Policy-Neutral Writing
Be careful not to describe opinions or contested assertions as fact.
When using opinions or contested claims in writing, ascribe them to the source from which they came. “According to X” is often a helpful construction because it tells the reader where the contested assertion comes from. Additionally, citations are often a helpful tool when pointing to contesting opinions.
Avoid contentious and unprofessional language.
Use descriptive, clear language that speaks to the issue at hand. Your language choice should not reflect any editorialization. Avoid loaded terms that speak to one side’s interpretation of a policy argument.
Contentious language frequently appears in several forms. Below, we focus on three forms: qualifiers, double-speak, and generalizations.
Qualifiers
Qualifiers are added to nouns to modify their meaning. Frequently, a qualifier is used to express degree (e.g., “some small businesses grow into large businesses”). However, qualifiers can frequently be used in ways that create uncertainty or sow doubt in the minds of readers. Using qualifiers to create ambiguity where there is none or finding qualifiers that can editorialize can often distort writing and make a policy issue unclear. Be careful when modifying your nouns and be sure you’re not editorializing.
Double-speak
Double-speak is language that is deliberately designed to mislead readers or make unpleasant events sound more palatable. Double-speak is often associated with defense writing (“collateral damage” as opposed to “civilian casualties”) but frequently can be used in economic writing (“downsized” instead of “laid off”). Be clear as to your terms and use industry standard language.
Generalizations
Generalizations are statements that draw broad conclusions that are unfounded. Oftentimes a feature of sloppy writing, a generalization can mislead the public by thinking a conclusion is broader than it is, or because a generalization can misrepresent the data. It is okay to simplify ideas for public consumption but be careful not to draw too broad a conclusion.
Previous