Word Wrestle #5 - Some Fun for a Change!

Yes, I know the purpose of Word Wrestle allegedly was to help you navigate through grammar, use the right word for the right purpose, and generally avoid hacking off the CWC (which, as you know, can have dire consequences). But this week? Let's combine two of our favorite things, word wrestling and commercials, for a bit of a grin.

There's a Bud Light ad on Blackhawks radio that has my new favorite commercial line:

"Will Bud Light make your team play better? No. Because that's not how beer works."

Every time I hear that, I crack up. It's delivered in a perfectly straightforward style, by a spokesman who's clearly enamored of beer...but who also knows its place. :-)

Bud Light isn't the best beer in the world. Some people think it's not really "beer" at all (I'm looking at you, IPA-micro-brewery-fans-of-beers-with-stuff-in-them-God-probably-never-intended-beer-to-contain). Some people claim it's undrinkable, watered-down, and generally otherwise not worth using for much other than, maybe, cleaning out the garbage disposal. That's not MY opinion, necessarily...but it's some people's.

But the beauty of this company's product--and its ads--is that it doesn't CARE. It's just out to put the beer in your mind as an option for "the big game," and give you a smile or two. 

And this isn't the first time Bud Light has come out with commercials that are actually witty. Which, IMHO, puts them head-and-shoulders above about 98% of the advertising out there.

Although beer doesn't make our writing better--because, again, THAT's not how beer works, either--there are plenty of things beer DOES work quite well to do. On a hot day, at a baseball game, very few things taste better.

In the meantime, there's at least one ad out there that I can actually enjoy--every single time. And that's something any agency ought to get kudos for.

Thoughts?
Janny

Word Wrestle #4: Spell Check is NOT Your Friend.

Last week, we talked about how to get good spelling and grammar help--which is to run what you write through the real-life pair of eyes of someone who knows how to do these things correctly.

And, as you know, there is also a way to get bad help.
That comes from applications that promise to do "spell-checks" and "grammar checks."
And they're everywhere.

Today, however, we're just going to talk about the Microsoft Word version of it.
Which ought to be called a perversion of it.

I don't know why one of the world's superpower-corporations couldn't get this right. They've had years and years, and versions and versions and VERSIONS of Windows, in which to figure out that whoever wrote that original version of Word's Spelling and Grammar Check was a complete imbecile.

Yet it has never been fixed. Not by one iota.

So I cannot say this enough: DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES USE WORD'S SPELLING AND GRAMMAR CHECK AS YOUR PROOFREADER.

I found out why when I ran a document through the Grammar Check, once upon a time, with the honest intention of seeing if it would, in fact, catch bad grammar.
If it would, in fact, catch sentences that don't make sense because the wrong WORD is in them.
If it would, in fact, catch things like putting "hers" where you mean "his" or "her" where you mean "him," or similar things that are RIGHT in the strict spelling sense, but complete and utter gibberish in terms of meaning.

I'm here to tell you, unfortunately, that Grammar Check can't find any of those.
It can't tell sentence sense.
It can't tell when you've accidentally put the wrong gender in a sentence.
And it can hardly tell when you've said "hardly" but meant "heartily."
In short, it's not a Grammar Check at all, in that it will not correct ERRORS of that sort.

But what it DOES do, boys and girls, are things like this:
--Where you have a sentence that says a phrase like "your children" or "your career" or "your school"...it will query that and suggest "you're."
--Where you have a sentence like "She didn't know if she dared," it will query that and suggest putting in a question mark.
--And probably the worst and most egregious offense of all...Where you have a sentence that says "It's a problem," it will query it and suggest you change to "Its." And where you say, "Its nature is to be incorrect most of the time," it will absolutely bear that sentiment out--by querying and suggesting "It's."

I don't have hard figures on this. I don't have statistics. If someone does, I'd love to see them. But I'd be willing to guess, off the top of my head, that Word's Spelling and Grammar Check will take something that's already correct and tell you to make it wrong approximately 88 percent of the time.

And the rest of the time, it won't find the wrong word or the nonsensical sentence. Because if the words are all spelled right...it can't read enough to actually check the GRAMMAR and tell you the sentence is wrong.

Which means that while, as a raw spelling (and repeated-word) checker, it has some limited capability...as a Grammar Check, it's a complete fraud.

And yes, I'm prepared to stand behind that.
Because I've seen many instances of what results when writers lean on it.
And that, boys and girls, is awful.

Spare us awful writing. Either use reverse dictionaries to help you spell a word you "know" but can't "spell"...use regular dictionaries to make sure you're using the right word...use someone like Strunk and White to get some of the grammar gremlins out of the way...

...or best yet--use a really, really good editor, and all these things will be seen to.
Properly.
Decently.
And in order.

Class dismissed!

Thoughts?
Janny

For Better, For Worse...

I'm committing to a new (old) book. See the sidebar for progress on the resurrection of MY BROTHER'S KEEPER, a "Fabulous Five" contest winner once upon a time...and a book that's always been close to my heart (as only a book about two basketball players could be). Problem is, it's been through umpty-ump-plus-one too many revisions, reversions, remakes, and retools, until the original STORY has been lost in the shuffle.

But...no more. I hope. 

I'm going into Intensive Care (not to be confused with where our hero may end up) of my own to get this book Up and Running Again, starting with Write-a-Thon's SPRINT tonight. Stay tuned!

More to come,
Janny

And I Don't Have a Job in Advertising...Why? (part 1)

You know you do it.
You talk back to the TV or the radio when an ad comes on that you think is stupid.
Or, as many people do during the Super Bowl ad blitz, you "rate" the ones you think are good and pan the rest.

On that subject, does anyone remember when Super Bowl ads were actually good? When they were funny? When they were memorable? When they didn't feel the need to PREACH at their audience? (And does anyone find it ironic that Super Bowl ads will frequently preach at their audience about some "social justice" or "moral" issue, and then segue right to a Super Bowl halftime show that drags the bottom of the moral barrel, is subject to "wardrobe malfunctions" that you swear were planned, or that is so banal that you can't even watch it?)

But...I digress. And I DO talk back to the TV and the radio.
For different reasons, depending on the ad.

There's at least one ad that I DESPISE because it paints women as total idiots about their cars. You know the one. It's where you hear a series of dings and the woman says, "Oh, that's your gas gauge. And that's your tire pressure thingy. And that's your oil whatchamacallit." 
They're INDICATORS, sweetie. Or WARNING LIGHTS. And if you don't know enough to call them that instead of "thingies," someone needs to take away your car keys.

But there are others that, while I don't despise them for their portrayal of human beings as idiots (there are far too many of those to enumerate here), I find myself talking back to every time because the writing on them is HOPELESSLY awful. As in bad. As in incorrect, to the point where they don't even make sense.

My favorite nonsensical one is a bank ad (they're frequently bank ads, come to think of it) where the narrator is talking about people who run their own businesses. Entrepreneurs, if you will. And he says, "And you know that when you run your own business, no day is ever the same. And if it is, you know something's wrong."

Yeah, something's wrong, all right. WITH THAT SENTENCE.

Can you pick out what it is?
Post it in the comments!

Janny

This Week's Wrestle: Copywriting versus Copyrighting versus Copy Editing versus...

Yeah. I need some anti-hair-pulling-out medicine on this one. 
I cannot tell you how many times I've been through the job boards and read from some author wannabe: 

I've written a book and I need a copywriter to edit it and correct the spelling and grammar, in some cases reword a sentence or two where it doesn't make sense...

And so on. And so forth. And so CLUELESS. 
As are the ones who want all the services given above--and want to get them from a copyrighter.

Or a copywritter, which may be the worst of all. Although all three are pretty bad.

So let's set the record straight. 

1. A copywriter writes copy. Specifically, sales-oriented copy. Such as the volumes of  "junk" you get in the mail all the time, wanting you to buy, take a course in, or attend something. 
A copywriter DOES NOT edit books. No, not even the "copy" in said books. 
The person who does that is a copy editor, a line editor, a substantive editor, or...
There's a recurring theme here. Can you spot it?
Yep. There's nothing in those titles about writer.
So if you are looking for book, article, blog post, or journal editing...you want a copy editor. Not a copywriter.

You also don't want a copywriter if you want someone to write the book FOR you.
That's a ghostwriter. NOT a copywriter. 
While it's possible to find good copywriters who can also ghostwrite for you, it's not easy. Nor is it particularly recommended, as they tend to be two different skill sets--not to mention two different mindsets.
So if you're looking for someone to be a co-author, to interview you for a book manuscript, or to take transcriptions and organize them into a book...generally, you're NOT looking for a copywriter. The tools and weapons to do that kind of work aren't in most of their arsenals--and, it must be said, most true copywriters I know don't even want that kind of work.

2. A copywriter has nothing to do with copyright. 
Copyright has to do with protecting your intellectual property. It's the process by which you declare that something is YOUR work and no one else's.
The person who does that is YOU. Not anybody else, strictly speaking. Even registering your work with the Copyright Office doesn't mean they're doing the copyrighting; they're merely documenting what YOU already possess--which is ownership of certain said material as of a certain said date. 
So if you are looking for copy editing, you don't want a copyrighter.  
Nor are you looking for a copyrighter if you want copy written. 

3. Copywritting is the kind of jaw-dropping request that leaves a potential editor or writer scratching his/her head. You see, using that word makes it impossible to tell what kind of help you need with that request--other than the obvious, which is spelling help. (And no, you don't get that from the legendary "spell check" on your computer. In the next segment of this feature, we'll talk about why not.) If English isn't your first language, this is somewhat forgivable. If you're supposedly a native, however, it's not. No. Not even once. Ever. 

(Although if you apologize because you're not a good speller elsewhere in the job posting...it's somewhat easier to take. But not much.)

In reality, you may actually want real live copywriting work done. Until we get past the spelling hurdle, we won't know for sure--although in my experience, what follows that word in most job ads, once again, isn't a request for "copywriting" at all. It's usually a variation on "I need an editor." (With which the Catholic Writer Chick concurs.)

So, let's review.

There's only one thing a "copywriter" does for you: write sales or marketing COPY.
This can be letters, memos, brochures, e-mail series, presentations, or catalog descriptions. 
Yes, copywriters do work in the book industry: as back-cover, jacket flap, or promotional/PR/press release writers. 
But that is where their connection to a book begins...and ends.

So please...if you've written a book and want help with the "copy" on the page...
ask for an editor.
Not a copywriter.
OR a copyrighter.
OR...no, let's not even go there. 

Capisce?

My hairline will thank you.

Comments?
Janny

This Week's Word Wrestle: The Dreaded Apostrophe

The poor apostrophe!
Just THINKING about the many ways I've seen this abused sets my teeth on edge, as it does to anyone with a modicum of proficiency in the English language.

For those of you who don't have that, here are a few simple rules.

1. Plurals are never made with apostrophes. EVER. EVER. EVER.
In other words, if you see (as I saw this week on a choral schedule sign) "solo's" indicating that the group was going to talk about people auditioning for SOLOS, and you have to physically restrain yourself from getting up and rubbing out the apostrophe on the white board (as I did), you're not being "picky" or "pedantic" or "fussy." You're being literate. Congratulations to you. You know better than probably 90 percent of the allegedly English-speaking population out there. (The foreigners I know for whom English is a second language, by and large, get this right. Go figure.)

2. Plural possessives put the apostrophe after the s. Not before it.
In other words, if you're going to visit the Johnson family, you're going to the "Johnsons'," not the "Johnson's." If only one Johnson lives there, you might be able to get away with the second construction. On the other hand, if only one lives there--say, Abby Johnson--you're probably saying, "I'm going to Abby's house," not, "I'm going to Johnson's."  If you're a young man and you commonly call your friends by their last name, you could say the latter...but it would still be more correct to use the former, since your friend Johnson probably hasn't banished the rest of the family from "his" house forever and taken sole possession of it. Get it?

3. It's WOMEN'S clothing, but LADIES' attire.
It's CHILDREN'S clothing, but CHILD's play.
It's MENSWEAR, but MEN'S conference.

Yes, there are irregularities here and there. Deal with them.

4. Finally, speaking of the "conference" example above...

Maybe it's just me, but it seems more correct to place an apostrophe in that "possessive," even though it's largely omitted. Things like "writers conference," although considered technically fine...grate my teeth. Is it a conference of writers? Yes. Is it a conference designed for writers? Yes. If those things are true, don't the writers, in effect, own it? So in that case, to my way of thinking, the term should read "writers' conference." (And, no, not "writer's conference"...unless, again, only one writer is there or "owns" it or goes to it. Which makes it a really, really, really small conference.)

5. Most of all...just remember. Please. Remember.
APOSTROPHES ARE NEVER USED TO MAKE A PLURAL. EVER. EVER. EVER.

I fully expect many of you to be traveling with Sharpies now, ready to jump on and correct those illiterately-produced signs, memos, and other nonsensical notices that say things like "Buy one, get one free on Friday's," or "Tomato's on sale today," or "All permission slip's due tomorrow."

They're everywhere. You know it, and I know it. Do your part. 
Me, I have to go take a Valium now.

Happy Friday!
Janny