1. Start with the reader’s problem, not your topic

The most common mistake I see — and I’ve made it myself — is opening with the subject. “Introductions are an important part of any article.” “In this guide, we will explore the art of writing introductions.” Nobody woke up this morning worried about introductions. They woke up worried about their own bounce rate, their own blank page, their own readers leaving.

So start there instead. Name the reader’s problem in the first sentence: “Most readers decide whether to stay in the first three seconds.” That’s not about me or my topic. It’s about the reader’s exact situation, stated plainly. When the first line is their problem, the second line becomes your promise: here’s how to fix it.

Try this test on your next draft. Read your first sentence and ask: is this about the reader, or about me? If it’s about you — your topic, your process, your expertise — move it down. Open with them instead.

2. Cut the throat-clearing

Throat-clearing is everything you write before you get to the point. The background, the definition, the gentle ramp-up: “Writing has always been an essential skill. Since the dawn of the internet, content has played a crucial role…” Every one of those sentences is the writer warming up. And every one of them costs you readers.

Here’s my rule: if a sentence could be deleted and the article would still make sense, it doesn’t belong in the introduction. I often find I can delete the first two sentences of a draft and the piece gets better instantly — because the third sentence is where I actually started saying something.

The fix is mechanical, not creative. Write your introduction, then delete its first paragraph. Read what’s left. If the piece still works — and it usually does — keep it deleted. If something essential is missing, add back only that one thing, in one sentence.

3. Make a promise you can keep

A good introduction is a contract. It tells the reader what they’ll get if they stay, and then the article has to deliver it. “Here’s how to write introductions that earn the next paragraph — with a specific opening, a clear promise, and no throat-clearing.” That’s a promise: three concrete things, all of which this article actually covers.

Vague promises don’t work. “In this article, you’ll learn everything you need to know about introductions” promises nothing specific, so it earns nothing. A reader who can’t tell what they’ll get can’t tell whether it’s worth their time.

And keep the promise honest. If your introduction promises “the one trick that doubles your readership,” you’d better have that trick — with evidence. Overpromising is worse than underpromising, because the reader who feels cheated doesn’t just leave. They remember not to come back.

4. Open with something specific

General openings bore people. Specific openings stop them. Compare these two:

“Many writers struggle with introductions.”

“I deleted the first paragraph of this article three times before it was ready to publish.”

The first could open a thousand articles. The second could only open this one — and it makes you want to know what was in those deleted paragraphs. Specificity is what makes an opening feel written by a person rather than assembled by a template.

You don’t need drama. A small, true detail works better than a big, invented one. A number (“three seconds”), a scene (“I stared at a blinking cursor for twenty minutes”), a confession (“my first draft opened with ‘in today’s fast-paced world’”). One specific thing in the first two sentences changes the whole temperature of the piece.

5. Keep it short — the three-sentence test

Here’s a test I run on every introduction: can the reader reach the first heading after about three sentences? Not three paragraphs — three sentences. If the introduction runs longer than that, it’s probably doing work that belongs in the body.

This isn’t a hard rule. Some topics need a longer runway — a story, a setup, a bit of scene-setting. But the default should be short. An introduction that runs eight sentences is really an introduction plus the start of the article, and the reader can feel the drag.

Short introductions also force clarity. When you only have three sentences, you can’t hide behind filler. You have to say what the reader’s problem is, what you’re going to do about it, and why they should trust you — and then get out of the way.

6. Write the introduction last

This is the advice I resisted longest, and it’s the one that changed my writing most. I used to start every article by wrestling with the opening line. Now I write the body first and the introduction last — or, more honestly, I write a bad introduction first, write the body, and then rewrite the introduction once I know what the article actually says.

It works because you can’t introduce something you haven’t written yet. The first draft of an introduction is always a guess about what the article will be. The last draft is a summary of what it actually is. The second one is almost always better: tighter, more specific, honest about the contents.

So stop agonising over the first line. Write a placeholder — “Introduction goes here, something about readers leaving fast” — and get to the body. Come back when you know what you’re introducing. The opening will be waiting, and it’ll be easier than you think.

A quick checklist

• First sentence names the reader’s problem, not my topic
• No throat-clearing — deleted the first paragraph and the piece still works
• The introduction makes a specific promise the article actually keeps
• At least one concrete detail (number, scene, confession) in the first two sentences
• Three sentences to the first heading, or close to it
• Written (or rewritten) after the body, not before it

The honest truth

Introductions aren’t about being clever. They’re about being useful, fast. The reader gave you three seconds. The best way to honour that is to spend those seconds on their problem, in specific words, and then get on with the article.

Most of the introductions I delete aren’t bad writing. They’re just written too early, for the wrong audience, with too much warm-up. Fix those three things — write it last, aim it at the reader, cut the first paragraph — and the opening mostly takes care of itself. The reader stays not because you tricked them, but because you respected their time in the first three seconds. That’s a promise worth keeping.

Frequently Asked Questions