“Clarity trumps persuasion,” MECLABS president Flint McGlaughlin reminds audiences at his seminars.

Yet too often, writing lacks any clarity at all, and we find ourselves unable to comprehend an author’s point–in no small part because of his impenetrable jargon and (perhaps inadvertent) obfuscation.

During one recent lecture I attended, the speaker went on at length about his firm’s “overseas entities” and how his customers “leveraged” this or that. Even the business school students he was addressing had a hard time puzzling out his real meaning.

This problem is particularly acute in non-profit writing. Those who market non-profits to the wider world, including fundraisers, often fall into the trap of writing material their audiences fail to understand.

Fortunately, the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation has assembled an insightful and highly amusing series of three articles by Tony Proscio to help non-profit writers (and anyone else) identify and root out jargon and improve clarity.

In the third and final booklet (link in PDF), Proscio synthesizes his argument:

Whenever I set out to write anything—and almost anytime I start to read anything more demanding than a cereal box—I find myself asking the two questions I’ve described here: Who’s supposed to do what to whom with how much? and* What are we against?* These are not the kinds of questions taught in great writing courses. They do not necessarily lead to more beautiful writing, if that is judged by aesthetic standards alone. But they have one overwhelming virtue that too much of today’s public-interest writing sorely lacks: They lead to the kind of information that nearly everyone wants and needs to know.

What techniques do you use to maintain clarity in your writing?

Brian Clark at Copyblogger has the scoop:

Long copy works, because people want as much benefit-oriented information as they personally need to make the purchase.

Some won’t read much of it before buying. Others will read every word.

The key is to make the presentation of this information — your copy and the visual elements of the page — context appropriate. It needs to look and feel like your audience expects content from you to look and feel…

If you try to throw garish colors, exclamation points, and yellow highlighter at your audience when that’s not what they expect to see, you lose. In more ways than one.

• Lydia DePillis says Washington, D.C. needs a fiscally-conservative alternative to the lefty D.C. Fiscal Policy Institute, the only think tank focused on the city’s local government.
• Are participants in marathons and other event-based fundraisers really donors in the same sense as direct-marketing donors? Tom Belford says no.
• Pork Barrel Barbecue has released a barbecue-scented fragrance. Really.
• It’s not clear why repairing ill-maintained local transit infrastructure ought to be a federal responsibility.
• Last but not least, Conan O’Brien spoke last week at Dartmouth’s commencement.

It’s always interesting to see A/​B testing in action.

In 2008, the Obama campaign tested the creative used on its website splash pages to maximize e-mail sign-ups and donations.

President Obama’s reelection campaign is doing the same thing. When you visit BarackObama​.com today, you are automatically redirected to one of several splash pages, each of which has a different layout or call to action.

Variant 1: Campaign button

This simple landing page, decorated with a campaign button, asks site visitors a simple question and invites e-mail signup. If they do not wish to sign up, visitors are offered a bail-out link to the main campaign website.

Variant 2: Are you in?

This simple landing page is like Variant 1, only with the campaign logo in place of the button.

Variant 3: Are you in?—with the President

A twist on Variant 2, this page includes a large photo of President Obama overlaid in front of the signup form.

Variant 4: 2012 starts here—I’m in

This page swaps out the “Are you in?” question for a statement.

Variant 5: 2012 starts here—let’s go

Continuing the evolution begun in Variant 4, this one replaces the submission button text so it reads “let’s go!”

Variant 6: Fired up?—let’s go

This next variant again changes the main call to action, once again asking visitors a question.

Variant 7: Are you in?—no bailout

This one returns to the simplicity of Variant 2, but drops the “continue to website” bailout link that allows visitors to skip this splash page.

Variant 8: Sign up

Variant 8 tests some drier but perhaps more effective copy: “sign up for campaign updates” with a generic “submit” button. Sometimes being straightforward is best.

Variant 9: Be the first to know

This landing page variant makes site visitors an offer of exclusive information: “be the first to know.” The submission button now reads “sign up.”

Variant 10: Help build this campaign

Variant ten, in turn, appeals to visitors’ belief in the campaign’s mission and invites them to “help build this campaign.” The “from the ground up” and “join us” language suggests a certain exclusivity.

Variant 11: Are you in?—photo background

This is a very different take on the landing page, including a large photo of the President and a much smaller signup form using language from Variant 2.

Variant 12: Are you in?—photo background, take 2

Modifying Variant 12 slightly, this version includes the exclusive offer also seen in Variant 9.

Variant 13: Are you in?—photo background, take 3

Another take on Variant 11, this one repeats Variant 8’s to-the-point “sign up for campaign updates.”

• The District of Columbia government has sometimes been commendably lenient in enforcing its arbitrary zoning restrictions. Except sometimes it decides to enforce the regulations for political reasons.
• Mailer Mailer debunks seven common myths about e-mail marketing. They point out, for instance, that sending lots of messages doesn’t necessarily lead to more unsubscribes.
• Reach Mail, meanwhile, offers advice on the best time of day to send marketing e-mails.
• Phew: demand continues strong for workers with MBAs. (Not so much for JDs, though.)
• Last but not least, Amazon​.com is now selling more Kindle books than physical books.