Assume nothing: writing for newcomers

Your readers only know exactly what you tell them. Everything else is guesswork.

The curse of knowledge

When you work somewhere for months or years, you develop what psychologists call "the curse of knowledge" - it becomes impossible to remember what it was like not to know what you now know. You forget that acronyms aren't universal, that processes aren't obvious, and that context you take for granted is completely invisible to newcomers.

This curse manifests everywhere in organisational content. Landing pages with 30 words total, expecting visitors to watch a 5-minute video for basic information. Study descriptions that mention "Protocol 12.3" without explaining what that means. Contact forms that ask for "referral source" without clarifying what qualifies as a referral.

Every assumption you make creates a barrier between your content and your reader.

The parent searching for childhood diabetes research at midnight doesn't know your organisational structure, your research history, or your internal processes. They know their child was recently diagnosed and they're looking for help. Everything else - including why they should trust you, what participation involves, and how to take the next step - you need to tell them explicitly.

The 30-word landing page problem

One of the most common manifestations of assumed knowledge is the minimalist landing page that provides almost no information because "people don't read" or "they should watch the video for details."

Consider this real example:

Childhood Development Research

Join our studies helping children thrive.

[Watch our video] [Contact us]

This page assumes visitors understand:

• What type of studies you conduct
• What age ranges you work with
• What conditions or situations you're researching
• What participation actually involves
• Why they should trust you with their child
• How to determine if their child might be eligible
• What happens after they contact you

That's not web design - it's wishful thinking.

The reality is that most people won't watch a 5-minute video to get basic information they can read in 30 seconds. They won't contact you if they don't understand what you do or whether it's relevant to their situation. They'll leave and find information elsewhere.

Every visitor is a newcomer

Even if someone has heard about your organisation before, their knowledge is fragmentary. They might know you "do diabetes research" but not know whether you work with children, what studies are currently recruiting, or how to get involved.

They might have been referred by a healthcare provider but still need to understand what participation involves, what the time commitment is, and what questions to ask during their first contact.

Your content needs to work for the person who knows nothing about you. When you write for newcomers, you automatically serve everyone else too. When you write assuming knowledge, you exclude the very people you're trying to reach.

This doesn't mean being condescending or explaining every basic concept. It means providing enough context for people to understand what you're offering, why it matters, and what they need to do next.

The essential context framework

For every piece of content, especially landing pages and first-contact materials, ask yourself:

1. What is this? Don't just say "our services" - explain what type of services, what you're trying to achieve, and why it matters.

2. Who is this for? Be specific about demographics, situations, or criteria. "Families with children under 5" is more helpful than "young families."

3. What actually happens? Describe the real experience of engagement. "Monthly check-ins" is more useful than "ongoing support services."

4. Why should they care? Connect your work to outcomes that matter to your audience, not just your organisational goals.

5. What's the next step? Make it obvious how someone moves from reading to action, with realistic expectations about what that process involves.

Context without overwhelming

Providing essential context doesn't mean overwhelming readers with every possible detail. It means giving them enough information to understand whether this is relevant to them and worth pursuing further.

Compare these approaches to describing a service:

Assumes too much knowledge:

Join our early intervention program. Contact Sarah for enrollment.

Provides essential context:

We provide early intervention support for children showing developmental delays, helping families access therapy services and navigate support systems. This program is for children aged 18 months to 5 years whose development is behind expected milestones in areas like speech, movement, or social skills. Participation involves monthly family consultations and access to our resource library, with all services provided at no cost. Contact our family support coordinator to learn more about eligibility and what's involved.

The second version is longer, but it allows families to make an informed decision about whether to pursue more information. It respects their time by providing enough context upfront.

The video trap

Video content has its place, but it shouldn't be a substitute for essential written information. Many organisations default to video because it feels more engaging, but this creates accessibility barriers and forces linear consumption of information.

Parents researching at midnight might not be able to play audio. Healthcare providers scanning for quick information won't commit to watching a video for basic details. People with hearing impairments might not have access to audio content.

Use video to enhance understanding, not to replace basic information. Provide the essential context in text, then use video to show what participation looks like, feature family testimonials, or demonstrate your facilities.

This approach serves everyone: people who prefer reading can get what they need immediately, while people who prefer video can access additional depth and context.

Common assumption traps

• The acronym assumption: You use "ASD" or "NDIS" or "GP" assuming everyone knows what these mean. Always spell out acronyms on first use, and consider whether the spelled-out version is actually clearer.

• The process assumption: You assume people understand "referral processes" or "enrollment procedures" without explaining what these actually involve for families.

• The urgency assumption: You assume people understand why they should act quickly ("limited spaces available") without explaining why the opportunity is valuable.

• The credibility assumption: You assume people understand why they should trust you without providing evidence of your experience, credentials, or track record.

• The next-step assumption: You assume people know what happens after they contact you, what information they'll need to provide, or what the timeline looks like.

Testing your assumptions

The best way to identify knowledge assumptions is to watch real newcomers try to use your content. Ask people unfamiliar with your organisation to explain what you do based on your landing page. Ask them what questions they still have after reading your content.

Pay attention to the questions you get repeatedly in phone calls or emails. If multiple people ask the same question, that information should be prominently featured in your content rather than buried in FAQ sections.

Every frequently asked question represents a failure to provide essential context upfront.

Building newcomer-friendly content

1. Start with the user's perspective: What does someone need to know to decide whether this is relevant to them?

2. Define your terms: Don't assume familiarity with medical terminology, research processes, or organisational structures.

3. Explain your value: Help newcomers understand why this matters and what makes your approach different or beneficial.

4. Show, don't just tell: Use specific examples rather than abstract descriptions. "Three 45-minute sessions over two weeks" is more useful than "brief intervention period."

5. Connect to outcomes: Explain what participation leads to, both for individual families and for the broader research goals.

The inclusion impact

Writing for newcomers isn't just about user experience - it's about inclusion. When you assume knowledge, you inadvertently exclude people who don't have existing connections to healthcare systems, research communities, or your organisation.

Families from diverse backgrounds, people with different educational experiences, and anyone new to your field benefit when you provide context rather than assuming familiarity.

Accessible content is inclusive content. When you write assuming nothing, you open your services to the broadest possible audience and ensure that people can make informed decisions about participation based on clear, complete information.

Check your understanding

Copy and paste this to ChatGPT when you're ready for feedback:

I've been completing some questions that have been presented to me as part of an SEO course. I'm currently answering questions for a section titled "Assume nothing: writing for newcomers". Please check my answers and let me know if I've understood the key ideas correctly. My responses are below.

1. What is "the curse of knowledge" and how does it affect content creation?

2. A colleague suggests that providing detailed context will "overwhelm users" and argues for minimal landing pages with video explanations instead. How would you respond to this concern?

3. Consider this scenario: Your organisation's communications team argues that explaining research methods and eligibility criteria in detail makes your work sound "too complicated for regular families" and suggests simplifying landing pages to focus on emotional appeals instead. Analyse why this approach might actually exclude the very families most likely to benefit from your research, and explain how providing context can build rather than undermine trust.

4. A stakeholder insists that families "should do their own research" before contacting your organisation and argues that providing comprehensive information upfront "creates dependency and reduces engagement quality." Evaluate this reasoning and explain how this perspective misunderstands both user behaviour and effective research recruitment strategies.