The Language of Euphemism
by the analogZONE Webmaster
I've been newly struck this week by the language of euphemism that permeates our environment.
I suppose I first noticed it when Xerox decided, years back, that they needed to call themselves "The Document Company." Instead of embracing the niche the marketplace had carved out for them, as companies like Kimberly-Clark did - I mean, really, how often have you had someone ask you for a "tissue" as opposed to a "Kleenex" ™ ® ? - they decided their indentification with photocopies was a liability rather than an advantage. So they became the "document company," we dutifully changed our terminology to refer to "photocopies" rather than "Xeroxes" ™ ®, and now the machines in our offices are from Canon and Ricoh and any number of other companies who didn't insist on sacrificing their marketplace-proclaimed identity for something else. When we go to Kinko's for an emergency job we don't demand Xerox, either - we don't really care whose machine it runs on so long as it's speedy, clean and cost-effective.
I make fun of Britain to our Editor, partially to get at him but partially for their identification of any vacuum cleaner as a "Hoover"… but I'm equally sure that the Hoover Corporation is laughing their way to the bank in England as a result of that identification. The basic lesson is that corporate labels, however inadvertent, DO ultimately matter. Something to bear in mind when you're revisiting your mission statement again.
The analogZONE Editor-in-Chief was at the National Association of Broadcasters convention this past week…for what he says (and I have reason to believe) is a visit well into the double-digits across his wide-ranging career. They now bill themselves as the "Ultimate Electronic Media Show." Wow. What constitutes "electronic media" today? MP3 files? Cell phone pictures and text messages? And somehow now all of these things are "broadcasting"? Last I heard, N.A.B. still stood for National, Association and Broadcasters?
Either the show or their ad agency's slogan needs to be changed, it seems to me.
Or maybe that's what is happening, in an evolutionary kind of way.
I remember when NAB added the "Multimedia World" annex to the existing broadcast show. A nod of sorts, acknowledging that these computer geeks really had something going in their corner, and that the realm of NTSC/PAL/SECAM was sooner rather than later destined to converge with the Windows/Mac/Amiga worlds. They put those vaguely disreputable exhibits in the bottom level of the Sands convention center. Kind of like the "bad crowd" at the prom…you didn't want to be seen consorting with them, but after the evening you were nobody if you couldn't say you'd seen their demos or collected their literature.
Now they're the toasts of the party and are poised to take over the realm of "Ultimate Electronic Media," as advertised.
Then there's the vocabulary fun we're experiencing in politics. What are obviously books - remember them? - are becoming narrative sections comprising unactionable items. And don't get me started on Rumsfeld and his "fungible" troops, budgets and so on. All I'll say is that it points to an underlying truth that it's not about understanding or clarity as much as it is obfuscation. But, then, that's politics.
The other side of euphemism, of course, is that what you don't say is just as important as what you do say. One of my recent contract jobs was for a DSL supplier who wanted to offer services on a special/exclusive basis to employees of its parent and sister companies. The source material I got for the cheery paycheck-attachment letter was all about what the service would cost the customer - no comparisons of price with other local DSL suppliers - and the limited support hours that would apply. Nothing, in short, that could be presented as any kind of advantage for the customer.
I raised with the company that they really weren't giving me much in the way of persuasive material to work with, and could they offer a little more detail? So, of course, I then received from them an e-mail outlining geographic restrictions.
There was another great example of this on a commercial this evening, between plating and tasting on Iron Chef America. The commercial was for an anti-depression drug - with, they emphasized several times, "reduced risk of sexual side-effects." The next 40 seconds were a litany of potential nasty results if you were or were not simultaneously on a nicotine patch, were or were not doing X-Y-Z other things, and wound up with a final list of likely side effects that included nausea and sleeplessness. Quick cut, then, to a cheerful middle-aged lady proclaiming how much she now "felt like herself again." If the laundry list of repercussions from this drug are anything like this hypothetical patient's "normal" state, I can understand her need for an anti-depressant!
How do you avoid these euphemistic traps in your own materials? One way is to arrange for a cross-section of people to read anything you're unsure about. Especially in a technical environment, it's very easy for your engineering-intensive sources to get wrapped up in their terminology and point of view and feed you source information that reflects them alone… without realizing that the recipient on the other end may have a different focus or expertise. After all, your materials help to sell your product not just to fellow engineers, but to executives who hold the purse-strings. Get a third-, fourth- or even fifth-party perspective. Besides, it's generally good proofing practice to have a really fresh set of eyes review your content regardless.
Another help is to be an unabashed collector, both of the good and the bad, from your competitors. Mis-steps you may not see in your own materials will blaze boldly out at you in someone else's, and will make them easier to see in your own. Plus, you'll have a fun file to look back on at some future point. When cleaning through my files last week, I found my treasured brochure from a manufacturer in Taiwan whose claims for their consumer loudspeakers included softer, silkier hair for customers who listened to music through their system. That's a dramatic example, but I'm sure you can find your share of balderdash among your competitors' items. Nothing else is such a good check-and-balance against excessive, unsupported claims on your own part.
Finally…in my dress-for-success corporate days, I used to have a slogan pinned up on my bulletin board, wherever I went. I stated that "every product has an inherent drama," and that my job "was to dig for and capitalize on it."
If you do that, and do it successfully, you won't need euphemisms or hollow slogans. And you and your products will thrive as the janitor Hoovers the hallway, someone changes toner in The Document Company's machine, and your Internet service provider's fine print gradually expands.
Refer This Page To A FriendContact the author