Practical PR Guide for Solicitors — Telling your story without jargon or dumbing down

Communications consultant Stewart Argo shows how accuracy and accessibility aren’t mutually exclusive when it comes to getting your message across.

Jargon has its place

According to one dictionary, jargon is: ‘special words or expressions used by a profession or group that are difficult for others to understand’.

That’s a rather unkind description, because jargon isn’t necessarily bad. In fact, it’s essential. I applaud and celebrate the effective use of jargon. Imagine how much time we’d waste without it, especially when speaking with peers.

The same dictionary provided an archaic definition of jargon as being a ‘form of language regarded as barbarous or debased’, which I found both amusing and more useful for my purposes, as this article will go beyond just technical terms to consider other ways in which writing obscures meaning.

There is no right or wrong

It’s easy for writers to get caught up in what they think is correct or incorrect and neglect the fact communication is only ever a means to an end. That’s why I believe it’s more helpful to think about what’s effective.

Tastes and opinions change, as do audiences and circumstances, and sometimes the pendulum can swing too much in one direction.

That may be why the Financial Conduct Authority is reviewing the use of jargon in products for consumers.

(As an aside, when I started work at the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) in 2001, one of our directors would still put in letters ‘15th proximo’ to mean the 15th of next month. He would have insisted that was the ‘proper’ way to write. Thankfully I haven’t encountered it since and can’t imagine anyone arguing his case now.)

When this matters

There will be many situations where it’s right to use professional terminology and the conventions of legal writing. There will be many situations where it’s worth moderating these, and this article will set out options for doing so.

A newspaper comment, a website article, a podcast appearance, a LinkedIn post and a conference presentation are all examples. (And that’s to say nothing of clients and colleagues who rely on legal advice and who, presumably, consist of non-lawyers in the vast majority.)

Let’s be honest: very few people want more material to read, understand and act on. Audiences – including professional ones – skim over emails, get distracted reviewing a letter or double-screen during a webinar. So, even when people do understand all the language presented to them, there remain other human barriers to your message landing the way you intend.

Reducing jargon also contributes to a sense of accessibility and relatability. Clients or new business targets may ask better questions and make quicker, more confident decisions when the language is direct. Journalists, regulators and other external readers are less likely to misinterpret the meaning when the text is designed for clarity.

Some types of jargon and how to mitigate them

Latin

Who doesn’t love a bit of Latin? I can’t say I did despite choosing to study it for five years at school. The legal profession definitely loves it, in stark contrast to its audiences.

One option is simply to put Latin phrases in English. An increasing number of people don’t know e.g. means for example and i.e. means that is. Nothing is lost by using this everyday language.

Inter alia can become among other things; ipso facto can be as a result. Where the meaning is more involved, a short sentence normally communicates more effectively than relying on a formulation few readers recognise.

Abstract nouns

Abstract nouns often cloud action. Instead of the commencement of proceedings, say when proceedings commence – or even better, when proceedings start. The provision of disclosure becomes providing disclosure. These adjustments make events clearer, especially when the reader is moving quickly.

Longer words

Shorter and simpler words can replace heavier vocabulary without loss of meaning. As above, commenced becomes started; terminate becomes end; in the event that becomes if.

Utilise can nearly always be use, and prior to can be before.

Minor, incremental adjustments such as these have a cumulative impact on readability, particularly in longer notes where the overall density of language affects comprehension.

Technical or conventional phrases

A caveat (or perhaps I should say condition) that applies to everything in this article is I am not pursuing a dogmatic approach. Context is king. And obviously I’m not a lawyer. Some of the examples I’m giving may work; some may not. The point is to illustrate the art of the possible in general terms.

To continue then…

Executed in counterpart can be explained as signed in separate copies that together form the full agreement.

Liquidated damages can be described as a fixed amount of compensation agreed in advance.

Indemnity becomes clearer when expressed as an obligation to cover another party’s loss.

Usually, clearer writing is shorter (and therefore preferable), but those examples show the opposite can be better.

For inherently technical concepts such as estoppel, adding a bracketed explanation gives readers enough context to follow the reasoning without altering the law. In that example, it may be OK to say: estoppel (broadly, preventing someone from contradicting what they previously said or did).

Executed by the parties can be signed by everyone involved. Likewise, failed to comply with can, in many contexts, be replaced by did not follow or did not meet, without diminishing the seriousness of the point.

Traditional connectors also warrant review. Notwithstanding the foregoing becomes despite what is said above.

Forthwith and thereafter become immediately and after that.

Other alternatives

Setting aside specific words and phrases, here are other ways to handle the pressure for legal precision in situations where adhering to that would be counter-productive:

• Add a disclaimer at the end of an article that the content has been simplified or otherwise moderated for accessibility
• Include a description at the start of an article about the intended audience
• Use a footnote to explain a term so the clarification or qualification doesn’t interrupt the flow for the reader
• Add a point in the ‘notes to editors’ in a news release
• Incorporate a link to the definition or explanation of the term
• Include a brief glossary of terms used in the article

Reducing jargon is not cosmetic…

It is a practical discipline grounded in respect for your reader. With a few simple tweaks and techniques, legal meaning can remain intact, but the path to understanding becomes clearer.