Plain Language Is Not “Dumbing Down” Writing

“I want a refresher on my writing.” 

“I want to improve my grammar.” 

“My company sent me here.”

These are the consistently similar answers I get in every writing class I teach to professionals when I ask what brought them to the course.

During some recent clear, concise writing sessions I delivered to a large public-facing organization, though, I was startled by a repeated answer. One or more participants in each session replied, “I want to learn how to dumb down my writing.”

The first time someone answered that way, I was mildly irritated, but I didn’t address it. When I heard it again over the next two sessions, my irritation increased. By the time I heard it yet again in session four, I was angry.

My anger about “dumbing down” prompted me to wonder why I was responding so strongly. On the surface, without thinking about it deeply, that perspective on plain language writing may seem harmless, and I’d certainly heard it elsewhere before. But hearing it in my class bothered me. I’ve reflected on my reaction since then, and here’s what I’ve realized.

Double trouble

If I break the phrase “dumb down” into its two words, I start to see why it’s problematic even if the writers didn’t consciously have harmful intent.

Dumb

The “dumb” part of the phrase implies a belief on the writer’s part that their audience — or at least part of it — isn’t intelligent. The writer believes they “have to” write in an overly simplistic way so that the (wrongly assumed) unintelligent readers can understand their message.

This attitude, to me, shows a sense of ableism and a lack of respect for readers’ diverse characteristics and their varied educational, cultural and linguistic backgrounds. This mindset is especially problematic because it is most often applied to readers whose first language is not English or to those with intellectual or communication-related challenges.

Down

The “down” part of the phrase similarly implies a negative belief about the audience but as a comparison to the writer’s self-beliefs. Because the writer seems to believe that the audience is “less intelligent” than they are, the audience is also placed “lower” than the writer on some self-assigned ladder. The false superiority and the condescension inherent in this attitude are neither accurate nor fair.

Justifying plain language 

In that fourth writing session, where yet another person mentioned “dumbing down,” a different participant asked for a way she could justify using plain language to her team lead, who was resistant to it. Her question provided me a wonderful opening to share my perspective — calmly but passionately — on the implications of the phrase “dumbing down.” Here’s how I explained what I believe about the role and value of plain language (paraphrased):

The goal of writing is to share a message with the audience because you want every reader to understand — that is, after all, why you’re sharing the message. Plain language is the way you do that. 

Why would you choose to use language that you know could make it difficult or impossible for some readers to understand your message when doing so might exclude rather than include some of them from comprehension?

Plain language is not “dumbing down” your writing; it’s making your writing understandable to the maximum possible number of readers. Plain language is a tool for accessibility and inclusivity.

Where I go from here 

These recent discussions and reflections have led me to deepen my desire to teach writers how to use plain language — and to encourage some writers to reconsider their views on its meaning and value.

___

Previous post from Tracey Anderson: Writing Coaches and Writers — “A Beautiful Synergy”: An Interview with Tanya Gold

The Editors’ Weekly is the official blog of Editors Canada. Contact us.