How to Write Killer Campaign Pages

What these groups share is that they read in a hurry. Casual readers may skim-read and are engaged by human elements of the story and sections relevant to them, while journalists need to see the standout data and figure out its importance to their readers and beat. This leads to a creative tension where we’re trying to write as efficiently as possible while also weaving in human interest and context.

JB: How do you ensure the copy is efficiently written?

GC: Fluff is the enemy. We’re always looking for parts to remove and aren’t afraid of being too brief. We avoid wordy sentences and assess whether each sentence earns its place by delivering useful information or context. In data-led pieces we veer away from repeating what is easily gleaned from the visual assets and instead try to find a different way to express or compare data points.

I’m always looking for ways to break up sentences and paragraphs into smaller ones without falling prey to LinkedIn post syndrome. I start to sweat if a paragraph has more than four sentences! 

JB: Does the page structure play a part in communicating key elements of the project?

GC: Our team has developed a guiding template over the years and we’re always looking for ways to improve it. We start by managing expectations by flagging the big takeaways and communicating the structure through the copy, “what we did” and “key findings” sections, headers and – for longer pages – an index, so every type of reader knows where they are and why it’s important.

Coming from a filmmaking background, I find it fascinating how juxtaposing paragraphs or moving a sentence from the end of one paragraph to the start of the next adjusts meaning and the structure of understanding. It’s like being in the edit suite, changing the match-on-action between shots and building a sequence.

JB: On that note, I really value descriptive headers that act as stepping stones for readers that want to navigate to the sections that are most relevant or compelling to them, particularly when we’re dealing with data split regionally or demographically. How do you circumvent any comprehension issues if readers are gravitating towards specific sections?

GC: I assume that the reader may have skipped other sections, so it’s important to restate what we’ve done while changing up the vocab and syntax so there’s variety for the more dedicated reader.

I might also mention how a detail in one section relates to other areas of the article or where else I refer to the same place or data point. Mapping it out for the reader.

JB: I would say language variation isn’t always desirable, though. For the visual assets, we often favour consistency in vocab and phrasing, establishing an internal logic so readers understand that any deviation from this denotes a different data approach.

JB: You mentioned the balance between efficiency and human interest, how do you go about developing that emotional resonance?

GC: It all starts with the intro. We try to strike a balance between giving context on the general issue or trend that the piece explores and establishing what our specific angle is — why our piece is unique and essential. The introduction is a chance to hook the reader, which usually means making it feel urgent and personal. 

Like all good writing, writing landing page copy is an act of empathy. What will draw the reader in and keep them reading? What might they be interested in finding out next after each point? More often than not, that comes down to a single question: Why?

JB: How do you pinpoint the “why”?

GC: I’ll refer to the project brief to see what drew you to the project in ideation and how the data that came from your original curiosity fits into broader trends. My instinct for this has developed over many years of writing these presentations, but also prior experience writing tailored outreach versions of our work for publishers with different interests. 

I’ll also look for related studies and pieces of content to identify relationships between data sets. This also helps clarify why our piece is original or new, and ensures I put a fresh spin on the subject.

JB: When trying to tap into the emotive core of a project, do you have to adapt the style depending on the client?

GC: It depends on the client’s general style and preferences, but also on the topic — there’s more room for a friendly tone if writing about the most popular local restaurants rather than house price trends. If a piece is potentially politically charged, it pays to let the data do the talking so as not to alienate the reader. 

It’s an instinct you develop — again, empathy for the reader. In our design-led pieces or where the data is humanities-oriented or on a more cultural topic, there is license for more literary/evocative sentences. The reader is there for inspiration or entertainment and may be drawn by more imaginative or lateral connections between data points. 

JB: Even when you’re adopting a more stylised, literary approach you’re still employing methods to articulate the robustness of the data. What are these?

GC: While the figures and methodologies hold water, we also build authority in the way we refer to ourselves and our work. Using formal language that positions our research authoritatively has become part of my ‘muscle memory,’ changes like switching “find out” to “identify,” “our project” to “our study,” emphasising that our figures represent firsthand research, and avoiding open speculation on the “why” (“it could be…”). 

It’s essential to use high-quality, up-to-date sources to spell out why the people we quote are credible/relevant (who were they talking to, what was the context?) so as not to undermine the credibility of the work our researchers have done. We also build credibility by reaching out to the winners (e.g., the owners of the highest-rated women-owned small business in America) of our projects to provide the reader with more journalistic insights. 

JB: On the data side of things, how do you ensure that you’re interpreting it in a way that facilitates understanding for someone fresh to the project and aligns with the client's ethos?

GC: The data/creative team can inherently suffer from a “curse of knowledge” — they know the figures and methodology so well that things that might seem obvious to them require further clarification for the reader. That’s where I proudly raise my hand to express my “blessing of ignorance.”

Recently, this led to an about-turn with the way we presented figures for a client focussed on affordability. The data came to me as the percentage cost increase in switching from store brands to name brands, an approach that immediately requires a certain strain of language. I suggested we reverse and re-calculate the figures to the percentage saved by switching from name brands to store brands. It was simple for our data analyst to crunch these numbers, and meant that we could position the article around ‘savings’ rather than ‘expenses.’

JB: Does this “curse of knowledge” also manifest at the copy stage? Where you are locked into your own perspective?

GC: What we do over the years has evolved with the web and with the flow of clients. So we do a lot of ‘similar’ work and there is a format and rules, or developed instincts, the ‘muscle memory’ or expertise in the form. But it helps to work with freelancers or editors at least from time to time to question the stuff we take for granted/the habits we fall into. 

For example, for our recent piece on AI bias, we brought in our former content lead Jess Peace as a sensitivity reader which was super-helpful and important in itself, but which also drew attention to aspects like the depth of the explanations or even the words we choose to bolden in the Key Findings section. These are the bread and butter aspects of writing these pieces and it helps to look at them afresh.