A quality explainer ensures that a reader not only knows what action to take next, but also what they cannot determine on their own. This is the more challenging aspect of an explainer. The majority of explainers are so hedged that they effectively provide no information, or they are so overconfident that they provide inaccuracies.
Our writers prefer to use the primary text rather than a summary of the text. They will also maintain the qualifier for every rule that contains one. When a rule is situational and the answer is dependent on information not available to us, the piece will say so.
A good way to explain the rule is with an example. When people read an abstract statement of the law, they tend to ignore it, but a date, amount, and a fact that determines the answer captures the readers’ attention. Once the writer explains the three or so facts that change the answer, the reader can stop reading and do something else.
For simplify, explainers tend to fail. Explainers turn “generally in most states unless the agreement explicitly states otherwise” into a black and white answer because the simplified version is better. The reader will act on the sentence that lost the exception.
Each piece begins with source text and a reading level target. The writer drafts the text and then reads the text aloud against the reading level target and crosses out words that need to be explained. The writer then makes a second pass to restore the qualifiers that the drafting process eliminated without notifying the writer (this is the failure this format is designed to avoid).
Each draft is read twice for accuracy and to check against the source, and also as a reader with no legal background, showing each sentence in need of review. Detector and plagiarism checks are completed prior to delivery. Explainers are written for your own counsel review, and we will never publish on your behalf.
One rate, whatever the format: $10 per 100 words. You are paying for the writer’s time and judgement, so the price scales with the words rather than with a package tier.
| Typical legal explainer | Words | Writing | Fee (1%) | You pay |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Single-concept explainer | 800 | $80 | $0.80 | $80.80 |
| Standard explainer | 1,400 | $140 | $1.40 | $141.40 |
| Explainer with scenarios | 2,200 | $220 | $2.20 | $222.20 |
The writer receives 100% of the writing price. Our 1% fee is added on top of it, and 0.5% is donated to tree planting. Full pricing breakdown.
A named human writer with a background in this kind of work. No model drafts, outlines, edits or researches any part of it, and nothing is run through an AI humanizer. Every draft is checked against multiple detectors before it reaches you.
A named human writer with a background in this kind of work. No model drafts, outlines, edits or researches any part of it, and nothing is run through an AI humanizer. Every draft is checked against multiple detectors before it reaches you.
Yes, if you name the jurisdiction up front and can point us at the primary source. Traveling rules lose their original meaning, so we won’t localize the remedy we describe in the U.S. The remedy is drafted in the vernacular of that jurisdiction and reviewed by your local counsel.
No. Explainers describe how a rule generally functions and at what point it does not apply. They do not give instructions to a named reader about their situation. Articled is a writing organization and not a law firm and every piece is published with the disclaimer your counsel approves.
Completely. Copyright transfers to you on delivery, with no attribution requirement and no licence back to us. Nothing written for you is resold, repurposed or republished.
Reviews from completed, paid orders in this category.
Compliance copy can be either overly vague or overly confidently wrong. This example is neither. The guide describes the discretion allowed by the regulation and the test to be used in those cases. In cases where the regulation does not provide discretion, the language is void and unambiguous. Internal Audit had no feedback.
I review external copy for a regulated lender, and that usually means deleting at least half of it. This had qualifiers in the right spots and no made-up stats. I only had to mark 2 sentences. That is the least I’ve marked on any outside first draft.
A fifty-page strategy document turned into two pages that our chair read on a train and understood. The hard part is figuring out what is key and leaving the rest out. It is clear that someone made the decisions and did not just evenly condense the document.
We do not ask you to take the no-AI promise on trust. Each draft is run through these platforms and the reports are attached to your delivery email.
Originality.aiAI detection + plagiarism
GPTZeroAI detection
TurnitinAI detection + similarity
CopyleaksAI detection + plagiarism
Winston AIAI detection
ZeroGPTAI detection
SaplingAI detection
Content at ScaleAI detection
Send the brief, get a human draft back within 3 days. No account, no subscription, no AI.
$10 per 100 words · all of it to the writer · 0.5% to trees