Say what you mean, mean what you say or how to cut the B.S.

Since all of us contributing to this site see ourselves as writers, journalists and therefore, hopefully, communicators, here's something to think about the next time you're putting together a piece to be enjoyed by the rest of us here and elsewhere too.

The following article is based on an article written by Mr. George Olds which appeared in the Hamilton Spectator, June 8, 2007. I would like to thank Mr. Olds for inspiring me to share his article with you and apologize for what he felt was plagiarism on my part. It was never intended that way. In that article, Mr. Olds brings up many of the points in the article below: Ask a person today how they see a situation and don't be surprised if they start out with "At this point in time...". when they could just say "right now..." Ask a person what he does for a living, and you might get this:

"I maximize efficiencies." And "I leverage best practices."

'Scuse me? What did he just say? Might be an idea to ask for some clarification, something along the lines of

"OK, leverage one right now for me." And "could I please watch you maximize one?"

and see if you don't get a blank stare in return to your confused expression i.e. the listener isn't too sure what you're saying either or worse, yet, doesn't understand what you don't understand. That's because the person you asked about his job is talking B.S. ... not not what you're thinking. BS in this case is BureaucratSpeak. It's the language most commonly used in the workplace these days and what it's really doing is leaving a lot of folks not knowing what you're talking about. Whatever happened to good communication i.e. using words we all understand? After I left university with my hard-earned degree in English and communications, some years later I hooked back up with one of my best friends. She had gone much further than I had in her education and now had a PHD. And boy, did she ever show it off every time she opened her mouth to say something. She used huge words I'd never heard. Here I was an English teacher feeling utterly stupid and inadequate. I was so rattled that I wrote a poem titled "PHD ENNUIE" (yes she bored me) about her and her "five-dollar words". My poem even got published. To my knowledge, she's never been published, but she did go on to become a politician. That seems appropriate. Politicians are marvellous at covering up what they're saying with confusing verbal diarrhea. Their PR people are just as bad: take this example of a news release for a polly:

"The Honourable Horace P. Somebody, QC, LL.B, PhD, MP for Saskatoba-West and Minister of State for the Wheat Board announced today ..."

Now compare that to:

"Fifty-thousand Saskatchewan farmers stand to benefit from a new program announced today by Horace P. Somebody ..."

Notice the difference? The first release takes a lot of words to say nothing important. The second gets down to the meat and potatoes at a level we all understand and gets the message across. So how many of us are guilty of taking too many words to say too little? How many of us waffle on using BS or geekspeak or jargon from our various professions that leave anyone outside of those professions wondering what we're talking about? When we're writing, are we writing to communicate or writing to impress others with our knowledge of words? Let's face it: good communication is critical to reaching the widest readership and audience. So why "utilize a pen" instead of "use a pen"? Why tell someone you're "interfacing with stakeholders" when all you're doing is "talking to members"? Do you get where I'm going with this? If I'm to get my message across to you, it's important to follow the KISS principle: keep it simple stupid. Maybe simplicity doesn't make me sound as learned, but if I'm trying to learn about cameras and you talk to me about "F-stops" and "shutter speeds" without explaining what those are first, you've lost me. If I visit my doctor and she starts using the medical terminology for my condition, I wouldn't have a clue what she's talking about, would I? Keep it simple stupid and let communication flow! You might be interested in this little piece from the attached article:

One tool you can use to increase the "readability" of your documents is the Flesch Readability Quotient. Rudolf Flesch wrote Why Johnny Can't Read in 1955, and Why Johnny Still Can't Read in 1981.) If you use Microsoft Word, you already have this tool at your fingertips. It's in the little "ABC" button with the check mark, commonly known as spell check.

It will tell you the reading grade level needed to comprehend your document. I recently ran the privacy statement that appears at the end of every government e-mail through the readability quotient, and readers needed a Grade 14 reading level. That's right, you need to be reading at a university level to understand what the government wants you to know about privacy these days!

No surprise there eh? They don't really want you to know what they're saying. But how about this one:

Mediasmart is written at a Grade 9.2 level, Media Training A-Z is written at a Grade 10.2 level, and Media Training 101 is written for Grade 10.7. But get this: Public Relations for Dummies is written at a Grade 10.9 level. In other words, you have to be smart to read a book intended for, er, "dummies"!)

Take a few minutes to read the article that prompted my diatribe ... oops ... post here. I think you'll find it as interesting as I did. Oh, in case you're wondering about that guy at the beginning whose job is to "maximize efficiencies" and "leverage best practices", we're not sure but we think that means

"I keep track of employee behaviour." Or, "I compare what we're doing to what other companies are doing to see how we can do better."

Now why couldn't he just say that!