Summary: When machine logic butts heads with human expectations, what gets overlooked isn’t technology—it’s understanding. Today we’re dissecting a seemingly dull JSON error message to show how clarity, not code, drives communication. No metaphors. No storytelling clichés. Just the raw power of language, interpretation, and the hard fact that sometimes, there’s simply no story to tell—and why that matters more than you think.
What’s Actually Going On Here?
The subject at hand is a basic text string, returned as a JSON response: a technical object in programming environments that structures data in a readable way. The contents? An error message. Specifically: “Insufficient account balance.” No characters. No plot. No context or characters from which a story could be shaped.
And that is the entire point. This wasn’t meant to be a story. It’s a utilitarian function, designed to communicate a specific system status both briefly and unambiguously. A transactional notice. A barricade triggered automatically when a rule of the system is violated. In this case: trying to do something that costs money, with none in the tank. That’s it. No drama. No backstory. Just consequence.
The Mistake of Forcing a Narrative
There’s a growing habit—especially in marketing and some data design spheres—of hunting for “the story” in every byte of information. We’re told by branding experts that stories sell. And they’re not wrong. But it doesn’t mean every piece of content should or can be shaped into a tale.
Sometimes, like with a banking API or fintech interface, pretending there’s a “narrative” in a financial rejection message is not just weak; it’s misleading. It clouds the message. And if the message isn’t clear, the result is confusion and frustration—especially when someone’s money is involved. So let’s be honest: If your balance hits zero, telling the user there’s no balance is the only story you need.
The Value of Technical Accuracy
This is where the liberal arts and technical precision need to shake hands professionally. Misreading a JSON error as “a story” leads designers and communicators down rabbit trails that waste time and strip clarity. Sometimes a “no” is just a “no.” Chris Voss would remind us that “no” isn’t the end of the conversation, it’s the start of a real one. Why was the balance insufficient? Who’s responsible for funding it? How does retrying work? These are follow-up questions, not rewriting attempts.
Want to create a better interface? Fine. Translate this technical block into something empathetic, but still direct:
- “Your account doesn’t have enough funds to complete this transaction.”
- “This action costs money, and your balance is too low. Please add funds and try again.”
Notice what we’re doing here. We’re not building fictional characters or a plot. We’re embracing plain communication. The user isn’t left wondering whether it’s a system error or a mistake they made. The message is the message.
Simplicity Is Not a Lack of Thought
Some might worry that dropping the narrative means dropping engagement. That’s false. Engagement can come from precision and brevity too. Think of every time an air traffic controller speaks over radio—or when a paramedic gives a field report. Nobody’s telling a story. They’re giving what matters immediately. Clarity builds trust.
The deeper issue? We’ve trained ourselves to believe we have to constantly entertain. That if we aren’t telling a story, we’re boring. But when the stakes involve money, safety, or technical service, clarity is not boring—it’s responsible. Misleading metaphors can cost time, money, or worse. Good communication knows when to sit down and shut up.
Why Acknowledging “No Story” Is Its Own Lesson
By calling out when there’s no narrative to extract, you’re showing respect for your audience’s intelligence. You’re not wasting their time. You’re also giving value by saving energy that would’ve been spent twisting code into theater. Instead, we open space to discuss what could generate meaning—the context surrounding the message, not the message itself.
That’s where the real leveraging happens. Contextual relevance. If a fintech company wants to communicate this error elegantly, they don’t need better storytelling—they need better onboarding, proactive balance alerts, user-triggered spending limits, and clear retry behavior. Fix those, and you don’t need to dramatize the error. You empower the user.
What’s the Practical Takeaway?
Start with what the text is: a transactional JSON with a numeric consequence. Then, ask: What does the reader need to know, feel, or do next? That’s where your cleverness belongs—not in dramatizing dispassionate machine code into something Shakespeare didn’t need.
And by the way, this principle doesn’t just apply to JSON. How often are you forcing ‘human interest’ into charts, forecasts, legal warnings, or disciplinary review notices? Sometimes, they solve the problem better without storytelling. Because storytelling is only effective when readers want to hear a plot—they don’t when they want clarity.
#PlainLanguage #UserExperience #CommunicationMatters #TechnicalWriting #ErrorMessages #FintechDesign #MarketingWithClarity #NeverSplitTheDifference #DigitalProductDesign #UXCopywriting
Featured Image courtesy of Unsplash and Paul Hanaoka (qgSf_u0EfBQ)
