zlacker

We need to talk more about this.

That said, Organizations with professionals should be able to do nuance, at least a bit of it.

But the general public at large ... you're dealing with 'lowest common denominator' which is 'issues with literacy' and harder to grasp - very limited, care, attention span, and may not even be listening to the message - and may be getting misinformation from elsewhere.

Communicating clearly is a skill.

A lot of marketing people I believe have missed the message on this, every day I come across a new product and can't really understand what it does, the value proposition, who it's for, etc.. while at the same time there's tons of arbitrary marketing verbiage. Words matter.

>>jollyb+(OP)
The approach used by most famous religious books (bhagavadgita, etc.) is statements with many layers of meanings. For example, such a book might say "do to others what you want others do to yourself" and a well-meaning simpleton gets only the surface level meaning, while a more advanced reader sees the more profound meaning, which might've offended simpletons. So everyone gets exactly as much as useful for them. Metaphors are used for the same reason.

>>akomtu+dl
That's a really interesting point, but there's no practical way to do this i.e. to embed multiple layers of meaning into Public Communications.

The rules for Public Communications are the same as they are for branding: Consistency, Clarity, Authenticity. A simple, legitimate message, repeated consistently. "Keep Calm and Move On". "Get Vaccinated". "Wear a Mask". etc..