{
    "version" : "https://jsonfeed.org/version/1",
    "content" : "news",
    "type" : "single",
    "title" : "Technical Writing Need Not Be Abstruse—Use Plain Language for Maximum Impact |Digital.gov",
    "description": "Technical Writing Need Not Be Abstruse—Use Plain Language for Maximum Impact",
    "home_page_url" : "/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/cm-topics-button-component/","feed_url" : "/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/cm-topics-button-component/2015/10/23/technical-writing-need-not-be-abstruse-use-plain-language-for-maximum-impact/index.json","item" : [
    {"title" :"Technical Writing Need Not Be Abstruse—Use Plain Language for Maximum Impact","summary" : "Author writes: Additionally, the method utilized a myriad of factors for the purpose of incentivizing production to hit record-high levels of magnitude in the equivalent time period. Author thinks: My work sounds serious, impressive and interesting. Reader thinks: Huh? Technical writers are great—some of my favorite colleagues are technical writers. But technical writers often need","date" : "2015-10-23T10:00:55-04:00","date_modified" : "2024-04-02T09:45:13-04:00","authors" : {"colleen-blessing" : "Colleen Blessing"},"topics" : {
        
            "communication" : "Communication",
            "plain-language" : "Plain Language"
            },"branch" : "cm-topics-button-component",
      "filename" :"2015-10-23-technical-writing-need-not-be-abstruse-use-plain-language-for-maximum-impact.md",
      
      "filepath" :"news/2015/10/2015-10-23-technical-writing-need-not-be-abstruse-use-plain-language-for-maximum-impact.md",
      "filepathURL" :"https://github.com/GSA/digitalgov.gov/blob/cm-topics-button-component/content/news/2015/10/2015-10-23-technical-writing-need-not-be-abstruse-use-plain-language-for-maximum-impact.md",
      "editpathURL" :"https://github.com/GSA/digitalgov.gov/edit/cm-topics-button-component/content/news/2015/10/2015-10-23-technical-writing-need-not-be-abstruse-use-plain-language-for-maximum-impact.md","slug" : "technical-writing-need-not-be-abstruse-use-plain-language-for-maximum-impact","url" : "/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/cm-topics-button-component/2015/10/23/technical-writing-need-not-be-abstruse-use-plain-language-for-maximum-impact/","content" :"\u003cdiv class=\"image\"\u003e\n  \u003cimg\n    src=\"https://s3.amazonaws.com/digitalgov/_legacy-img/2015/10/600-x-366-English-Dictionary-Alan-Crawford-iStock-Thinkstock-166091799.jpg\"\n    alt=\"A large English dictionary.\"/\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\n\n\u003cp\u003eAuthor writes: Additionally, the method utilized a myriad of factors for the purpose of incentivizing production to hit record-high levels of magnitude in the equivalent time period.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAuthor thinks: My work sounds serious, impressive and interesting.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eReader thinks: Huh?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTechnical writers are great—some of my favorite colleagues are technical writers. But technical writers often need help communicating their important thoughts in plain language.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs an editor of technical, statistical reports, I see authors making a number of mistakes in approach, execution and English. Here are five of my agency’s most common arguments for not writing in plain language:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eI got an A on these kinds of papers in graduate school.\u003c/strong\u003e Yes, you did. And you were writing for a professor as your only reader. Your professor was likely smarter than you were. The long introduction with fancy SAT words might work in college, but it’s not what busy readers of your content are looking for. The research format of background, literature review, assumptions, research discussion, analysis, and finally ending with the conclusions completely buries the main points. Lead with your main points. Use \u003ca href=\"/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/cm-topics-button-component/resources/plain-language-web-writing-tips/\"\u003eplain language\u003c/a\u003e. Write for interested readers, not your academic or technical peers.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eI was taught to vary my word choice and to make paragraphs at least three sentences long.\u003c/strong\u003e Yes, you were. In 10th grade English. Don’t feel compelled to vary your word usage, especially for words with specific meanings. If you say consumption in one sentence, don’t say usage in the next sentence and then demand in the third. Readers will wonder if these terms all mean the same thing. Don’t make readers wonder. And, one-sentence paragraphs can be very instructive and powerful. Shorter paragraphs are easier to skim and easier to read.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eI was told to include an introduction, body and conclusion in my writing.\u003c/strong\u003e That’s OK for the SAT writing sample, but that format leads to repetitive content. Just tell the reader the main point first, then include some supporting facts or analysis. Don’t write in conclusion or to summarize. If your writing is clear and direct, you won’t need a conclusion.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eI know my readers—and I know they will understand these terms.\u003c/strong\u003e When writing Web content, unless you really know all one million or so of your potential readers, don’t assume they will be familiar with your technical terms. What may be common knowledge to you might be new to your readers. There are two simple solutions to fix this mistake, using either parentheses or pairs of \u003ca href=\"http://grammarist.com/grammar/emdash/\"\u003eem dashes\u003c/a\u003e to clarify technical terms: … technical term (definition or plain English meaning), or … simple term (technical term). Do not force your readers to crack open Merriam Webster’s Dictionary or their chemistry book or to search Google. Clarify your terms in context.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eI won’t look like a subject expert if I write in plain language.\u003c/strong\u003e No one was ever offended by content that was too clear. Technical-minded readers will certainly understand and possibly even appreciate your clarity. And a lot of nontechnical readers will also be able to understand and use your information. Plain language isn’t dumbing down content. It’s making your information more accessible to more people.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e\n\u003ch2 id=\"know-your-readers-and-write-to-them-hahahugoshortcode2596s2hbhb\"\u003eKnow Your Readers and Write to Them \u003cdiv class=\"image\"\u003e\n  \u003cimg\n    src=\"https://s3.amazonaws.com/digitalgov/_legacy-img/2015/10/600-x-400-Marketing-segmentation-Jirsak-iStock-Thinkstock-483426432.jpg\"\n    alt=\"Marketing segmentation\"/\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\n\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMy agency does a website customer survey every year. We ask questions about who the customers are (government, academia, business, private citizen) and how satisfied they are with the information we provide. We also ask a couple of questions that provide a great look into who in the world is accessing our information. And it is a wide world!\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn our 2015 survey, more than 25% of the 30,000 respondents told us they didn’t live in the United States. With 40,000 people using our website each day, that’s 10,000 people who live abroad. This percentage has been consistent for many years. Think about these readers when you use jargon or idioms or technical terms specific to a culture or location.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition to the global distribution of our users, a full 20% of our survey respondents say they are visiting our website for the first time. That means the old “we defined that in the report last month” won’t cut it. Each report should spell out acronyms, define units and explain technical terms. The key here is to know your readers and write to them.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhat other aspects of writing should authors of technical content pay attention to?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWriting in the agency style, which writers often forget about in the midst of analysis. Our agency has a \u003ca href=\"http://www.eia.gov/about/eiawritingstyleguide.pdf\"\u003eWriting Style Guide\u003c/a\u003e to help writers with punctuation, hyphenation, capitalization and agency style choices.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eScrubbing for consistency in usage, \u003ca href=\"/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/cm-topics-button-component/2015/04/20/the-content-corner-finding-your-voice/\"\u003evoice\u003c/a\u003e and \u003ca href=\"/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/cm-topics-button-component/2015/06/08/the-content-corner-creating-a-content-style-guide/\"\u003ewriting style\u003c/a\u003e when a report has many authors.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eReading the document aloud before sending it to your boss. Use spell check for way more than just spelling. Have a nontechnical colleague read it and give honest feedback. If you are the reviewer, never be afraid to say “I don’t understand this.” If you don’t understand what the writer is saying, many readers won’t either.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAnd, the sentence at the beginning of this piece should say, “This method used many factors to achieve a record level of production.”\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eColleen Blessing is a senior editor at the U.S. Energy Information Administration and the lead author of her agency’s award-winning style guide. She’s been editing government writing \u003cdel\u003esince the first Roosevelt administration\u003c/del\u003e since her agency was formed in 1977 and has worked in the Office of Communications since 2006.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n"}
  ]
}