On copy and correctness 2 April 2010
Is politically correct language helping us to protect people’s rights – or confusing the message? One of my friends is in the excellent habit of sharing copy she thinks will interest me. The latest example was content for a leaflet produced by a national organisation. It would be inappropriate to be specific about the nature of the brochure, but what I can say is that the style of copy was classic robot language. Looking at the subject, I could understand why the copy sounded so stilted. It aimed to address a sensitive subject in a way that would not cause offence. But in doing so it seemed to have become dehumanised. Is this the conflict at the heart of of politically correct language? Its goal is to protect people, but the end result frequently turns out to be language that distances and confuses. This isn’t an argument against the value of its intention. I appreciate, for example, that referring to ‘assistance dogs’ is aimed to be more empowering than talking about ‘guide dogs’. But isn’t there a way to respect people’s rights and communicate clearly at the same time? What’s your view?
Written by Camilla Zajac
Camilla Zajac is an award-winning copywriter dedicated to uncovering what’s exciting and unique about organisations and empowering them to communicate that with impact. Learn more about copywriting services from Green Light Copywriting.
