Our LocationsPlain language doesn’t have to be plain
by Megan Pluskis
"I like fruit baskets because they give you the ability to mail someone a piece of fruit without appearing insane. Like, if someone just mailed you an apple you'd be like "Huh? What the hell is this?" But if it's in a fruit basket you're like, "This is nice!"
—Comedian Demetri Martin
In other words, it's all about context. At Siegel+Gale we know that how an idea is positioned and packaged is just as important as the idea itself.
As a plain language writer, I often wonder whether positioning the idea of straightforward communication through the term "plain language" is really communicating what the plain language movement represents.
For most people, the word plain is synonymous with being unadorned, lacking flavor or (dare I say) boring. But the goal of plain language writing isn't to lull anyone to sleep. It's to boil complex ideas down to their essentials and communicate them in a way that everyone (not just lawyers) can clearly understand. So, perhaps "plain language" could use a little rebranding. "Cut-to-the-chase language" doesn't quite roll off the tongue, but you get the idea.
While its purpose is to get to the point, I think cut-to-the-chase language at its best is also about communicating with the right tone. To be engaging, cut-to-the-chase language needs to have a personality that's relatable to (and liked by) readers. Based on my experience as a human being, I think people respond well to humanity and humor, particularly when it’s coming from an unexpected source, such as a government or financial institution.
An email I recently received from ING Direct proves this point, and shows how cut-to-the-chase language that’s written with humanity and humor can go a long way.
When I first saw the email, its subject of Annual Privacy Notification had me prepared to recite an internal monologue of, "Skim, skim. What does this even mean? Blah blah. Delete." But instead, upon opening it I was greeted by a very unpretentious and approachable paragraph that read:
"Here's some important Privacy Policy info that we're required to send you each year. It seems like a lot of legal stuff, but we promise, it'll only take a few minutes. And don't worry, there's nothing you need to do on your end."
So down to earth…so human! By not showing off their legal might, they made me want to actually continue reading the email (or complete the call to action, as we often say at Siegel+Gale). As any client would probably agree, having your readers do what you want them to is the ultimate goal. Turns out, as ING shows, sometimes all it takes to achieve this is showing a little humanity in your communications so they're more approachable.
ING also uses humor as a way to relate to readers and grab their attention. Perhaps my favorite part of their email was its closing, which takes a tongue-in-cheek approach to explaining how readers can contact someone if they have questions:
"Replies to this email end up in a black hole. If you need to reach us, email us at sales@ingidrect.com. Thanks."
This bit of humor not only gives the email personality, but more importantly, a sign of life. I, and probably most other people, can better relate to a financial institution that has a pulse and is willing to crack a joke. We are human after all. It helps when banks (or any type of company for that matter) show that they are too.
ING proves how using cut-to-the chase language, with a dash of humanity and humor, can result in improved customer experiences. Not only will customers read what is written, and do what they’re asked, some may even share their positive experience with others in, say, a blog post.
Megan Pluskis is an information architect for the Siegel+Gale New York office.
Contact us
North America
625 Avenue of the Americas, 4th Floor
New York, NY 10011 USA
10960 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90024 USA
Middle East
Loft Office 408, Building 2C
P.O. Box 502835
Dubai Media City, United Arab Emirates
Asia
No. 29 ShaJing Road, Building 5
Hongkou District, Shanghai 200080, China
6/F, Tower B, Jiaming Center
No. 27 Dongsanhuan Beilu
Chaoyang District, Beijing 100020, China
Great piece, Megan, and I absolutely love that opening quote.
I think your mention of expecting to “Skim, skim. What does this even mean? Blah blah. Delete.” is the crux of this matter. To even get someone to read any information is a challenge, and clearly ING managed to find a way to get past your limited attention span (in the non-insulting way!) and get you interested.
No doubt the language used would get an absolute kicking from the traditional plain language community, but nowadays just making it simple isn’t enough. With everyone’s minds a second away from drifting to the next task, there’s got to be more – whether through design, or an engaging approach like the one you’ve outlined. Also, I guess the human tone gets some way to making you feel you’re ‘being told’ the information, rather than ‘reading it’.
Thanks for all of your comments!
@Aaron: Refreshing, indeed. My blood pressure rises every time I try to read my electric or student loan bill.
@Jesse: Good points. In terms of airlines, I think language is another way that Southwest differentiates themselves from competitors. While sometimes I feel like I’m being subjected to bad stand up comedy, for the most part I appreciate that flight attendants use (not utilize) normal human being speak.
@Mike: I agree that there are other implications for people who read English as a second language. In those instances, humor or tongue-in-cheek comments could be confusing. However, as a native speaker, I find that humor makes information more memorable, instead of serving as a distraction. As consumers, we�re increasingly inundated with information that competes for our attention. I think communicating with the right tone, which includes adding humor, can be a successful tool for making important information stand out amongst everything else we process on a daily basis.
@Bill: I think bottom line language is also a good alternative. My main gripe with the word “plain” is that it’s often a euphemism for boring. And as Nigel notes in his comment, plain language on its own doesn�t necessarily equal clarity.
@Nigel: As you note in your article, I agree that plain language isn�t about demeaning readers or speaking to them as if they were children. You make a key point that plain English skills don�t equal clarity, but are a contributing factor to it. I�d argue that other elements of clear communication include strong information architecture and design.
Megan Pluskis
@Jesse: I feel like the airline industry leads the world in taking simple ideas and making them unnecessarily complex.
Your comment is interesting. Not all parts of the airline industry make simple ideas complex. Maintenance manuals must be clear. To make maintenance manuals as clear as possible, manufacturers use ASD Simplified Technical English. Each word has a specified meaning. Only simple grammatical structures are permitted. For an introduction to ASD Simplified Technical English, see http://www.techscribe.co.uk/techw/se.htm.
Good thoughts. I too am a little bothered about the term “plain language”, preferring instead to call the root of my work “clear English”. Is there a real difference? I think so: there’s an article on my website, linked from the home page.
How about bottom line language? I’ve been a fan of ING’s language for quite some time.
@Megan: But the goal of plain language writing isn’t to lull anyone to sleep. It’s to boil complex ideas down to their essentials and communicate them in a way that everyone (not just lawyers) can clearly understand.
Your ‘plain language’ is not my ‘plain language’. An idea cannot be boiled. Verbs such as ‘boil down’ are a large problem for many people who read English as a second language, because the meaning of the verb is not the sum of its parts (http://faculty.washington.edu/jansp/TC512/Syllabus/readings/PlainEnglish.pdf).
@Megan: I think people respond well to humanity and humor, particularly when it’s coming from an unexpected source, such as a government or financial institution.
I want information as quickly and as clearly as possible. I do not like humour to be mixed with information, because humour is a distraction.
@quote: “Replies to this email end up in a black hole. If you need to reach us, email us at sales@ingidrect.com. Thanks.”
The humour is not necessary. The first sentence can be removed with no loss of meaning.
I feel like the airline industry leads the world in taking simple ideas and making them unnecessarily complex. Why did trash that goes in a trash bag turn into “service items” that can be “placed in the receptacle”? When did “get off” become “deplane”? I guess the design is that the customer will translate all this fancified language into professionalism, but in my opinion it comes off sounding totally out of touch with reality. So I guess I’m saying that the airlines could learn a lesson from ING (or at least be fodder if you decide to write a less optimistic blog entry in the future!).
Most of what I do as a sales trainer is take marketing fluff and shape it into real live selling points that a normal human being might say to another normal human being. I guess you could say the reason I have this job is that there is a disconnect between how over-educated people talk and how the rest of us hear. Sometimes (and maybe you can relate to this) it feels like taking a toy boat and whittling it down into a smaller toy boat. But hey, as long as the checks keep coming I’ll keep turning “utilize” into “use”, you know?
It’s very refreshing to find “cut to the chase” language in government documents. Instead, I usually need about six ibuprofen and a shot of whiskey to get through one City Council bill. Governments and corporations alike would benefit from a cut-to-the-chase language movement, with the general public as the biggest winners of all.
Even something as simple as a fruit basket can be overly complex once we delve into contractual legal language– who wants to read through pages of fine print about apples and bananas? If I’m sending or receiving a fruit basket I want to know the exact terms of the deal without hiring a lawyer.