Legal Writing

Getting Rid of Pretty Lousy Type

It’s been said (mostly by me) that “the power of the press used to belong to those who had one. Now that everyone’s got a press (a computer attached to the Internet) the power of the press belongs to those who know how to use it well.”

____________
To me, typesetting (something I’ve been doing since I was in the 7th grade) is an art. ?And there ought to be a law,? I say — a law that imposes some sort of fine or punishment on people who set lousy type.

While there isn’t a law, there certainly are rules. According to them, if an attorney submits a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court (or just about any document to any court in any legal proceeding) and sets it the way many large firms set their client alerts, the court won’t even accept it, and with right good reason.

By and large, courts won’t accept documents set in Pretty Lousy Type. They certainly won’t accept something that’s set like this (an excerpt from a client alert published by a large law firm):

And why won’t courts accept documents set in Pretty Lousy Type?

Because they’re such a pain in the eye! That’s why.

____________
Professional typesetters are much concerned with legibility — how easy it is for readers to read what typesetters have set.

And why are typesetters so concerned with legibility? Because it has such impact on how pleased readers are with what they’re reading.

Very legible type is easy to read; other styles of type (e.g., the excerpt shown above) aren’t so easy to read. Give readers a whole bunch of hard-to-read type to read, and they become irritated. Not only that, but they’re much less likely to understand what they’re reading.

That’s right!

And that’s important: very important.

If the reason a high-priced attorney spends his time writing a client alert rather than doing billable work is because the alert can attract potential clients, then that alert shouldn’t simply be informative. It should be attractive and easy to read. It certainly shouldn’t give the reader a headache.

____________
Take another look at the excerpt above. In particular, look at the second line, and the next to last line; note how tight those lines are. There isn’t enough space between the words, and that puts a real strain on readers (which is so counterproductive if the goal is to convert them to clients).

Take a look at the right side of the type. Notice anything missing? If you’re an attorney, probably not. But if you’re a typesetter what’s missing is so obvious — hyphens! The copy is justified, but it’s not hyphenated. 

Go grab a newspaper or a book. Find a block of justified type, examine the right side of it, and you’re sure to find some hyphens. 

Why? 

So there’s consistent spacing between words.

Here’s that same block of type — justified and hyphenated:

Hyphenation goes a long way towards improving the word spacing, but there’s something else wrong with this block of type. Once again, if you’re an attorney, you’re not likely to see it. If you’re a typesetter, you’re sure to.

The problem is this: the block of type is set in Arial, a sans-serif face that was designed for headlines, not for copy*.

Here’s how the block of type looks when it’s set in Century, the face that the Supreme Court requires briefs to be set in:

That’s it! Add some serifs and some hyphens and the client alert goes from being set in Pretty Lousy Type to something much more acceptable — something more likely to be read and recommended.

____________
* Go to a bookstore or a newsstand and browse the offerings from professional publishers. Note that none of them has body copy set in Arial. There’s a good reason for that.

Full post as published by Set in Style on August 02, 2009 (boomark / email).