By Using Jargon, Benefits are Lost
A few days ago, I wrote that I believed President Obama, even an outstanding communicator, may have inadvertently used the often-times obscure language of Washington to describe the true intent of his program to get people back to work. Extending that theme, Brian Meshkin of Meshkin Ventures has some additional thoughts in this guest post:
“’Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague…
O, be some other name
What’s in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet”
These words, spoken by Juliet in Shakespeare’s famous play have been used to explain the importance of what something is, over what it is called. But in the case of the recent “stimulus” bill, I fear that the bill’s name may have doomed its ultimate failure.
By calling it a “stimulus” bill, Democrats have clearly set the criteria for its success – the protection and/or creation of 4 million jobs. However, its true benefits are lost in the word “stimulus” and are not measured in jobs created.
Frankly, no responsible businessman, governor, mayor or school superintendent is going to hire someone today knowing that funds to pay that person will disappear in two years thereby negatively affecting their future budgets. They will use this money for one-time expenses.
Instead of speaking in theories that the average American could care less about, they need to speak in real terms.
First, drop the word stimulus. It’s a false promise and overused by politicians. Obama was elected as a visionary. Stick with the platitudes and call it the Renew America Act.
Second, here’s what I’d like to hear said.
“We have a responsibility to lighten the load, share in the yoke, and roll-up our sleeves to help each other as our brother’s keeper with love for our neighbor.
The Renew America Act will protect Americans during this financial crisis. As all the studies show, financial difficulties are the leading cause of family break-ups in America. Because of this bill, we will lessen the destructive impact on American households. We will put money in the pockets of working and middle-class Americans through targeted tax cuts. We will protect our kids’ schools and teachers, as well as the police officers and firefighters who keep our neighborhoods safe, so our children’s dreams of tomorrow are not limited by the economy of today. We will invest in healthcare so that the millions who are losing their jobs and health insurance can still take their kids to the doctor while they look for work. We will invest in green technologies so that our country will become energy independent.
In so doing, we will achieve a measure of success that is not measured by economists and politicians in Washington, DC. This success will be felt around dinner tables and school gymnasiums, water coolers and places of worship where families, friends, neighbors and co-workers gather to talk about what’s really important. The Renew America Act is stopping the downward fall of this economy and giving Americans the chance to pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and get back to the business of renewing America. For many generations, the secret to America’s success has been found in the heart of its people, and We the People will bring this economy back. It is time for the people’s government to stand beside us instead of looking down on us. Now is a time for us to be the change we wish to see.”
With this approach, the “goal posts” are far more achievable because this is what the bill actually does – supports schools, local governments, green technologies, and healthcare. The benefits are easy to understand and immediate. This gives Americans what they voted for … hope.
Brian Meshkin
brian@meshkinventures.com
951-719-4242
Meshkin Ventures
Category: Featured, Reputation management
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
Great post!
This emphasizes what I’ve been talking about with others lately too. It seems many politicians are starry-eyed over their own double-speak. If it comes in a slick package and sounds good, it must be right. But, it’s time to stop with the light and smoke show and talk in real terms.
Dr. Rus
Mr. Meshkin
I like your title for the President’s bill. “Stimulus” is tentative and sounds like a very modest start, which is what it will probably turn out to be, but I don’t think that is what the Congress and the White House should be conveying to the American people at a time when they want dramatic action despite their fear that things will get a lot worse before they get better. I think you’ll agree that last night’s Presidential Address was a lot more in line with your hope-filled approach.
Regarding Shakespeare’s quote, I think the complete statement is much stronger than the excised version. It makes the absurdity that the poet wants to express inescapably clear by citing specifics of what a name is not — using the power of rhetorical negation (what did he say?) to emphasize his point.
Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What’s Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What’s in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet….
As to rewriting someone else’s words, that’s always a two-edged sword. For example, in your sentence about the kids’ schools and the police/firefighters, the phrase that begins with “so” is a dangler. Better to rewrite the sentence to avoid the confusion between it and what comes before. There are other issues, as well, but I give you an “A” for stepping to the plate to make a point. It’s not easy reworking other people’s words and, in my experience as a writer, editor and teacher of writing, doing so is often considered impudent and arrogant. I’ve been there, done that. Unfortunately, most writers have frail egos despite their protestations to the contrary. And one person’s editing is another person’s poison.
I’ve reworked the writings of others and improved them enormously — with kudos from the writers’ managers and the writers’ target audiences — but in the process I also inadvertently undermined, in some cases virtually annihilated, the writers’ confidence. I now tread more softly on other people’s words. I do much less editing and rewriting and give a lot more advice and counsel about what the writers are trying to accomplish and what they might do to make what they’ve written better. To borrow from your blog, I want to give them help based on hope not mere admonishment. I’m not always successful but I try — borrowing more of your words — to lighten the load, share in the yoke, and be my brother’s keeper. That’s enough love for my neighbor.
Dr. Rus – Thanks for taking the time to read my ramblings. Let’s hope that we can work together collectively to renew our country.
Kind regards,
Brian
Dear Don – Thank you for your insightful comments. Yes, I agree that last night’s speech was far closer to the Obama America voted for in November. It was inspiring, on message, and demonstrated the charismatic leadership that we crave as a country. As for your suggested improvements in writing style, I appreciate all suggestions as my writing is far from perfect. In my life, I’ve found that the following euphemism is true: the more I learn, the less I know. Most importantly though, I appreciate the “A” grade for effort. It is my hope that we will all strive to be our brother’s keeper so that we can live up to the promise of the patriotic words we sing — “crown thy good with brotherhood from sea to shining sea.”
Dear Brian,
A view from the UK. I watched Obama’s closing remarks on his Budget Summit a week or so ago.
While your “Renew America Act” may have a more appealing sound it is emotionally loaded and equally unclear. At least “Stimulus” is the correct term in Economics, and can have a precise meaning: although expectations need further managing back to reality of likely results.
There are hard decisions to take and the public must have it explained why a degree of austerity is not only inevitable but necessary. My impression from his closing remarks particularly on health is that Obama does feel his mission is to educate the public to the point they can understand the debate. Fewer un-insured is a necessity or hardship and social injustice follows but at the same time medicaid is unsustainable, cuts must be made and the pain shared between consumer, provider and taxpayer. Promises to root out fraud and waste are not new and not enough.
best regards James