Posts Tagged ‘jargon’

Cluetrain Manifesto on Jargon — Solutions a Problem

Wednesday, April 8th, 2009

Yesterday, I posted excerpts from a classic book on communicating about technology or science: The Cluetrain Manifesto, by Rick Levine, Christopher Locke, Doc Searls and David Weinberger (Perseus Books, New York, 1999). One of my favorite screeds from the book covered the inappropriate but common use of jargon:

Bob Epstein, then at Sybase, gave a well-received speech where he used the expression “extended enterprise client server.” Afterward, people were asked if they could recall the phrase. Most said they remembered hearing a bunch of buzz words; none could remember the phrase.

“This is because ‘extended enterprise client server’ is composed entirely of TechnoLatin, a vocabulary of vague but precise-sounding words that work like the blank tiles in Scrabble: you can use them anywhere but they have no value.

“TechnoLatin takes perfectly meaningful words and empties them. If language is a living organism, TechnoLatin words are like those pod people in the movie Invasion of the Body Snatchers. They look real, but they are not. And like the pod people, TechnoLatin has become the norm. Clarity is the exception when it should be the rule. Today we no longer make chips, circuit boards, computers, monitors and printers. We don’t even make products. Instead, we make solutions, a fatuous noun further bloated by empty modifiers such as total, full, seamless, industry standard, and state-of-the-art.

“Equally vague and common are platform, open, environment, and support when used as a verb. A veterinarian using TechnoLatin might say that a dog serves as a platform for sniffing, is an open environment for fleas and that it supports barking.”

Gable PR studied news releases issued during one week over PR Newswire and Business Wire. A new “solution” was promoted or touted every eight minutes on average. More than half the companies claimed to be “leading providers” of something, but never submitted evidence to support the claim.

PR firms and internal PR staff need to strive for clear communications in a human voice and advoid jargon. When clients insist on using favorite phrases against agency advice, the results can be damaging to both company and agency. One WSJ Interactive editor put it into perspective with this thoughtful response to a client-mandated pitch that used “solutions” and a few other TechnoLatin phrases: “No thanks, I’m done covering solutions…I filter out pitches with the word ‘solution’ or ‘solutions’ now…especially ones that are ‘customer-centric’ or ‘mission-critical.’ Please don’t write to me about solutions anymore…they’ve become a problem.”

The answer: the hard but rewarding work of positioning the client properly, then supporting the position with facts, evocative thoughts and even some personality — a proven way to break through the competitive clutter and build an organization’s image and reputation.

Posted by Tom Gable

Cluetrain Manifesto — Wisdom from 1999

Tuesday, April 7th, 2009

In an earlier posting about being authentic in Twitter, I mentioned Cluetrain Manifesto, Body of Truth and The New Rules of PR and Marketing as resources for in-depth background on speaking in a human voice and telling better stories. As a great coincidence, I received an email from Simon Owens, who just wrote a story for Media Shift on PBS on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of Cluetrain. Here is the message and a link to his story.

Hey Tom,

I read your post yesterday mentioning the Cluetrain Manifesto. I recently got a chance to interview three of the four authors of the manifesto for a PBS feature I wrote about the book’s 10-year anniversary. They each reflected on the last 10 years and how the rise of Web 2.0 — Twitter, social networking, blogging — fits into the relevancy of what they wrote.

Anyway, I thought this was something you and your readers would find interesting. Take care.

Simon

<snip>

Beyond interesting, Simon’s story gives us pause to think about how we are communicating in old and new ways. It’s worth reviewing a few excerpts from Cluetrain. I’ll do a separate post shortly with a favorite excerpt from Cluetrain on jargon. In the interim, enjoy a few highlights.

The Cluetrain Manifesto¬ – Rick Levine, Christopher Locke, Doc Searls, David Weinberger, Perseus Books, New York

Introduction

A powerful global conversation has begun. Through the Internet, people are discovering and inventing new ways to share relevant knowledge with blinding speed. As a direct result, markets are getting smarter-and getting smarter faster than most companies.

Unlike the lockstep conformity imposed by television, advertising, and corporate propaganda, the Net has given new legitimacy-and free rein-to play. Many of those drawn into this world find themselves exploring a freedom never before imagined: to indulge their curiosity to debate, to disagree, to laugh at themselves, to compare visions, to learn, to create new art, new knowledge.

These new conversations online-whether on the wild and wooly Internet or on (slightly) more sedate corporate intranets-are generating new ways of looking at problems. They are spawning new perspectives, new tools, and a new kind of intellectual bravery more comfortable with risk that with regulation. The result is not just new things learned but a vastly enhanced ability to learn things…

While many such people already work for companies today, most companies ignore their ability to deliver genuine knowledge, opting instead to crank out sterile happytalk that insults the intelligence of markets literally too smart to buy it.

95 Theses (a few highlights)

4. Whether delivering information, opinions, perspectives, dissenting arguments or humorous asides, the human voice is typically open, natural, uncontrived.
5. People recognize each other as such from the sound of this voice.
6. The internet is enabling conversations among human beings that were simply not possible in the era of mass media.
11. People in networked markets have figured out that they get far better information support from one another that from vendors. So much for corporate rhetoric about adding value to commoditized products.
14. Corporations do not speak in the same voice as these new networked conversations. To their intended online audiences, companies sound hollow, flat, literally inhuman.
15. In just a few more years, the current homogenized “voice” of business-the sound of mission statements and brochures-will seem as contrived and artificial as the language of the 18th century French court.
18. Companies that don’t realize their markets are now networked person-to-person, getting smarter as a result and deeply joined in conversation are missing their best opportunity.
21. Companies need to lighten up and take themselves less seriously. They need to get a sense of humor.
22. Getting a sense of humor does not mean putting some jokes on the corporate web site. Rather, it requires big values, a little humility, straight talk, and a genuine point of view.
23. Companies attempting to “position” themselves need to take a position. Optimally, it should relate to something their market actually cares about.
24. Bombastic boasts-”We are positioned to become the preeminent provider of XYZ”-do not constitute a position.
34. To speak with human voice, companies must share the concerns of their communities.
38. Human communities are based on discourse-on human speech about human concerns.
39. The community of discourse is the market.
Companies that do not belong to a community of discourse will die.
43. Such conversations are taking place today on corporate intranets. But only when the conditions are right.
48. When corporate intranets are constrained by fear and legalistic rules, the type of conversation they encourage sounds remarkably like the conversation of the networked marketplace.
61. The inflated self-important jargon your sling around-in the press, at your conferences-what’s that got to do with us?
89. We have real power and we know it. If you don’t quite see the light, some other outfit will come along that’s more attentive, more interesting, more fun to play with.

Posted by Tom Gable