Many people are told to avoid “that,” but such advice ignores occasions when “that” is necessary for clarity.
It is true that you often can avoid “that.” A sentence such as “The folder that you need is on my desk” could be written “The folder you need is on my desk” with no impact on clarity. Similarly, instead of saying, “Our office is in a tall building that is made of brick,” most people would say, “Our office is in the tall, brick building.” Reducing the clause “that is made of brick” to the adjective “brick” saves words.
But sometimes, omitting “that” can create confusion, so be careful; use judgment when removing it. Consider the sentence, “The CEO announced the new policy would take effect Friday.” The first half of the sentence appears to be saying that the CEO announced the new policy, and the words “would take effect Friday” seem to awkwardly hang on the end. The problem is that the writer omitted the word “that” and should have left it in for clarity. “The CEO announced that the new policy would take effect next month” is a clear and flawless sentence.
In “The CEO announced the new policy would take effect next month,” it appears that “policy” is the direct object of announced. The sentence makes sense because “The CEO announced the new policy” is a grammatically complete thought and it is logical: CEOs often announce new policies. But that’s not what happened here. What the CEO actually announced was “that the new policy would take effect Friday.” The true object of announced is not the word “policy,” but the clause “that the new policy would take effect Friday.”
