’s problem to get to the hero part. This one takes the trouble to describe, in great detail, the client’s loss of pallets in the warehouse. It does a good job in describing what we were up against, and by the time you read about what we did you actually give a damn. This inversion was the writer’s idea, not mine.
I gave them 400 support emails and said to grab 20 pertinent questions. I got 18 questions in return and an explanation as to why the other two were the same question. That explanation turned out to be really helpful in resolving tickets.
We do not ask you to take the no-AI promise on trust. Each draft is run through these platforms and the reports are attached to your delivery email.
Originality.aiAI detection + plagiarism
GPTZeroAI detection
TurnitinAI detection + similarity
CopyleaksAI detection + plagiarism
Winston AIAI detection
ZeroGPTAI detection
SaplingAI detection
Content at ScaleAI detection
Send the brief, get a human draft back within 3 days. No account, no subscription, no AI.
$10 per 100 words · all of it to the writer · 0.5% to trees