I found it hard to follow the logic behind the comments in the letter from Martin Cutts of the Plain Language Commission (Money Marketing,May 16) talking about the FSA website.
Surely a website uses plain language or it does not. Why pick out bits of it, then hide the rest in “small print”?
Add to the problem that the FSA site is not the easiest to navigate, plain language or not, just what did win the award?
Was it the name? FSA? You know, the Food Standards Agency. Or is it the Football Supporters' Association, which the Diary mentioned in the same MM issue?