Steve,
I read the piece and thought it made a good point about the overuse of PowerPoint. You could have chosen to omit the quote, but I thought in the context of how if was used, it was fine and to the point. As far as you being the “the ‘shock jock’ of professional communicators,” I think that is just fine too. Much of corporate writing ends up being an unimaginative preconceived litany of stale talking points anyway. I say bring on more of the same insightful and fun to read material!

Thanks, Mark. And I'm glad you liked the article. That's the only thing I worry about . . . that if people are getting offended by the quote, they are losing sight of the point of the article . . . which is how corporate speakers are taking the easy way out by throwing junk-filled powerpoint slides up there and calling it a speech.

And I don't know about "shock jock." To me, that means doing stuff in a calculated manner JUST to get a reaction from people.

I honestly don't do that. I dont' write "Jesus" and "Shit" and think to myself: "That oughta stir up the animals!!"

It's just that it's almost impossible to offend me . . . not almost, it IS impossible to offend me. So I rarely have a sense of what will offend other people. I mean, of course there are times when I know I'm being politically incorrect . . . but that's the only way I know how to be!

Steve C.

Tell her to kiss my ass.

Personally, I am offended by people who use the phrase "the lord's name in vain" all high and mighty. But I don't write letters about it - I just post to other people's blogs!

So, both sophisticated AND a shock jock. That's quite a trick - kinda like the folks who claim Bush is 1. an idiot and 2. Running a massive double secret right wing conspiracy. You cant have it both ways folks, one precludes the other.

We need more direct, impactful stories like that one, not less.

Keep up the good fight.

- Neruda

OK kids - don't get your panties in a knot. I have this image of Steve N pounding away on his keyboard (and swearing the whole time) as he fervently defends Steve C's right to post "bad" words on his blog. Swearing (at least the mild mannered form we're referring to here) is no big deal - especially since it's a direct quote. It actually gives the piece some flavour and attitude.

As for Steve N's comments about George Bush - ask some Canadians what they think about him. I'm fairly certain you'd have to use a whole bunch of asterisks in the word people used BEFORE the word "idiot" before you could quote somebody.

And by the way Steve C, I'm looking into the whole trademarking of "from schlock to strategic" so don't even think about it! Hope you enjoy Vancouver next week, it's a great city.

O Canada, my home and native land... well, not quite, but I was in Hamilton once.

Yeah, I work with a proud Canadian (is there any other kind?) so I regularly get the anti Bush diatribe. By the way, just for the record, as a straight edge libertarian atheist, I am no friend of 'ol GW.

Now, where you are correct is that I do pound away at the keyboard with a string of obscenities flowing, but that's just business as usual...

Hidden away in the goofball commentary is the fact that yes, I think Steve is right here. I always question why folks don't write more like they speak - as soon as they get pen in hand, they think they have to get all formal. There is a time and a place for that, but not all times and not all places.

As Monique (the canadian co worker in question) will tell you, I have precious little patience for "righteous indignation" - which certainly came through loud and clear in that complaint letter.

Well, having spend my fair share of time watching you operate in person (remember, I DO have pictures! -G- ) I've always felt you brought a refreshing "Sandburg-esq" quality to your writing and reporting.

It certainly would have been a disservice to your readers to water down or rewrite such a powerful quote. Your aggreved reader obviously didn't get her training in journalism - or came of age in the evil "PC climate" we now find ourselves in these days. Back in my J-School days I would have been given an "F" had I rewrote or not included a quote of such passion and feeling.

Even though I didn't read the RR article, I have a pretty good sense of the gist of the piece just from your brief overview and that one quote.

Given this reader's response, I suspect her own material is just so much pablum.

Craig

Steve,

I wouldn't sweat it. While you may have offended the odd person, I'm sure there are many like me who appreciate your honest, unfiltered impressions of the world of corporate communications.

I suppose we also have to defend the reader's right to tell the editor "I don't like Steve's stuff." But each of us is also free to send a note to the editor at RR to say "It doesn't offend me, keep Steve in the lineup."

Steve...
Your "vulgarity" and "offensiveness" are exactly what I love about you. They make your legitimate communications discussions entertaining, in a spoonful o' sugar kind of way. I benefit from your ideas while successfully clinging to my Too Good For This Corporate BS self-delusions.

Don't ever change, baybee.

You'll never please everyone.

I was once corrected for saying "Jeez" because it was derived from Jesus (not because it simply sounded idiotic).

Well, I'm the Canadian co-worker that Neruda referenced above, and I have three things to say:
- W sucks
- Love a quote with a punch -- keep it up Steve C
- Crescenzo, send me that damn RR edition I helped you with before I get righteously indignant on your ass.

Lovingly, M.

Not to sound too Spock-like, but I find the hysteria over curse words to be very illogical. It's okay for me to say the word 'spit', and it's okay for me to say 'feces', but it is not okay for me to say 'shit.' Then there's my boyfriend's mother, a kind and lovely woman who would never swear, yet says the word 'bloody' freely. So it's okay to curse in another language? The NY Times had an interesting article on swearing recently that may be of interest to you: http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050920082109990021

While the rules of what makes a curse a curse seem completely arbitrary to me, and therefore hard to respect, I do think it's important to keep in mind other people's feelings on the subject. When I spend a lot of time around people who don't curse, and then get around people who do (or, say, start listening to half of what comes out of my own mouth), I really notice the sound of swearing. It's like linguistic violence, in a way, and it's very striking. That, of course, is why cursing is so much fun, but it also makes me understand why it can seem offensive to people.

I think it's fine to use the quote you did, because it was both honest and illustrated your point. It clearly wasn't for shock value and, as someone else said, you can't please everyone. I just hesitate to be so derisive about the letter-writer's concern.

However, I don't hesitate to be derisive of her righteousness. It brought to mind one of my favorite Monty Python bits, which I found on the web:

Dear Sir, I wish to complain in the strongest possible terms about the song you have just broadcast about the lumberjack who wears women's clothes. Many of my best friends are lumberjacks, and only a few of them are transvestites.

Yours faithfully,
Brigadier Sir Charles Arthur Strong, Mrs.

Two of my favorite quotes on swearing come from two mentors of mine; naturally, they contradict themselves:

• "Your father wouldn't say 'shit' if he had a mouth full of it." --my mother

• "If you say 'shit' when you drop your pencil on the floor, what do you say when you blow out a tire on the Brooklyn Bridge?" --Larry Ragan

god, python RULES. Great quote, although I thought you were gonna go for the equally applicable "I object to all this sex on the telly. I mean, I keep falling off!"

-Neruda

True story: I have an absolutely awesome article on how *not* to do "personality testing" hovering around the consciousness of my brain, but I haven't been able to write it. See, my CEO objects to crassness enough that I censor everything down to the blandest possible expression. Normally, that's not an issue. But the impetus for this article -- and the obvious opening anecdote -- is a conversation that was relayed to me regarding a recent round of testing at my husband's company. "Got my test results back," he told someone.

"Oh, yeah, what did they say?"

"Well, apparently, I'm an asshole."

It's simply KILLING me that I can't use it, and because I can't use it, I can't write the piece. And it's a damned shame (crassness intended) because that story encompasses so much of what's normally wrong with how personality testing is handled.

GAAAAAAH!

Grandmother always told me that people only swear when they can't come up with anything intelligent to say. I loved the woman dearly, but I think she may have missed a few cases, like my testing story, and your Powerpoint slide. If Ragan didn't have a problem with it, then -- no offense to our self righteous friend -- screw it. Some people thrive on feeling offended, I think. Makes them feel better about themselves. There are limits, of course, but if you're quoting, well, hell, ... You could have doctored it down to "Does he really expect us to read that?" But that just doesn't seem to carry the weight as well.

To paraphrase Fran Lebowitz, getting offended is the natural consequence of leaving one's home.

so, what was written in the return email to the "offended"? clearly, it couldn't have come from you as it would have been "easily dismissed".

also, you must now change your byline to include the "sophisticated shock jock of professional communicators" title. definitely need to get that trademarked and develop a logo. don't forget to obtain all tatoo rights as well. also, WWSD wristbands should be legally nailed down.

when you think about it, the blog photo now plays well with the entire SSJPC persona. it's eerie ( not necessarily the photo ) how the photo has presaged this newly formed world view of you. the photo certainly portrays a certain toughness and shockyness. also, only a sophisticated type would use the hip, reverse video gray. another marketing op - SSJPC grey!possibly, this woman was influenced by the blog site.

anyway, call all the legal beagles possible and act quickly. 15 minutes is not very long and there's marketing money to be had! i can see TV rights and a movie script in the offing!

Quality post....

From a linguistic perspective we should actually be pretty proud of the heritage our 4 letterers have. Long before we were using 'sophisticated' language, which like the word 'sophisticated' was imposed on us by the Normans post 1066, these babies were the staple of any good anglo-saxon conversation.

Not that I'm saying you should be proud of being anglo-saxon... just that the English language would be very much worse off without some good profanity (another word the French introduced to describe us common working folk ;).

"For certeyn, olde dotard, by youre leve,
Ye shul have queynte right ynogh at eve."

http://www.librarius.com/canttran/wifetale/wifetale330-342.htm

Steve,

Speaking for the nominally prudish and occasionally self-righteous, I have to admit there have been times that I've felt a little exasperated -- usually related to porn references (Jes**, do guys think of anything else?).

That being said, I am one of your biggest supporters, because you calls it like you sees it when it comes to corporate communications. And because who can't love a guy who makes you laugh your as* off in the middle of an otherwise tedious workday?

Your rebuttal column in CW on the corporate tattoo story was a modern-day classic. I had editors running from one cube to the next to share it as soon as they finished it.

I even read it out loud to my husband, a repair manager in a manufacturing company. He said if they used words like pen*s in his company newsletter, he'd actually read it.

Therein lies hope for communicators everywhere.

Where can I purchase my WWSD wristbands?

First, everyone, thanks for the support. I've said it before and I'll say it again: The people who read this blog are the smartest people in the field. Or at least the most accepting.

I don't know what was written back to that woman. I don't know if anything was written at all. But I know we'll run the letter in Ragan Report.

Kathy, it's funny that you mention the tattoo column . . . I happened to stumble across that issue yesterday, and re-read it (yes, I am vain enough to read my own stuff once in a while; but I usually think it sucks).

But that tattoo column isn't bad. And you know what the first thing I thought of when I read it?

"Damn . . . I should have posted that on the blog, instead." You folks out here would appreciate it.

Steve C.

Steve---what was the gist of the tattoo column? Can't remember whether I read that or not....seems a bit familiar.

I've long known you to be crass, vulgar, unprofessional, and you're right, the sophisticated comment was off the mark. For people that eat, sleep, and breath what is often heavily edited and censored commentary, it's a refreshing change, and part of why you're so fun to read. But you already knew that.

Now about those sunglasses...

OK, I'm a few days late posting a comment on this, but it's time for the Other Opie to weigh in (Opie 1 -- aka David Murray -- already has done so).

Steve C, I hope you know by now I'm no prude. I don't see how anybody who has spent any time in journalism and corporate communications could be, unless your career has consisted of writing for the Moral Majority newsletter. And I'm with practically everyone else who has posted here -- your vulgarity and willingness to say anything, no holds barred, is what makes you who you are. We need you to keep us from going absolutely insane from the sh*t (that's "shit," not "shot") we have to write for corporate executives.

But I also agree that your reader has as much right to complain as you do to write whatever you want. I think it's pretty funny how several people who've responded here have done so with just as much indignation as they accuse your reader of -- telling her to "kiss my ass" and suggesting that she writes "pablum."

Let it go. Have a debate about whether or not such great quotes (and it is great!) should be printed or not, but don't repay the reader's attack in kind. She's entitled to her opinion, whether or not we agree with it.

Yeah, I was offended by the executive's use of Jesus' name as a curse, but hey, that's the world we live in. I choose not to use it that way, but I know some people do and I'm not going to waste time screaming about it. On the other hand, I don't think it's fair to be considered "high and mighty" or "PC" because of how I feel about it -- because I don't believe I'm either one.

So, for the record: You should have quoted the guy, just as you did, perhaps using asterisks so as to soften the offensiveness (although personally I don't see what good it does). This is what we've come to expect from The Ragan Report. I'm grown-up enough to handle whatever discomfort is causes me and to move on.

I am in full agreement with the previous comments. Readers need to be able to trust us as communicators to know how to get a message across. If the best way to make a point is to include a swear word (or words), then the reader should see the necessity or at least usefulness of it.

Think how refreshing it would be to see a political speech refer to Bin Laden or some other terrorist or tyrant as a "son of a bitch." It is exactly what everyone is thinking, but what just about everyone is afraid to say.

By the same token, if the feeling in that room was that the person didn't want to put up with PowerPoint shit, then the best way to express those feelings is to quote that person directly. I commend you for doing so.

By the way, the tatoo article sounds vaguely familiar to me, as well. If there is some way to post it on this blog, I would be as happy as a pig in shit.

I'm the "kiss my ass" guy. In my defense, that was an attempt at a laugh. I was *THISCLOSE* to writing "Tell her to go f*ck herself" but ended up self-censoring since I do not - popular opinion aside - go out of my way to offend. And I always find the word "ass" funny regardless.

*Of course* the letter writer is entitled to her opinion. It's when those opinions threaten to set or change policy that people tend to bristle. I think we've been conditioned to a degree as a society to be *so* super-sensitive to giving offense that the potential for corrective over-reaction is high. And that is sad.

>

And the potential for losing our sense of humor is also high! Good point.

Ms. "Offended" comes from the same class of people who keep pushing me to publish grip-and-grin shots and breaking news stories on how everything is just peachy. I can't STAND it. I did not go to the Pollyanna school of journalism, and neither did you. Good on you, I say.

Just an observation about how easy it is to suggest someone is from a "class" of people who would support "pollyanna" journalism -- and then post only your initials. It seems to me someone who is so adamant about good journalism wouldn't mind revealing their name. What I can't stand is people who speak loudly and then hide behind the curtain of anonymity.

I think you nailed it when you said, "It was a direct quote." Also, by using the swear words, you conveyed exactly how seriously that audience participant felt about a poorly executed Power Point presentation.

I'm not a big fan of Power Point because it's horribly misused. I can't think of anything I enjoy less about a presentation than sitting there, reading the paragraphs that the presenter has crammed onto each slide to myself, while the presenter proceeds to read them out loud. I am NOT listening to the presentation at this point. And now, I'm editing what the presenter has written! And I'm thinking about picking up my dry cleaning. And wondering how long until we get a break. And praying that there will be another slide to read and gripe about soon so that I don't fall asleep.

PP should highlight main points and keywords only. It is not a substitute for notecards. Otherwise, its boring as hell and painful for the audience. (And yes, I just swore.)

Isn't it up to your editor to "censor" the swear words anyway?

Keep on keepin' on, Steve...

Kirsten

I'm so glad most people (actually, I think everyone) weighed in on the side of running the quote. I don't regret it for a second.

And of course the woman can write whatever she wants. I relish getting letters like hers. I relish getting ANY letters . . . especially in print. Any kind of feedback at all is better than no feedback.

Which is what makes this blog so terrific. Being able to write what you feel and then have a bunch of smart people kick it around is one of the most rewarding things about my whole stupid career.

All right, I'm going to post the tattoo column . . .but I hope the expectations aren't too high. It's not THAT good. It's only okay. But it's very okay, I think.

Steve C.