Our Contribution to Creating Misunderstanding

When we write, do we purposely set out to be misunderstood?  To prevent understanding?  I would hope not, but we do so.

My contention is that some people write to impress themselves, not to create understanding.  

Here is my background.  In 1973 my consulting mentor required me to draft material (e.g., letters, reports, etc.) for him at the eighth-grade level.  I was a recent MBA graduate and … well … thought I knew it all.  Invariably, when I would draft something for him, he’d send it back for a rewrite at a less-lofty grade level.  His rationale was that writing should be for understanding not to impress yourself.  One particularly gruesome weekend was spent rewriting a multiple page report – his instructions to me were to take my typed report (we had rudimentary word processing – an IBM mag typewriter) and ‘arbitrarily strike though every third word, reprint it, then rewrite it for understanding by adding missing verbs, pronouns, etc. (but not length).”  I had to, in every case, manually calculate the Flesch Index of Readability* and prove to him that the effort resulted in eighth-grade writing.*

If the reader’s understanding is what we strive for, why write reports, proposals, blogs, etc., at a higher level?  For ourselves?  Or our readers?

Here’s an example.  The extracts (in bold) are from a recent article I read, The Demon of Irredentism is Back with a Vengence by Medish and Rondos.  [Note: The article itself is a good, important read.  My purpose in extracting from it is not to criticize the article or the authors; reading it simply provided me with two samples to use.

From the article:

“Geopolitical atavism has become fashionable, politically expedient and unchecked by the major powers who are either distracted or complicit. Today the globe is pockmarked with latent or current irredentist disputes.”  This quote’s readability has a score of 17, or 15.3 grade level.  

Rewritten (I used Bing’s AI to do so.  I am not making any judgment re: AI, simply using it):

“Some countries want to take back land that they think belongs to them, even if it is part of another country. This is very popular and easy to do these days, and the big countries who could stop them are either too busy or don’t care. Today the world has many places where this is happening or could happen.” Readability score is 76.4 or 7.4 grade level.

Another example, first from the article:

“The system assumed that the world’s dominant powers would contain the contradiction with a combination of appeal to normative rules and a generous application of pragmatism that may have offended many a purist.”  This quote’s readability has a score of 22 or 18.3 grade level.

Rewritten (again, with AI):

“The system thought that the strongest countries in the world would solve the problem with a mix of following the rules and being flexible when needed. This might have made some people unhappy who wanted things to be perfect.” Flesch readability ease is 72 or 8.0 grade level.

Ignoring your own grade level, which of the examples (the authors, or from AI) are more readable and, importantly, understandable?  I am not here to criticize either the authors or the article itself.  To the contrary, Medish and Rondos made me think not only about irredentism (I had to look it up) but also consider the intended readers.*  Was communication enhanced or stymied?  Will the article be more widely read and understood?  

[Note: Personally, the referenced article should have a wider audience as a ‘must read’ but the style within which it is written likely precluded some readers from doing so.]

Please take a moment to re-read the bolded extract, then the AI interpretation that follows.  Does simplifying the writing (‘dummying’ it down) improve (1) your own understanding and (2) likely increase the readership?

This blog is not about the article, but rather written to provoke some thinking about how we write.  Yes, you could criticize my style also; I do not pretend to be a great writer.  My sole goal is to ask the question, “Do you write to impress yourself or write to improve understanding?”

Thoughts are welcomed.

*Flesch Reading Ease gives a score between 1 and 100, with 100 being the highest readability score.  Between 70 and 80 is equivalent to eighth grade school level.  BTW, calculation on the Flesch Readability Score is embedded into Word.  This blog (without the authors’ quotes) is written has a score of 55 or grade 9, likely because of the length of my sentences.

*The Demon of Irredentism is Back with a Vengence, Euronews, August 12, 2023.

*I also don’t know who the intended audience for Euronews is.