My November 17 post on preachers who lift sermons from the Internet drew a rather strongly-worded reply from one Bruce D. Johnson of Germantown, Maryland. Mr. Johnson, a former preacher, says that I have no standing to object to this practice because I’m a speechwriter.
The full text of Mr. Johnson’s reply may be read as a comment on my November 17 post. But the pertinent paragraph is this:
“However, what I find most interesting about your comments, and I apologize ahead of time for the strength of these words, is how hypocritical your comments are. You are a speech writer. You write words that other people use, but don't attribute to you. In all of my years of listening to politicians (or CEOs who use speech writers), I have never heard either one say, "In the words of Hal Gordon, my speechwriter . . . " So why is it only when a preacher uses someone else's words that it becomes unethical?”
I sent Mr. Johnson a rather lengthy reply, addressing all the points he made in his comment. But I’m going to reprint the portion of my reply that deals with Mr. Johnson’s charge of hypocrisy, because I feel that I have to uphold not only my integrity, but the but the honor of the speechwriting profession.
So here is my answer.
Dear Mr. Johnson:
You say that it is “hypocritical” of me to object to preachers using canned sermons, since I’m a professional speechwriter and I, in your phrase, “write words that other people use but don’t attribute to you.”
Very well; that’s a fair point that deserves a frank answer.
In reply, let me say that speechwriting is much more of a process –- a dialogue, if you will, between the speaker and the speechwriter -- than an exercise of individual creativity. I don’t know how much experience you may have had with speechwriting, but in my nearly 25 years as a speechwriter I have written for top advisors to President Reagan, the chief executives of some of this country’s leading corporations and General Colin Powell. Do you really suppose that a poor scribbler like me goes to the office of a leading political figure or CEO, hands him a finished speech and says, “Here are your lines for your next event. Please don’t muff them”?
Hardly.
Before I even begin to write a speech, I find out everything I can about the person I’m writing for. From the very beginning, I am subordinating my own personality to that of the speaker. It is not my job to win a literary prize for myself, but to help the speaker express his own ideas his own way.
Usually, the process starts by meeting with the speaker to discuss the speech. The speaker tells me what he wants to say about a given issue or issues on a given occasion. Very often, the speaker will tell me what sources I should consult for background information, and which experts I should interview. All this before I write the first word of the draft.
When I produce a first draft, the speaker reviews it, and either re-writes it or tells me how he wants it re-written. This process is repeated through the second, third, fourth -– or as many drafts are needed until the speaker is satisfied that the speech reflects his ideas and his style of speaking. And even then, it is not uncommon for the speaker to depart from the text during the actual delivery.
That’s why the speaker does not say, “In the words of Hal Gordon, my speechwriter…” Because they are his words.
I remember a novice speechwriter asking at a seminar on speechwriting, “When does it stop being your speech?”
I replied, rather sharply: “When is it ever ‘your’ speech?” From beginning to end, the speech belongs to the speaker.
That’s why I don’t think you can seriously maintain that there is no difference between using a speechwriter and appropriating a sermon from the Internet and passing it off as your own. And that’s why I don’t think I am “hypocritical” to object to preachers who plagiarize.
Sincerely yours,
Hal Gordon
If any other speechwriters want to jump into the fray, I’d be most interested to read your reactions.
