Buzzwords on trial
Actually, my feelings on the matter aren't that cut and dry. I tried to articulate this in one of my first posts ever back February of last year.
Basically I agree that they can be evil things and most of them are dreadfully misused and overused. But I also think that at least some of them are actually necessary to kick-start valuable and worthwhile new ideas and help them spread.
The example that comes to mind is Web 2.0. Some may find it cringe-worthy, but I think it conveys a worthy idea:
We've had a few years to figure out the web and this time around we're doing things differently--smaller, simpler, more participatory. More about real people connecting with each other and less about making unscrupulous stock speculators rich.
Of course, the ideas behind most buzzwords are probably not so worthy. But if buzzwords are just the messengers, do they deserve to be shot?
Maybe. Maybe not. I do think that some form of forced retirement would be nice, but I admit it doesn't sound too practical.
Anyhow, two recent pieces have got me thinking about buzzwords again. The first is an article from USA Today. Here's a key quote that highlights a major problem with buzzwords.
Ryan Donovan, a Hewlett-Packard public relations director, concedes that terms like "data migration" and "optimizes agility" — both of which have been found in his company's press materials — might be confusing to your average reader. But he says the company uses those phrases in documents intended for technology experts and executives who might be turned off by more plain-spoken wording.
"This is the language that they're comfortable with, and it's our job to make sure that we're speaking to them in a language that they understand," Donovan says.
Poor buzzwords. They go from conveying a potentially worthy idea to something admittedly much, much sadder--a sort of "nudge nudge" appeal to the ego of a potential customer. "You're in the know, I can tell. Well so am I. Let's do business!".
These buzzwords are often a mask. People who use them are covering up their ideas--or the lack thereof. They are overcompensating. They don’t have anything substantial to say so they try to use impressive sounding words instead.
But people who abuse buzzwords don’t sound smart. They sound like they are trying to sound smart. Big difference.
All true. All true. I just think it's more of a criticism of the way some people use buzzwords than a critique of the buzzwords themselves.
Who knows? Maybe I'm just deluded. Maybe I'm just a marketing writer trying to reconcile a love of simple, direct communication with a portfolio that contains more than a few buzzword-heavy pantloads.So what are your thoughts on buzzwords? I'd love to know. Can you think of more potentially worthy ones? Do you think they will ever go away?

1 Comments:
John:
The subject of buzzwords is starting to get a lot of play on-line.
If you haven't seen David Meerman's post (WebInkNow.com) on Gobbldygook in PR, check it out.
We need to add a few more of the biggest culprits. I conducted a survey of several hundred editors on our list a few weeks ago. Over 90% thought the adjective "leading" was overused (as in "a leading producer of") in press releases. In my opinion, it's a total throw-away. It means nothing, because everybody uses it.
To my surprise, "solutions" got only a 68% overused rating (although several editors sent comments underscoring their disgust with it). The word is not meaningless, it's just been ruined by overuse by releases and advertising from producers of standardized products (as opposed to custom-engineered products or services). Heck, a paper clip is a solution, isn't it?
I've got more survey data, and would be glad to share it via email, and through this venue. Fun subject, but also very important to those of us that are being pressured to succumb to corporate-speak every month as we toil to communicate for our clients.
Dave Schmidt
VP, Public Relations Services
Smith-Winchester
Southfield, Michigan
david@smith-winchester.com
Post a Comment
<< Home