Does “plain language” have a naming problem?

Most people don’t ask for “plain language.”

They ask for:

• instructions they can follow immediately
• emails they can skim quickly
• health information they can understand
• policies that make sense
• reports that get to the point

Readers value clarity when they experience it. But those same people may say they don’t need, or want, “plain language.”

The problem with “plain”

With respect to the person who coined the term “plain language,” the word “plain” conjures up something dull, unsophisticated, or ordinary.

Plain yogurt. Plain toast.

People may hear “plain language” and subconsciously think:

• less intelligent writing
• less expert material
• less sophisticated audience

But plain language isn’t simple or basic. It’s thoughtfully engineered for comprehension.

The resistance

At the recent IHA Health Literacy Conference, health literacy experts Sarah Glazer and Jane Gfrerer shared some of the arguments they’ve heard against using plain language:

• It’s unprofessional
• More complex writing is better writing
• Educated people will be offended
• The lawyers won’t go along with it

Complex language has long been associated with expertise and authority. Every discipline has its own terminology. Using it shows that you’re an expert, that you’re part of the in-group.

In those professional cultures, going “plain” doesn’t just seem unnecessary, it sounds like a professional risk.

It’s time for a rebrand

Instead of spending our energy trying to teach people what plain language is (and isn’t), we could adopt labels that intuitively tie clear, strategic writing to expertise and results.

The new terms could:

1. Emphasize effectiveness to suggest that writing should reflect competence and results:

• Effective writing
• Precision communication
• Frictionless communication
• High-clarity writing

2. Emphasize expertise to imply that writing understandably takes more expertise, not less:

• Expert clarity
• Precision writing
• Strategic clarity
• Professional clarity

3. Emphasize audience response to shift the focus from writing style to what it achieves for the reader:

• Reader-centered communication
• Usable writing
• Audience-ready content
• Low-friction content

We don’t have to pick just one. There may be terms that are more accurate and effective in some fields than others. And we might just have to try them to see which ones will stick.

People love the experience of clear communication—they just don’t necessarily respond to the label. The goal isn’t to make writing simple or boring. It’s to make expertise easier to access. Nothing plain about that.