Institutions often write as if their readers are endlessly patient, willing to follow long paragraphs and carefully layered explanations, and prepared to reread a message several times before deciding whether it applies to them. This model still assumes that misunderstanding leads to effort. For many members of Generation Z, misunderstanding more often leads to disengagement.
This is frequently interpreted as a lack of attention or seriousness, yet research suggests a different explanation. Generation Z does not reject information itself, but reacts strongly to communication that fails to make its purpose visible early on. Having grown up in a constant flow of messages, notifications, and competing narratives, they tend to assess very quickly whether a text tells them why it matters and what it expects from them. When this is unclear, the message is not debated. It is ignored.
Studies on Generation Z’s communication attitudes show a strong preference for structure, explicit rules, and clearly defined expectations, particularly in institutional contexts. This generation values clarity not as a comfort, but as a condition for trust. They are not unsettled by complex systems, but they are wary of vague language that seems designed to soften responsibility or postpone decisions.
At the same time, their everyday communication style differs markedly from that of older generations. Comparative research on online communication shows that Generation Z tends to use fewer words, relies more heavily on images and visual cues, and often replaces explanation with shared references or symbolic language. Older generations, especially Generation X, are more likely to favour longer texts, explicit reasoning, and complete sentences. Neither approach is inherently better. Tension arises when institutional communication continues to privilege only one of these styles while presenting it as neutral.
Most public and organisational communication still follows a text-heavy, abstract model that rewards endurance rather than understanding. Messages are filled with reassuring but imprecise expressions such as “support”, “opportunities”, or “appropriate procedures”, which sound professional but rarely explain what will actually happen. For many young readers, this language does not feel inclusive. It feels evasive.
This has concrete consequences when communication is tied to access. Youth services, education systems, housing support, and health information often depend on written instructions to be navigated successfully. When these instructions are unclear, young people are expected to compensate by asking questions, seeking clarification, or persisting despite uncertainty. Research and field experience both suggest that many do not. Silence, in this context, is not indifference, but withdrawal.
Marginalised Gen Z youth are particularly affected by this dynamic. Unclear communication demands confidence, familiarity with institutional codes, and a belief that one has the right to ask. When every message feels like it was written for someone else, disengagement becomes an understandable response.
Importantly, Generation Z is often described as unserious or overly informal, yet research paints a more complex picture. This generation shows strong awareness of social responsibilities, legal frameworks, and ethical boundaries. What they tend to reject is not formality, but emptiness. Language that sounds careful while saying very little is read not as respectful, but as untrustworthy.
Plain language responds to this gap without lowering ambition. By focusing on clear structure, concrete wording, and explicit actions, it allows institutions to communicate complexity without hiding behind it. For Generation Z, clarity signals respect and accountability. It suggests that understanding is expected, not optional.
Institutions sometimes fear that clearer language will undermine their authority. For many Gen Z readers, the opposite is true. Clarity strengthens credibility, while opacity raises suspicion. In this sense, adapting communication is not about following trends, but about recognising that unclear language is no longer neutral. It is a barrier.
Bibliography
Peredy, Z., Vigh, L., Quingyu, W., & Muyi, J. (2024). Analysing Generation Z communication attitudes, values and norms. Acta Periodica, 30, 4–19. https://doi.org/10.47273/ap.2024.30.4-19
Generational differences in social media communication. (2024, July 14). https://languagedlife.ucla.edu/sociolinguistics/generational-differences-in-social-media-communication/
Raslie, H., & Ting, S.-H. (2021). Gen Y and Gen Z communication style. European Journal of Economics and Business Studies, 39(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.25115/eea.v39i1.4268