Legal Writing

Richard J. Wegener Needs an Editor

Richard J. Wegener, an attorney with Fredrikson & Byron and “a member of the prestigious Advisory Board to the Bureau of National Affairs? Antitrust & Trade Regulation Report,” is like most attorneys — when it comes to writing client alerts and such, he needs an editor.

To see why, let’s look at the introduction to an article he wrote — Smaller U.S. Mergers Will be Scrutinized Due to Decreased Hart-Scott-Rodino Filing Thresholds

Here’s the intro to the article before it’s been edited:

The Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, also known as the HSR Act, is the primary U.S. premerger notification statute. In general, the HSR Act requires that acquiring parties and target companies in certain mergers and acquisitions (including the acquisition of certain exclusive licenses), as well as participants in the formation of joint ventures, notify both the Federal Trade Commission and the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice of a contemplated transaction before the transaction is consummated. Notification gives the agencies the opportunity to evaluate whether to challenge the transaction on the grounds that it will injure competition.

And here it is after it’s been touched by a skilled and experienced editor:

The Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (the HSR Act) requires the parties in certain mergers, acquisitions, or joint ventures to notify the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice of those proposed transactions. This gives the agencies the opportunity to evaluate the transactions, and to challenge them if they will injure competition.

Perhaps the greatest change is visible before a word is read — the edited version is half length of the unedited version.

That’s important, and here’s why:

• The target audience (potential clients, presumably those who aren’t very familiar with the Act) are busy people. They value their time, and they appreciate attorneys who understand that.
• A key goal of the intro to an article is to let readers know what the article is about so they can quickly decide whether it’s of interest.
• Another goal is to encourage readers to continue reading. Stuffing the intro with excess verbiage and convoluted phrases runs counter to that goal.

______
Now let’s consider one convoluted phrase, in particular:

. . . a contemplated transaction before the transaction is consummated.

That’s 19 syllables.

In the edited version, it’s just six syllables:

. . . those proposed transactions.

The amount of time the reader has to spend reading that has been cut by two thirds. Not only does this save the reader time reading, it saves the reader time grasping what he’s reading.

Look . . . the edited version is easy to grasp, but the unedited version is not so easy. It suggests there might be a requirement to notify the government of a “contemplated transaction” after it’s “consummated,” and it leaves readers to wonder about that.

You’re not set in style when you present readers with copy that makes them spend their time wondering about what you wrote (not when it comes to informative pieces like client alerts) .

______
When you write, write for your readers. Consider who they are and what they want.

If they’re busy people looking for solid information, don’t burden them with excess verbiage and convoluted phrases . . . not if you hope to convert them to clients.

If you can’t give them what they want, or you don’t care to or haven’t even considered it, don’t waste your time writing client alerts and such. Your time is better spent (I suppose) talking to potential clients in person or on the phone, or inviting them to lunch or to play golf.

Writing for the sake of writing is not an effective marketing strategy (unless your goal is to attract search engines). Neither is trying to pretend you don’t need an editor when it’s so obvious you do.

Full post as published by Set in Style on July 15, 2010 (boomark / email).