OK Steve, back up, I have some steam here...so what might a writer of a retiree publication write about, if they're not at least in part covering what their retirees are doing with their time?

Retirees' activities are no longer tied to the company's bottom line---they're now doing well if they can do something they find fulfilling and interesting to them....and (I know this because a good 1/4 of my audience is retirees) they LOVE reading about what one another is doing post-work. Believe me, anything that keeps you from being 6 feet under or in the hospital or a care home is fare game and exciting to THEM---it says they're still living.

I have always agreed that for employees, just about any publication can be pushed to be less puff-ball and more strategic, to get them to think about the company's business and how they fit in, etc. I struggle with this all the time.

But I think retirees are a different audience. With retirees, there is probably 90% less "what we ought to be telling them" in planning content, vs. employees. As writers of such publications, we have to put ourselves in their shoes---what would they want to read and find interesting?

To be clear, I think the headline writer ought to be paddled for such a schlocky title, but for that audience, I would definitely stand behind the subject of the article.

OK, I'm done. And not steamed =) Love every irreverant comment you ever made, and I think you should swear MORE, not less. I just think you were off base on this one.

Laurel:

It wasn't so much the topic of the article . . . because the writer did write about things other than the basket weaving. It's wasn't a bad piece. It's not the kind of piece I can imagine anyone reading unless they knew the guy personally . . . but that's okay.

I agree with you that retiree publications are different.

It was the packaging of it. You had to see the picture of the poor guy. And then that awful Romper Room headline . . .that is what I was objecting to, mostly.

The picture made it look like he was on his last legs. I should have saved it, but I didn't.

You would have taken one look at how this article was packaged and said, "Lame."

Even though the article itself wasn't that bad from what I remember.

Steve

Those are great headlines. And we know how hard those are to write.

I've been following a thread on a message board dedicated to Six Flags Fright Fest (I am a roller coaster nut in addition to all my other issues) that is not unrelated to this one. It involves people complaining that the annual Halloween Fright Fest (again, FRIGHT. FEST.) went over the line being inappropriate and disturbing. The issue in question is a live "Bad Santa" area, with "Ho Ho Hos" drinking booze and Santa trying to get you to sit on his lap. Mind you, this is in an area with a HUGE (literally 6 foot wide) sign stating its "R rated", no kids under 12, yada yada yada. But still people go, get offended, and insist on writing letters of complaint. YES, you have the right to be offended. YES, you have the right to complain. But you do not have the right to expect everyone else to line up behind your idea of appropriateness.

Were those headlines over the line? Maybe. Like many issues, its an eye of the beholder thing I guess. But man oh man, what is with this whole "well, MY delicate sensibilities were trodden upon" mindset? Have we really adequately addressed all the world's really big issues, and can now focus on such minutia?

I'll lighten the mood with a slightly inappropriate joke:
A pirate walks into a bar with a steering wheel in his pants.
The bartender says "Hey, buddy, whats with the steering wheel?
The pirate says "AARRRGH, it be drivin' me nuts!"

- Neruda

Yes, offensiveness is in the eye of the beholder -- and often depends on your perspective.

I like this old joke to illustrate what I mean. A guy is seeing a psychiatrist who administers the Rorschach test.

"What do you see in this picture?" the shrink asks.

"A naked man and a naked woman having sex," the guy says.

"And what about this one?" the shrink asks.

"Two naked men having sex," the guy says.

"And this one?"

"Two naked women having sex."

Finally, the psychiatrist stops and says, "It's fairly obvious that you have an extreme preoccupation with sex."

To which the guy responds, "You're the one with all the dirty pictures!"

Ha ha ha ha ha those are both great jokes!

Neruda . . . there is finally something we're not in agreement on. Both fallen Catholics, both libertarians . . . we mesh on all levels, except roller coasters.

I hate them. And Ferris Wheels, too. My young son has picked up on the fact that I am afraid of Ferris Wheels, and every time we pass the big wheel at Navy Pier (about 12 times a month, because we drive right by it to come home), he says: "Hey, Dad . . . you're going to take me on that pretty soon, right?" Little scumbag.

By the way, did you actually SEE the movie, Bad Santa?

Steve C.

I loved Romper Room. I loved everything about it. Except at the end, when the teacher would pull out the Magic Mirror. She never said my name. Could be because my mom gave me a name shared by women in their nineties...you know, those retirees who are basket weaving their way into the grave with spittle down their chins.

You're not alone, Eileen. Miss Sherry never said my name either.

As many of you have said (here and in other posts), writing good headlines is tough. If anyone has some great ideas for creating punchy, interesting headlines, please share.

I'll take your son on the giant ferris wheel, Steve C. I love it and so did my kids. Although I think that marked the beginning of the end of my marriage.

Well, thank you, Robert. But I have to decline your offer.

See, it's not the WHEEL I'm afraid of necessarily. Or the roller coaster. I'm afraid of the carnies that are in charge of running those damn things.

I mean, who does the maintenance? The dope smoking 19 year old who takes the tickets? I just don't trust the machinery or the people in charge of it!

Steve C.

Dope-smoking carnies, pirates' nuts, the ho-ho-ho's, fat midgets and strategic writing for retiree publications, all on one thread. Genius.

And all for a price that can't be beat!

Okay, well now you've got me all fired up. I was fine with the shit and Jesus story, I was even fine with your blasting of the piece on Earl, but now - carnies? You're going to pick on carnies?? Is nothing sacred?

SN - I'm with you on the roller coaster addiction. Pulling from a past blog - maybe Steve IS a sissy!!

:)

P.S. I think part of your larger point Steve is that you always want people to THINK before they write & publish, think before they speak & create that awful powerpoint presentation. I think people far to oft forget that everyone is not inside their head.

I've got a great daily calendar of "anguished English" of printed missteps. My favorite was this one:

"Free cocktails to ladies with nuts."

OK, now I'm worried. Looking at these past few blogs, I realize I've been asked to do a PowerPoint presentation for one of Steve's seminars and it better not suck.

I've got a profile of a retiree in my lastest employee pub about an old guy who makes little wooden power poles (he's a retired lineman) and he looks real unhappy in the photo, probably because his wife made him sit there for the shot. But I've been told the retirees really love to read that stuff, along with all the company stories.

I wouldn't dream of printing a foul word, in or out of a quote, in the an employee pub. We once promoted the sale of hockey tickets and said, Oh, just puck it. Whooeee, did the proverbial excrement hit the air moving device in copious quantities and get spread around the room.

And we won't make fun of NASCAR, even in an oblique way, after finding out the chairman likes the sport and doesn't take kindly to slights to one of his favorite sports.

At least we promoted Talk Like a Pirate Day last month. Even said to call your co-worker a bilge rat. Couldn't say anything about lusty wenches, however.

I guess you win some, you lose some.

Yeah, you have to be careful with Talk Like a Pirate Day. Most of those expressions are rated "Arrrrrr."

OK, you can put me out of your misery now.

Talk about your tender sensibilities! The occasional profanity in Ragan Report doesn't bother me, but we could never get away with any such thing at my place of employment. Heck, I even had someone complain once because I used the word "darn" in an article on our intranet. Between the Arial-ish font we use and the closeness of the letters, "darn" to this reader looked like "dam," which almost spells "damn" and sounds just like it! But that's not the story I want to tell.

We periodically publish stories on our intranet citing recent mentions of GEICO in the news or in popular culture. Last week we ran one including the fact that Kanye West recommends buying GEICO insurance in his current hit "Golddigger." Well, some folks took it upon themselves to research the full lyrics to that "song" and (also recalling Mr. West's post-Katrina comments about our president), found them objectionable, and took us to task for featuring Mr. West on the company intranet. We maintained that we were not endorsing or passing judgment on Mr. West, just noting the fact that a popular entertainer had dropped our name (again; it's the second time he's done so) in one of his numbers.

One of our protesters, finding our argument unpersuasive, took his objection to higher authorities, and soon I got a request from one of our top execs to delete the story. I stated our case for the record, but went back and took out all mention of Mr. West (curiously, nobody in our company, which is mostly female, objected to another item mentioned in the story: we'd finished second in a Maxim magazine contest).

So, in essence, we got busted not for using profanity, but for MENTIONING THE NAME of someone known to use profanity. If that's the standard, then we have a lot of employees who'll never see their names in company publications.

Greg