Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by glial 12 days ago
I appreciate this push-back. I keep a running list of words like this...content, product, device, experience, space, vehicle, resource, etc. I can't put my finger on why, but all of these make me distrust the speaker.
7 comments

Yeah I have a similar list. Mine also includes "journey". As soon as a word gets adopted by MBAs to abstract away the real world, it gets added to my list. They're words that project the idea of a smart person but only to stupid people.
Mine is "thought leader" - I've yet to meet someone who calls themselves that who's had a useful thought.
I know a few people who unironically call themselves that. They sound awesome, but scratch beneath the surface of what they say... there's nothing there.
I'm a thought leader. I thought I should lead.
I saw a news article recently where the headline was something about someone's "cancer journey". Maybe I'm old - only 51! - but I thought it was kind of a tasteless way to put it. That said, language is a malleable thing and no one needs my approval.
It’s a conflict of interest. When people organically create things online with no incentive except the love, you can give them a lot of trust. Once someone goes from that to manufacturing “content” (or even worse goes from nothing to “content”) there’s major incentive to either shill for some product for compensation, or to generate outlandish things that get more clicks, views, likes, subscribes. All of this is antithetical to creating about a subject because you enjoy the subject.

From about 1998-2008 I ran one of the largest sites on the internet for a particular niche. Zero advertisers, no ads, no shady links, just content about a subject I loved. I worked hard to make sure it was accurate and up to date. Now someone creating the same site would be loads of referral links or paid ads, so no trust whatsoever in what’s being presented.

This makes sense to me.

I get a similar ick when I hear someone say "I enjoy consuming this type of content." They're not selling anything, but they are still adopting the soulless language. Like, if it still exists after you interact with it, you haven't consumed anything. Second, do you really see yourself this way? Why not just say "I love to read travel blogs"?

All these words are too broad is why. It allows someone to say something without really knowing what they mean. But also they may know what they mean, so you are not sure!

Device is a handy one though you often want to say "computer, laptop, tablet or phone" in one go. We could call them all computers but that would confuse people I think.

Yeah exactly, It is meant to mean/sound something in a way which could impress people or get any desirable outcome but in reality it means nothing or sometimes even opposite in a way similar to double-speak, recent layoffs and how they are worded seems to be another example.

These words are sometimes like schrodingers cat and this is also what I have observed that within recent layoffs, its really hard to accurately find what the real intent behind it was within some companies and there is no wide consensus.

Perhaps this is their true purpose, to hide the real intent behind things and perhaps (to give the benefit of doubt?)

I don't know how common it is but I can't stand "consume" for "eat/drink". Especially when used in the first person. Why would anybody say that about what they eat?
For me it's when companies talk about themselves as brands.
A few days ago I was watching a video history of a storied company which eventually disappeared. Which one doesn't really matter, as the story is repeated so many times.

By the 1990s, it had largely withdrawn from its earlier manufacturing role to "branding" products made largely in Taiwan. Its manufacturing "partner" learned the design and the business, and eventually took over the marketing role itself. The new (foreign) brand exists, and is relatively well-known, the century-plus original ... was sold in bankruptcy auction in the early aughts and ... surprise to me, actually continues on as a "brand".

What I've noticed as well are two common trends:

Many well-known brands, particularly in appliances, sell products which are all but certainly produced by whitebox manufacturers in China, with the "brand" literally an adhesive label slapped on at the end. There's not even enough trust in the relationship to weld or stamp the name onto the goods. Often times those badges will fall off after a few months....

Increasingly I see goods with no manufacturer indication at all. Ceramics, electronics, household goods, and the like. There may have been some sort of adhesive label, but there's no permanent branding or marking that will remain on the device.

I'm hardly the most brand-aware or brand-loyal person out there, but I did come of age in an environment where the marketing philosophy was "brand is king". After decades of rebadging goods from independent manufacturers, even the pretense of branding's significance no longer seems to exist, in many cases.

What else would you call smaller companies and products within a company?
Whatever they are! Using the literal word "brand" in public messaging is leaking the marketing team's lingo to customers.
Oh I see, you'd think they'd know better then to use jargon publicly...
"Divisions" and "product lines" were the terms used at the beginning of mass production. One of the innovations of Alfred P. Sloan at General Motors was the idea of a division-based corporation, or the M-form company, contrasting with the earlier U-form (unitary) business.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-divisional_form>

Outside the US you'll find Chaebol (Korea) and Keiretsu / Zaibatsu (Japan) models.

If your company has several brands, call them brands. But it's usually not like that.
For me, its "learnings" and "performant". We've had "lessons" and "fast"; what do those words not capture?
If you're not an English speaker, it's even more aggravating when speakers of your language replace common words with English ones to sound more sophisticated/corporate. So instead of using the native word for "knowledge", they'd use "know-how". (Of course using more common words like "knowledge" or "skill" are not good enough, you need something that sounds more sophisticated to the foreign ear, like "know-how".)
It's shibboleths. It signals they're part of the in-group.
performant is more loaded than 'fast'
They're ambiguous words when there's no reason to not be more specific, so either the speaker is lazy or intentionally trying to muddy the waters.