By Dr. Wan Khatina Nawawi
Poor formatting is not just bad for consumers; it can reshape how markets operate. This piece examines how typography, layout and design drive transparency, switching and competition
In Part 1 of this series, I argued that typography is not merely aesthetic but plays a regulatory role. How information is presented – font, layout, hierarchy – influences consumer comprehension and action. In regulated industries, disclosure must be accurate, legible, clear, and intentional.
But there is another dimension. Poor typography does more than frustrate. It can distort market operations, raising competition concerns alongside consumer harm.
Here is why this matters.
When information asymmetry affects competition
Competitive markets rest on consumers being able to access and compare information. But if content is dense, confusing or buried, that assumption collapses.
Firms investing in clear, reader-friendly disclosures may lose out to those who use confusing or unclear formatting to hide key terms. Hidden fees or important exclusions in small print can undercut consumers’ decision-making. In such scenarios, competitive advantage comes not from better price or quality but from consumer confusion.
Typography and switching costs
Typography also plays a role in what economists refer to as search and switching costs. Even when consumers want to compare alternatives, poorly designed presentation can make that process frustrating or cognitively taxing.
For example, imagine trying to compare two broadband plans where one presents pricing, data caps and contract terms in a clean, well-spaced layout, while the other buries key terms in dense blocks of text with small font and minimal spacing. Both may technically disclose the same information, but only one facilitates easy comparison.
Typography that impairs readability or skews attention increases the time and effort needed to evaluate options. When this happens, consumers are more likely to stick with their current provider, not because it offers better value, but because switching feels too effortful.
Typography as a non‑price dimension of competition
Beyond price, quality and innovation, typography must be recognised as a competitive dimension. It affects user experience, evaluation of alternatives and value communication. While academic research has examined how information quantity and quality affect competition, there is little attention paid to how the visual presentation of that information contributes to market outcomes. Typography, as a specific design feature, is largely absent from mainstream competition policy literature.
Nonetheless, insights from existing work on strategic disclosure and information overload remain highly relevant. Janssen and Roy (2024) show that firms may soften competition by withholding information and relying on pricing as a quality signal. Boleslavsky and Skreta (2025) find that excessive or low-quality information in search markets can deter comparison and reduce price pressure. Although these studies focus on content rather than design, the mechanisms they describe – ambiguity, complexity and cognitive burden – can also be produced through typography. Poor visual presentation can obscure key information, discourage search and ultimately weaken competitive intensity.
Typography, in practice, becomes a silent competitor.
Poor typographic practices can also act as a soft barrier to entry. New or smaller firms that aim to compete on clarity, transparency or consumer trust may find themselves disadvantaged in markets where complexity has become the norm. If incumbents obscure unfavourable terms through cluttered or technical formatting, firms offering simpler, more honest communication must absorb the cost of educating consumers. This dynamic may reduce the effectiveness of entry or expansion strategies, reinforcing the position of dominant players.
Sludge, cognitive load, and sensory manipulation
Behavioural economics offers useful ways to understand how design affects decision-making:
- Sludge refers to design features that introduce unnecessary friction. These include cramped fonts, dense paragraphs or awkward layouts that make it harder for users to read or act.
- Choice overload arises when consumers are faced with too much information that is poorly organised. This can lead to decision fatigue or inaction.
- Sensory manipulation involves visual tricks that steer attention. These include pale fonts, cluttered screens or hiding important terms in places that users are unlikely to look.
These are not just design flaws. They can reduce switching, reinforce consumer passivity and give inefficient firms an advantage.
From a competition policy perspective, the concern is not only consumer harm but also how poor design sustains market power. If firms can shield themselves from switching through unreadable disclosures or by nudging users away from alternatives, then even in markets with multiple suppliers, competition becomes muted. This is particularly relevant in digital or subscription-based markets, where design is often the key interface between firm and user. In these settings, typography is not peripheral. It can become a mechanism for entrenching dominance.
Regulatory attention and enforcement possibilities
Regulators in several jurisdictions are beginning to recognise that how information is presented can influence market dynamics. Australia’s ACCC has highlighted the role of interface design in shaping consumer decision-making in its Digital Platform Services Inquiry. In the EU, the Digital Services Act includes provisions requiring clarity and accessibility in how platforms communicate with users. The UK CMA, in its 2022 discussion paper on online choice architecture, has also flagged poor interface design as part of problematic online choice architecture.
While these efforts have emerged largely from consumer and data protection frameworks, they raise questions that are increasingly relevant for competition policy. Issues such as lock-in, reduced switching, and limited effective choice may be reinforced by how information is visually presented.
From poor design to dark patterns
Poor typography exists on a spectrum. What begins as neglect can evolve into manipulative design. When design is intentionally used to steer users against their interests, we enter the domain of dark patterns.
These can involve hiding the riskier options, making cancellation hard or layering distracting visuals, all eroding transparency and distorting competition.
In the next piece, I will explore dark patterns’ dual impact on consumer protection and competition, and why regulators are sharpening their focus.
Typography as competitive infrastructure
There is a growing need to bridge competition, behavioural and communication disciplines. Market outcomes are not just shaped by incentives and entry barriers, but also by the micro-details of consumer interaction. Recognising typography as part of competitive conduct brings design into the heart of policy conversations, where it rightly belongs.
Typography is more than form: it is a fundamental feature of market structure. Clarity in presentation supports information flows, constructive competition and consumer agency. Unclear design weakens competition, raises screening costs and may even embed market power.
Regulators must elevate typography and design considerations in enforcement and policy. Markets deserve more than price competition. They also require design competition that serves users well. For businesses, especially those reliant on digital interfaces should also be mindful of how typography and layout influence user choices. Clear and accessible formatting is not just a consumer-friendly feature. It can also reduce the risk of regulatory scrutiny, especially in markets where competition depends on how easily users can compare and switch. By reviewing their interfaces for readability, prominence and fairness in design, firms can strengthen trust and demonstrate that they are competing on the merits, not through confusion.
How choices are presented matters just as much as the choices themselves