General Motors was fined for various reasons and one item that came to the media's attention was this this story about words banned from reports.

No biggie. Pretty soon they'll become Guangzhou Motors, leave the declining US market, and that'll be the end of all the law suits.

Somehow I doubt that GM employees and agents really need to be told not to use some of the more over-the-top words and phrases. If someone uses a word like 'apocalyptic' or 'deathtrap' to describe a recall problem they deserve to be fired.

The rest of the words are pretty standard crisis-management weasel words which don't really fool many people these days anyway. The substitution of 'issue' for 'problem', for example, is pretty well known.

I was thinking the same thing, arnie, until I came to "serious" and "NEVER" (maybe because of the capital letters and bold?). And "safety" and "safety related" didn't make sense, unless the employees would say something negative about it.

But I certainly can understand "you're toast" and "mutilating" and "eviscerated" and "deathtrap," etc. Those were a few of my favorites!

GM has come a long way since 2008, I agree with them on that. The new "Speak up for Safety" program seems ever so much friendlier to the public.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kalleh,

quote:

until I came to "serious" and "NEVER" (maybe because of the capital letters and bold?).

Exactly. Would a GM employee ever write that way? I doubt it. They've also got to be wary of seeming to claim more than they can provide. For instance they wouldn't claim 'absolute safety' nor would they say something would never (caps or bolding there or not) happen, just in case it might, however unlikely it might appear to the speaker/writer.

Here are John Oliver's thoughts on the banned words idea.

Pretty funny, Proof.

After watching Oliver, I though more about the GM PowerPoint exhibit of banned words and wondered if it wasn't the presenter's idea of a satirical look at corporate reports (GM, in particular due to their problems).

Here is a list of words one university thinks should be banished from common usage.

Until recently I had assumed that "hashtag" was the day Germans ate chopped food.

Just what we need: another university without a sense of humor.

I've been calling it a hashtag (i.e., the glyph itself) for more than two decades. That makes it rather common these days.

There are lots of banned/overused word articles recently!

I am not sure a sense of humor has anything to do with it. They just think some of these are overused words, and I have to agree on a couple: selfie and Obamacare. They are right, we have been taking self pictures ever since I've had a camera - using the timer. Suddenly everyone thinks it's new? The second is Obamacare. I consider that an ignorant, and political (Republican), word. It's the Affordable Care Act, similar to Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc.

I think the objection is to actually saying "hashtag" in conversation - with a meaning something like "and now I'm going to indicate how I'd like you to take that".

They seem to think that people are saying things like "Did you see that? Hashtag, L, O, L." but it's a usage I've never come across. Objecting to something no one does on the grounds that you think it would be wrong if anyone did do it, seems rather perverse.

As for "Obamacare", sure it's intended as a slur but that's politics. Words like this are by their very nature ephemeral. Two presidents down the line and we'll never hear it again.

There's also an objection to using "ageddon" and "pocalypse" as suffixes but English is a productive language and this is just a kind of wordplay. Overused? Maybe. But ban them? Ridiculous.

And the objection to "fan base" on the grounds that we already have "fans" would be more valid if a) they actually had the same meaning and b) we had no other synonyms or near synonyms in English.

The thing about overusing words is that it is self-limiting. Once people start thinking you are a bit of a dick for using a particular phrase the usage falls off and is replaced by something else that in turn becomes overused making people think you are a bit of a dick for using it so...

DO some words and phrases irritate me? Sure. Do I think I should publish lists of them and demand people stop using them? Do, I really look like that much of an idiot?

No need to answer that question.

Now me, I think words like "the", "a" and "it" are WAY over used.

quote:

Now me, I think words like "the", "a" and "it" are WAY over used.

Learn Chinese. then; you won't have to use them. Oh, wait ...

These articles just keep coming! I assume you won't be able to get this because now the Tribune seems to be hugely proprietary, but this Eric Zorn article is about words being skunked, which is when the "common folk — everyday speakers and writers — wrest it away from the purists and, by dint of repetition, turn what was once considered an error into standard usage." Have you heard skunked used like that? I haven't.

The word (or phrase) purists are complaining about is "Smokey the Bear." Apparently, it's supposed to be "Smokey Bear."

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:
These articles just keep coming! I assume you won't be able to get this because now the Tribune seems to be hugely proprietary, but this Eric Zorn article is about words being skunked, which is when the "common folk — everyday speakers and writers — wrest it away from the purists and, by dint of repetition, turn what was once considered an error into standard usage." Have you heard skunked used like that? I haven't.

Blame Bryan Garner

quote:

Originally posted by Geoff:
Until recently I had assumed that "hashtag" was the day Germans ate chopped food.

#LOL

In another article about GM's banned words (69 - really???), they brought in health care. Apparently a hospital in Minnesota, trying to reduce errors by creating a "blameless" culture, replaced the words "errors" and "investigations" with words like "accidents." They reduced preventable deaths and illnesses. One might say, "Words save lives!"

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:
They reduced preventable deaths and illnesses. One might say, "Words save lives!"

Is it possible they reduced them by redesignating them as non-unavoidable premature life-sign cessations and health failure incidents?

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:
a "blameless" culture,

Frankly, I think I'd prefer a "blame" culture. I'd like to know that if the surgeon removing my appendix accidentally kills me or the nurse administering my painkillers misreads 50 milligrams as 50 grams they will be appropriately dealt with. The idea that they would be able to go, "Hey! No fault, no penalty." might encourage them not to be as careful as they would otherwise be.

Speaking ofbanned, here's a silly story.

No sillier than the SCOTUS. US women, welcome to the Eighth Century.