Why plain language may not work for you

I recently came upon this study of terms of use contracts from tech companies. Two things stand out: 

1. A plain language translation of the contracts made it much easier for users to understand what the contract actually said. 

2. At the same time, it made some users trust the companies much less, once they understood what the contract actually said. 

The study says, “Participants inherently trusted companies using plain language summaries more and were more willing to share personal information with them.” However, they backtracked when they realized that the companies were essentially saying, ‘I’m taking your data, I can use it however I want, and you have no legal recourse.’ 

So, does plain language work to win the trust of customers or does it backfire? 

On the face of it, it may appear that it backfired for the tech companies. But let’s dig a little deeper here. Let’s begin from the beginning, or at the top of the funnel, in marketing-speak. Let’s start at how an individual turns into a customer of a company in the first place. 

Typically, companies invest a lot of time and money in understanding their target audience and tailoring their advertising campaigns with terms and visuals that their target persona use, understand, and relate to. They spend oodles of money to come up with taglines with deep emotional pull and strong brand recall. 

However, the same time and effort do not always go into sustaining the customer’s trust once they become a customer. It’s almost as if the companies have split personalities. 

See examples below. 

Exhibit #1: Airtel
Airtel’s homepage feels like a luxury lounge with lots of breathing space. Messaging is clear and crisp. The call to action is staring you in the face. Not an extra syllable.   

But here’s how the terms look like:

I can hardly read it, given the narrow columns down which it’s flowing. This can’t be thought through. Is this a display glitch? For the record, I had opened it on my laptop on Chrome browser. Somehow I find it hard to believe that while the rest of the site is optimized, the terms aren’t?!

Not only are the terms hard on the eyes, but the language also gets denser, more passive, and distanced from the customer, with phrases such as “It is clarified and stated that…” 

Gone is the luxury lounge. I feel ditched. 

Exhibit #2: ICICI Prudential

Here’s an interactive product explainer from ICICI Prudential. It’s easy on the eyes and gives various options for you to play around with and explore. Note that it uses terms such as “his death”. 

In the screenshot below, you can see the use of pronouns such as “we”, “our”, “you”, and “your”.

Now, savour the following text from the terms and conditions: 

“In the event of the Life Assured’s death due to an Accident…” Note how they hesitate from saying “your death”. 

“The revival will take effect only if it is specifically   communicated by Us  to the You.” Yes, the you!!!

“A policy of life insurance may be called in question at any time within three years from the date of issuance of the policy or the date of commencement of risk or the date of revival of the policy or the date of the rider to the policy, whichever is later, on the ground that any statement of or suppression of a fact material to the expectancy of the life of the insured was incorrectly made in the proposal or other document on the basis of which the policy was issued or revived or rider issued: Provided that the insurer shall have to communicate in writing to the insured or the legal representatives or nominees or assignees of the insured the grounds and materials on which such decision to repudiate the policy of life insurance is based: Provided further that in case of repudiation of the policy on the ground of misstatement or suppression of a material fact, and not on the ground of fraud, the premiums collected on the policy till the date of repudiation shall be paid to the insured or the legal representatives or nominees or assignees of the insured within a period of ninety days from the date of such repudiation.” Enough said?

From marketing-speak to legal terms, it does not feel like I am dealing with the same company. Yet, it is the same me they are addressing, either to woo me into being their customer or impose those mind-boggling terms on. 

So, it’s just this: communication from companies is broken. It is disconnected. For me, Airtel is Airtel – the company that provides me cell phone services. ICICI Prudential is the company that provides me life insurance. And so on for all the companies whose products or services I use. I don’t see it as the marketing department of Company X or the legal department of Company Y. When I sense a disconnect in the language of the company, comes the first feeling of I’ve been had. Or at least, that the romance is over. 

The use of plain language throughout the company’s communication can address this gap. It can make the communication feel more connected, more whole. 

But wait, didn’t those tech companies use plain language and yet, some users said they trusted the companies less after their contracts became clearer? Does that mean plain language didn’t work? 

Actually, plain language worked. It worked to help users cut across the jamboree of words and see what the companies actually meant. But if the company’s intention is to harm users or cheat them or take advantage of them in some way, plain language will simple make this intention clear.  

Moral of the story: If plain language is used to “privacy wash” or “ethics wash”, that is, if companies use plain language to pretend to be trustworthy but actually aren’t, it will fail. 

Do not use plain language if you are not ready for it. Plain language is ethical communication, above all else. Yes, it can help your marketing messages become clearer and more focused. Customers can easily understand them and hence trust the company more. But the actual offering of the company must stand up to the promise delivered by the use of plain language. Else, don’t even try.