Martin Luther had [>>]]]> The concept of jargon reached new levels of importance last week when it was elevated from boardroom to courtroom. Fed up with inaccessible language within its system, Britain’s local government association (LGA) put its foot down. No longer tolerated are the terms taxonomy, re-baselining, mainstreaming, holistic governance, contestability, predictors of beaconicity—and 194 more.

Martin Luther had 95 Theses; the LGA has 200 terms to avoid. And they’re doing more than nailing them to a church door—they’re making policy out of them, banning them entirely from official use.

“The public sector must not hide behind impenetrable jargon and phrases. Why do we have to have ‘coterminous, stakeholder engagement’ when we could just ‘talk to people’ instead? . . .” said LGA Chairman Margaret Eaton in an official press release. “Councils have a duty, not only to provide value for money to local people, but also to tell people what they get for the tax they pay. People would be furious if they have no idea of what services their cash is paying for and how they should get to use them.”

It only makes sense. The best way to reach people is through plain language, and the antithesis of plain language is jargon. Jargon can certainly be clever and catchy—heck, Tendo devotes an entire feature to it each month—but it can also be confusing and cumbersome.

It’s a good lesson for marketers. Jargon can be great when talking to other marketers who actually speak the language. But when trying to communicate with your target audience, there’s little point in presenting the air of faux legitimacy that jargon can instill, especially if it obscures the message you’re ultimately trying to get across.

As the saying goes, if it’s good enough for government work . . .