Language

You are currently browsing the archive for the Language category.

Patch Monday: Is cloud right for your business?

05 March 2010 in Internet, Language, Marketing by Stilgherrian | 1 comment

[Oops. Not only was the Patch Monday podcast filed late, so it kinda became Patch Tuesday, I forgot to post it here. Well, that's fixed now.]

ZDNet Australia logo: click for Patch Monday episode 32

The key IT buzzwords for 2010 seem to be “cloud computing” and “virtualisation”, but is cloud really right for your business?

Will it provide a cheaper, more flexible option? Or can companies not afford to store data and run applications outside their business?

In a program recorded at the annual Kickstart Forum on IT trends, I spoke with Rosemary Stark, Microsoft Australia product manager for Windows Server and infrastructure solutions and Craig Deveson, CEO of Devnet, one of Google’s enterprise and web development partners.

Meanwhile, Michael Rich, managing director of Attaché Software, explains why he thinks IT vendors have got it wrong by attempting to sell products instead of providing business value.

You can listen below. But it’s probably better for my stats if you listen at ZDNet Australia or subscribe to the RSS feed or subscribe in iTunes.

Please let me know what you think. We accept audio comments too. Either Skype to stilgherrian or phone Sydney +61 2 8011 3733.

Cheap fake tan and fat thighs? Snooki!

16 January 2010 in Human Nature, Language, Media by Stilgherrian | 3 comments

“There needs to be a special word for the combination of a cheap fake tan and fat thighs.”

I expressed that view on Twitter early this evening. Thanks to @SophieAG I now know there’s already such a word: Snooki.

This class act’s name is Nicole Polizzi (pictured), though she goes by the nickname “Snooki” and “stars” in an MTV reality TV program called Jersey Shore.

Watching the trailer tells you everything you need to know.

According to The Hollywood Gossip:

She fake-tans and acts like a bit of a skank. Then again that sums up the whole cast, so what are you really gonna do. That’s just what she does…

Nicole has made headlines already … for having brown skin. Like for real brown. Not tanned, like she’s been rolling in the mud or something. Yech.

Apparently Snooki is such a shank that advertisers have pulled out of the series.

Snooki’s response?

“I just have one thing to say to Domino’s, Dell, UNICO and all the other haters out there: Fuck you! If you don’t want to watch, then don’t watch.”

Snooki added: “Just shut the hell up! I’m serious… Fuck you!”

…

UNICO, the Italian-American organisation that claims the show perpetuates negative stereotypes, plans to keep pressuring sponsors to boycott the show.

“She is not an embarrassment to Italian Americans. She is actually an embarrassment to the entire human race!!!!” UNICO said of Snooki in a statement.

Apparently Snooki’s idea of the ideal man is the Guido stereotype.

Given the monumental appropriateness of naming an entire sub-class of humanity after this woman — and I do mean sub-class — other suggestion faded in comparison.

Read the rest of this entry »

Script Challenge revisited

24 August 2009 in Language, Personal by Stilgherrian

Image of Script Challenge text: click for full story

After two years of sitting online unchallenged, my Script Challenge is finally being tackled by a couple of people.

Can you figure out what’s said by this unknown piece of writing?

It’s a quote from a novel by Ursula LeGuin.

Bob Bain and Jason Langenauer started having a go across the weekend, and a high school English teacher said he might show it to his class. So, no more clues for now — except to say that people are missing one very important point about alphabets.

[I'll close off comments on this post so that all the discussion stays with the original article.]

This is just to say…

27 April 2009 in Language, Media by Stilgherrian | 2 comments

I am, of course, the third-last person on the entire planet to listen to This American Life, the US public radio program presented by Ira Glass. But now I have. And in doing so, I stumbled across some amusing poetry.

The poems are based on an original by William Carlos Williams, called This Is Just To Say. In an episode of This American Life entitled Mistakes Were Made, program contributors created their own versions.

My favourite is the trio by Shalom Auslander:

1
I’m sorry you’re overweight
And drinking
And feeling like everything
In your life
Is doomed to failure
But this is probably why
Mom said
I was her favorite

2
It sucks, little doe
That I hit you
with my car

But at least
You weren’t alive
To watch the hunters
Shoot your children

3
He was a troublemaker, okay
And didn’t know when
To shut up

Still
We never would have killed him
If we’d known he was the Lord

There’s not much poetry here. Should there be more?

Why all corporate PR droids should be shot

22 April 2009 in Language, Marketing by Stilgherrian | 21 comments

Photographs of Michael Harte and David Thodey

Imagine this. You’ve just won a contract worth a billion dollars against stiff competition. How do you feel? Thrilled? At least, you know, a little bit pleased with yourself? Apparently not.

“The Commonwealth Bank is embarking on a significant transformation project and we are delighted to be a key partner. Through Telstra’s own transformation we have invested in world class networks and services and alliances with leading partners. We look forward to bringing these advances to the partnership to offer real benefits to the group, its customers and staff,” David Thodey [pictured left], Telstra’s group managing director enterprise and government said in a statement.

What bullshit!

Australia’s biggest telco Telstra just signed a 10-year deal to provide telecommunications and managed services to Australia’s biggest bank, the Commonwealth. The deal’s worth $100M a year. There’s bound to be some fascinating details which make this all very special. If nothing else, it’s worth a shitload of money — and that’s something to get excited about.

That paragraph of meaningless management wafflespeak is the reaction? There’s not a single fucking concrete noun in the damn thing!

Got any words of thanks for the hard-working staff who helped you win this deal, David? No.

Things aren’t any better on the Commonwealth’s side.

“Our arrangement with Telstra is a partnership which is directly focused on customer satisfaction through well-defined shared goals, commitments and business outcomes. This is the first time we have struck a deal of this kind,” the Commonwealth Bank’s CIO Michael Harte [pictured right] said in a statement.

Well of course the deal is focussed on customer satisfaction! You don’t set up deals to create dissatisfied customers, do you? Why not tell us why Telstra won? I think they’d have liked that.

Now I blame neither David Thodey nor Michael Harte for this idiotic language. I assume they have highly-paid corporate communications specialists to handle this sort of thing.

Those people should be shot.

This is probably one of the biggest business deals around this week, yet they’ve managed to drain every possible speck of colour and life from it — in the process portraying their bosses as drab, emotionless cyphers.

Read the full Telstra media release [PDF] for yourself. It’s pathetic. And the Commonwealth hasn’t even managed to get its version online yet.

Dear PR Droids, if you can’t manage to communicate the excitement of a billion-dollar deal between two of the nation’s most important corporations, then piss off out of it and clear your desk for someone who can.

Sit up! You’re on the Web!

10 June 2008 in Internet, Language by Stilgherrian | 4 comments

It’s either independent discovery or suppressed memory. Web usability expert Jakob Nielsen’s latest Alertbox column explains something I’ve been saying for years: that people sit up to use a website, and that changes their behaviour.

Unfortunately he’s been saying it for years too, so maybe I got it from him and then forgot.

Anyway, in Writing Style for Print vs Web he says:

I’ve spent many columns explicating the differences between the Web and television, which can be summarized as lean-forward vs. lean-back:

  • On the Web, users are engaged and want to go places and get things done. The Web is an active medium.
  • While watching TV, viewers want to be entertained. They are in relaxation mode and vegging out; they don’t want to make choices. TV is a passive medium.

This doesn’t mean that you can’t have entertaining websites or informative TV shows. But it does mean that the two media’s contrasting styles require different approaches to entertainment and education.

The differences between print and the Web may not seem as strong, but to achieve optimal results, each requires a distinct content style.

The very useful article then gives examples and good advice before spruiking his $1000+ per day seminars.

Nielsen is a smart man — though he isn’t always right on everything, as some of his fans believe. Still, if you’re considering the audience’s needs (and shouldn’t you always be doing that?) he’s spot on.

Of course I’m a complete hypocrite, because some of my posts have 1000 words of straight text. Rules were made to be broken.

Wayne Swan’s “Yes Minister” moment

14 May 2008 in Language, Politics by Stilgherrian | 1 comment

After he’d given the Budget Speech to parliament last night, Treasurer Wayne Swan was interviewed by the ABC’s PM program — where he delivered what I think has to be the best line of the night.

Swan was explaining that unlike his Liberal predecessor Peter Costello’s Future Fund, which was never spent on anything, Labor’s future funds would be spent on “contemporary” infrastructure needs. Journalist Mark Colvin asked how they could still be called future funds.

MARK COLVIN: I mean, if they’re not for the future, what are they for? Why aren’t they just government spending?

WAYNE SWAN: No, no. You’re confusing the name Future Fund with a fund for the future.

Yes, I can see how he’d be confused…

[Update 10.30am: Here's the relevant piece of audio.]

Communication usually fails, except by accident

23 April 2008 in Human Nature, Language by Stilgherrian | 3 comments

Every time I read 37signals’ blog, I find something of value. Today they tell me about a Finnish researcher in human communication, Osmo Wiio, and his Murphy-like laws of communication.

  • If communication can fail, it will.
  • If a message can be understood in different ways, it will be understood in just that way which does the most harm.
  • There is always somebody who knows better than you what you meant by your message.
  • The more communication there is, the more difficult it is for communication to succeed.

After that, you may want to read more about Osmo Wiio.

I’m not the only one critical of the Macquarie Dictionary, it seems. Big fat media empire Fairfax is switching over to using the Australian Oxford Dictionary. Crikey has the story (behind the paywall for the moment). They quote the Fairfax memo: “Style officers from major papers in the group agree that the Oxford has a stronger sense of style than the Macquarie, offers concise, informative definitions and clearly states its preference for word usage, and therefore is better suited for use in a media organisation.”

17 March 2008 by Stilgherrian | 1 comment

Stupid uses of “solution”

11 March 2008 in Language, Marketing by Stilgherrian | 5 comments

Photograph of truck with sign on side: Crawford Tree Solutions Pty Ltd 0417 871 471

Pet gripe: the use of the word “solution” in (originally) the IT industry and now, seemingly, everywhere.

Wikipedia doesn’t give it it’s own page, merely saying:

In business, a solution is a product, service, or combination of both which is said to solve a business or consumer’s problem; the term is often considered an overused and unimaginative buzzword.

So when I saw this truck (pictured) in Stanmore yesterday afternoon I wondered, “WFT is a ‘tree solution’?”

I assume this guy is an arborist, or “tree surgeon”. The former ain’t great marketing in the 21st Century ‘cos it’s latinesque, but I can live with the latter — after all, he’s a bloke what cuts down or fixes trees, yeah?

Other annoying buzzwords for me: “business ecology”, “DNA” (when used to talk about “our business’ DNA”), “space” and “Web 2.0″. Any others?

« Older entries