prescription for a prescriptivist
March 10, 2016 6:00 AM Subscribe
Help me convince a prescriptivist AP editor to deviate from AP style.
Our corporate style guide is AP. No house style, no industry-specific or organization-specific tweaks, no caveats for marketing or online work, etc. With one exception (our content marketing site), we bend the rules when it makes sense.
I have been tasked with maintaining/updating the style guide to reflect the reality of non-print, non-longform writing, and I am grateful and excited to own it. I'm a flexible editor and value flow/readability over rules. Our marketing has gotten more creative since I came on board, and I'm doing social and web content too. Nearly everyone is happy.
However, a significant portion of my work is done for another editor who is a strict prescriptivist with regard to AP style. She owns our content marketing site and it is her fiefdom. I am the new kid on the block and I originally had interviewed for her current position - they gave it to her as an internal promotion but loved me so recruited me to take her former position. It's worked out well but I sense a definite turf war, since I am also responsible for researching content marketing trends and basically pointing out what we could do better.
One of the things we can do better is speak to our readers instead of writing pieces that we can then pitch to dailies. I get that AP is important for PR and we're more likely to get picked up if understaffed media outlets can use our content as-is. But AP can be tedious and appear inconsistent to readers, and combined with our industry terms it can be really cumbersome to read. Our cms is supposed to have light, shareable, fun-fact kind of content but that's often incompatible with sticking to a rulesy style guide.
I don't have to have this person on board to change the style guide as a whole - that's going to happen. But I don't want to end up with a guide that our content site doesn't conform to - and more importantly I don't want to keep creating content that doesn't hit its mark because it's formulaic rather than engaging.
I'd appreciate links to any research/articles/discussion about adopting a house style, moving away from AP, writing for readers rather than editors, etc. I'm thinking a research-based presentation with several director/VP decisionmakers in the room is the best way to go, as this person tends to "just say no" to any suggestion about change.
(Please skip the fun snarky prescriptivist vs. descriptivist stuff as there's definitely some personal insecurity here on the part of my nemesis and I have to tread lightly.)
Our corporate style guide is AP. No house style, no industry-specific or organization-specific tweaks, no caveats for marketing or online work, etc. With one exception (our content marketing site), we bend the rules when it makes sense.
I have been tasked with maintaining/updating the style guide to reflect the reality of non-print, non-longform writing, and I am grateful and excited to own it. I'm a flexible editor and value flow/readability over rules. Our marketing has gotten more creative since I came on board, and I'm doing social and web content too. Nearly everyone is happy.
However, a significant portion of my work is done for another editor who is a strict prescriptivist with regard to AP style. She owns our content marketing site and it is her fiefdom. I am the new kid on the block and I originally had interviewed for her current position - they gave it to her as an internal promotion but loved me so recruited me to take her former position. It's worked out well but I sense a definite turf war, since I am also responsible for researching content marketing trends and basically pointing out what we could do better.
One of the things we can do better is speak to our readers instead of writing pieces that we can then pitch to dailies. I get that AP is important for PR and we're more likely to get picked up if understaffed media outlets can use our content as-is. But AP can be tedious and appear inconsistent to readers, and combined with our industry terms it can be really cumbersome to read. Our cms is supposed to have light, shareable, fun-fact kind of content but that's often incompatible with sticking to a rulesy style guide.
I don't have to have this person on board to change the style guide as a whole - that's going to happen. But I don't want to end up with a guide that our content site doesn't conform to - and more importantly I don't want to keep creating content that doesn't hit its mark because it's formulaic rather than engaging.
I'd appreciate links to any research/articles/discussion about adopting a house style, moving away from AP, writing for readers rather than editors, etc. I'm thinking a research-based presentation with several director/VP decisionmakers in the room is the best way to go, as this person tends to "just say no" to any suggestion about change.
(Please skip the fun snarky prescriptivist vs. descriptivist stuff as there's definitely some personal insecurity here on the part of my nemesis and I have to tread lightly.)
(so if you don't have data - you could run some experiments to gather data. Perhaps by releasing the same content in different formats to different segments of your audience and seeing which fares better)
posted by cubby at 6:32 AM on March 10, 2016
posted by cubby at 6:32 AM on March 10, 2016
Is this really about AP style, though? That might be a red herring. It sounds like the current approach is formal, and you'd like to see content that's less formal. And it doesn't sound like this person will shift, even with a top-down decision.
This person might not even really know how to write so differently. Would implementing this require a new person in her job? Could you shift the PR-type content to a more formal "news" portion of the website?
I suspect higher ups might not care about the specifics of AP vs house style, nor would they understand why changing the style would make content more reader friendly.
You are tasked with updating the style guide, but it seems like you want to use that project as a way to change how your colleague does her job. Is that your charge or just what you want? That seems like a round-about way of getting where you want to go.
posted by bluedaisy at 6:43 AM on March 10, 2016 [4 favorites]
This person might not even really know how to write so differently. Would implementing this require a new person in her job? Could you shift the PR-type content to a more formal "news" portion of the website?
I suspect higher ups might not care about the specifics of AP vs house style, nor would they understand why changing the style would make content more reader friendly.
You are tasked with updating the style guide, but it seems like you want to use that project as a way to change how your colleague does her job. Is that your charge or just what you want? That seems like a round-about way of getting where you want to go.
posted by bluedaisy at 6:43 AM on March 10, 2016 [4 favorites]
Alternatively, get examples from competitors who are doing this better. That might make an impact.
posted by bluedaisy at 6:44 AM on March 10, 2016
posted by bluedaisy at 6:44 AM on March 10, 2016
Data. You need data. You need to show how a looser, more informal style impacts readership, click-through, social media shares, and so forth. You need data.
posted by kariebookish at 7:22 AM on March 10, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by kariebookish at 7:22 AM on March 10, 2016 [1 favorite]
Nthing need for data. You might look at Forrester or some other b2b research/data firm to see if they hit this for you --- try their "content marketing playbook". But yeah, if you can run any kind of testing yourself that will be the most helpful thing you could do --- maybe try simple a/b testing with an email blast or something and comparing open rates.
And yeah, I agree getting her to agree to walk away from AP will be key. The overall battle may be larger in scope, but the AP style book is the weapon with which you will be attacked.
posted by Diablevert at 7:28 AM on March 10, 2016
And yeah, I agree getting her to agree to walk away from AP will be key. The overall battle may be larger in scope, but the AP style book is the weapon with which you will be attacked.
posted by Diablevert at 7:28 AM on March 10, 2016
Response by poster: Thanks guys. I know I need data ... that's what I'm asking for. Surely there are studies, essays, research that I can use for benchmarking - I can't do testing internally until higher-ups say to. She will fall in line with forward-thinking VPs, just not with me.
posted by headnsouth at 8:26 AM on March 10, 2016
posted by headnsouth at 8:26 AM on March 10, 2016
Agree with kariebookish, but it sounds to me like you are talking more about voice. A more informal voice can still benefit from adhereing to AP style.
posted by jgirl at 8:58 AM on March 10, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by jgirl at 8:58 AM on March 10, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm having a hard time imagining what a study would look like. If you just formatted different material in different styles and asked people which was more readable, it'd depend heavily on the type of material you used. The AP style is intended for journalism, and it tends to keep things short for copyfitting purposes (and if I'm not misremembering, some of it was even geared toward physical typesetting).
I would suspect that the closest you might get is to take some of your own material and present side-by-side examples of AP-formatted vs. your preferred alternative, whatever that is. There certainly won't be any studies comparing AP to a style guide you haven't written yet.
And be clear about what your preferred alternative is. Is it another style guide, like Chicago, or do you just want to write a whole new corporate guide from the ground up? Keep in mind that, as goofy as it can be to work with in non-journalism contexts (and I have had to do this in the past), the AP style is pretty minimal. When you take out all the generic advice and the libel stuff, there isn't much space left dedicated to the rules. If you were going to propose a change to a different style guide, it is very likely that whatever you suggest is going to have a lot more rules. Chicago, which is the ones I've used most often in corporate settings, is huge and has far more rules to follow than AP. And writing your own from the ground up could come across as reinventing the wheel. A lot of companies will have company specific style outlining things like industry and company terminology to supplement another mass market or industry style guide. I can only think of one (huge, old) company I know of that writes and maintains its own complete style guide, and it's awful and nobody uses it.
I guess I'm having a hard time understanding your question without some examples. What exactly are the issues you have with AP? Style guides mostly dictate things like punctuation and some word choice, and affect the appearance of the text more than the tone of the writing. It's been a minute since I've had to work with AP, though, so maybe I'm forgetting some things.
posted by ernielundquist at 9:20 AM on March 10, 2016 [1 favorite]
I would suspect that the closest you might get is to take some of your own material and present side-by-side examples of AP-formatted vs. your preferred alternative, whatever that is. There certainly won't be any studies comparing AP to a style guide you haven't written yet.
And be clear about what your preferred alternative is. Is it another style guide, like Chicago, or do you just want to write a whole new corporate guide from the ground up? Keep in mind that, as goofy as it can be to work with in non-journalism contexts (and I have had to do this in the past), the AP style is pretty minimal. When you take out all the generic advice and the libel stuff, there isn't much space left dedicated to the rules. If you were going to propose a change to a different style guide, it is very likely that whatever you suggest is going to have a lot more rules. Chicago, which is the ones I've used most often in corporate settings, is huge and has far more rules to follow than AP. And writing your own from the ground up could come across as reinventing the wheel. A lot of companies will have company specific style outlining things like industry and company terminology to supplement another mass market or industry style guide. I can only think of one (huge, old) company I know of that writes and maintains its own complete style guide, and it's awful and nobody uses it.
I guess I'm having a hard time understanding your question without some examples. What exactly are the issues you have with AP? Style guides mostly dictate things like punctuation and some word choice, and affect the appearance of the text more than the tone of the writing. It's been a minute since I've had to work with AP, though, so maybe I'm forgetting some things.
posted by ernielundquist at 9:20 AM on March 10, 2016 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: I guess I'm having a hard time understanding your question without some examples. What exactly are the issues you have with AP?
posted by headnsouth at 9:35 AM on March 10, 2016 [3 favorites]
AP abbreviates St. and Ave. but not Road. In a list of facility locations that looks like a mistake.It's not about these particular changes; they're examples. What I want to put into place is a house style that based on AP but with modifications where it makes sense for us to modify it. For me, consistency within a family of products is much more important than whether you say "1-10" or "one through 10." Our readers don't know AP style.
AP writes out percent instead of using the symbol. When we have an infographic with symbols and copy below it writing out percent, it looks like a mistake.
AP says put a quote attribution at the end of the quote; for multiple sentences, at the end of the first. It makes for clunky reading sometimes, especially since we often include credentials.
AP style uses "icing" for cookies, "frosting" for cakes. We are in a region where people "ice" cakes.
posted by headnsouth at 9:35 AM on March 10, 2016 [3 favorites]
So, on the one hand, you asked for advice on how to convince her. On the other hand, you said:
I don't have to have this person on board to change the style guide as a whole - that's going to happen.
You frame this as turf war.
Now, this may not work, because REASONS, but the best case scenario is that you win her over. Win her trust. Convince her that you are an ally, not someone who is a threat to her.
If you go with the approach you are planning -- I'm thinking a research-based presentation with several director/VP decisionmakers in the room is the best way to go, -- you may win the battle but lose the war. This amounts to going over her head and getting it crammed down her throat.
It might work better to take your research findings directly to her and try to make a clear case for some limited changes, but totally respect her authority to make the decisions.
If you can get buy in on small changes and then make her look good and chat up to theevil overlords people above her how thrilled you were that she was willing to take this chance/back you/whatever, she may eventually come around.
I would start by talking up how slowly established methods are to keep up with change. AP Style is probably behind the times in some areas.
You seem to know AP Style way better than I do. I tried to find something about AP Style and Twitter and all I found was their Twitter account. Does AP Style have rules about tweeting? If not, why not?
If at all possible, find a grey area and say (for example) "I want to handle tweets like thus and such because AP Style doesn't really address or accommodate tweets. The constraint of 140 chars means that writing out the word "percent" takes up an excess of real estate...etc."
Then track results. Try to show her that these changes work.
But when you do presentations to higher ups, make sure she gets credit and is not put in an awkward position.
She needs evidence not only that this works, but that she can trust you. You need to go through her and totally respect her decisions, not go over her head and around her. If you fail to convince her, up your game. Don't act like she is merely a stick in the mud and an obstacle.
You might try getting a copy of "Don't make me think". It is about ux design and that might be a good place to start making your arguments about changing the website: Start from a place if "research shows that cognitive load is a significant constraint on website design...etc" and then argue that AP Style is not optimized for web design and thus and such areas stick out in your mind as a poor fit for the web.
I will try to think of other sources to suggest.
posted by Michele in California at 10:53 AM on March 10, 2016 [2 favorites]
I don't have to have this person on board to change the style guide as a whole - that's going to happen.
You frame this as turf war.
Now, this may not work, because REASONS, but the best case scenario is that you win her over. Win her trust. Convince her that you are an ally, not someone who is a threat to her.
If you go with the approach you are planning -- I'm thinking a research-based presentation with several director/VP decisionmakers in the room is the best way to go, -- you may win the battle but lose the war. This amounts to going over her head and getting it crammed down her throat.
It might work better to take your research findings directly to her and try to make a clear case for some limited changes, but totally respect her authority to make the decisions.
If you can get buy in on small changes and then make her look good and chat up to the
I would start by talking up how slowly established methods are to keep up with change. AP Style is probably behind the times in some areas.
You seem to know AP Style way better than I do. I tried to find something about AP Style and Twitter and all I found was their Twitter account. Does AP Style have rules about tweeting? If not, why not?
If at all possible, find a grey area and say (for example) "I want to handle tweets like thus and such because AP Style doesn't really address or accommodate tweets. The constraint of 140 chars means that writing out the word "percent" takes up an excess of real estate...etc."
Then track results. Try to show her that these changes work.
But when you do presentations to higher ups, make sure she gets credit and is not put in an awkward position.
She needs evidence not only that this works, but that she can trust you. You need to go through her and totally respect her decisions, not go over her head and around her. If you fail to convince her, up your game. Don't act like she is merely a stick in the mud and an obstacle.
You might try getting a copy of "Don't make me think". It is about ux design and that might be a good place to start making your arguments about changing the website: Start from a place if "research shows that cognitive load is a significant constraint on website design...etc" and then argue that AP Style is not optimized for web design and thus and such areas stick out in your mind as a poor fit for the web.
I will try to think of other sources to suggest.
posted by Michele in California at 10:53 AM on March 10, 2016 [2 favorites]
Have you thought about looking at data journalism and infographics? This seems to be where the industry is headed with marketing materials. There are lots of articles on the web about this that you could approach your colleague with.
posted by Beethoven's Sith at 2:33 PM on March 10, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Beethoven's Sith at 2:33 PM on March 10, 2016 [1 favorite]
Oh, thank you! Those are, indeed, pretty wacky conventions.
Maybe, if you're looking for a general approach, frame it as unique requirements for the type of material you're publishing as opposed to the print journalism style that the AP manual is designed for. AP style is geared toward a general, non-technical audience reading short, non-technical news stories that are often printed in narrow columns.
It may make sense to spell out 'percent' in a news story, where maybe a % might look out of place. I have no explanation for the Road vs. St. thing, or for the AP even having an opinion on icing vs. frosting, but: WEIRD.
Your third example, attribution, is the clearest illustration of the difference between journalism and tech writing. In a news article, the primary focus is on the 'news' aspect, so quoting sources and establishing their credentials is key. In any kind of technical writing, though, the primary focus is on the technology (or, you know, whatever your source topic is). It matters much less who said what, and in fact, even in press releases, quotes are often made up by the writer and just attributed to company representatives. Quotes are attributed in news articles as a sort of hedge, giving the speaker the credit or the blame for the accuracy of what they're saying. So it's the source is making the assertion, not the writer. That is not applicable in official corporate communications, and that style should be loosened considerably to reflect that. I could argue that that style might even convey some degree of skepticism for what the source is saying.
posted by ernielundquist at 5:21 PM on March 10, 2016 [1 favorite]
Maybe, if you're looking for a general approach, frame it as unique requirements for the type of material you're publishing as opposed to the print journalism style that the AP manual is designed for. AP style is geared toward a general, non-technical audience reading short, non-technical news stories that are often printed in narrow columns.
It may make sense to spell out 'percent' in a news story, where maybe a % might look out of place. I have no explanation for the Road vs. St. thing, or for the AP even having an opinion on icing vs. frosting, but: WEIRD.
Your third example, attribution, is the clearest illustration of the difference between journalism and tech writing. In a news article, the primary focus is on the 'news' aspect, so quoting sources and establishing their credentials is key. In any kind of technical writing, though, the primary focus is on the technology (or, you know, whatever your source topic is). It matters much less who said what, and in fact, even in press releases, quotes are often made up by the writer and just attributed to company representatives. Quotes are attributed in news articles as a sort of hedge, giving the speaker the credit or the blame for the accuracy of what they're saying. So it's the source is making the assertion, not the writer. That is not applicable in official corporate communications, and that style should be loosened considerably to reflect that. I could argue that that style might even convey some degree of skepticism for what the source is saying.
posted by ernielundquist at 5:21 PM on March 10, 2016 [1 favorite]
Surely there are studies, essays, research that I can use for benchmarking - I can't do testing internally until higher-ups say to. She will fall in line with forward-thinking VPs, just not with me.
It's possible that there are and I've missed them, but I had a look through my usual sources for this stuff and couldn't find much. Not anything as specific as what you need, which is basically "hard evidence the AP style guide sucks sometimes." There's plenty of studies on things like length of subject line and adding in calls to action and so forth, and plenty of anecdote-endorsed declarations about the importance of a clear consistent brand voice, but nothing as nitty-gritty as "here are the numbers on % vs. percent."
Might one way around this be to approach the VPs asking to test, rather than saying "I know this way is better so here's how we're going to do it, suck it up?" E.g., say "I'm working on some changes to the style guide to ensure we have a consistent tone and voice across our content. My feeling based on my experiences with X, Y and Z that we've done is that pushing us in a slightly less formal direction would help with engagement. Before we push through any major changes, I was thinking we might run a few test emails like so to see how this impacts open rates, etc."
posted by Diablevert at 7:37 PM on March 10, 2016
It's possible that there are and I've missed them, but I had a look through my usual sources for this stuff and couldn't find much. Not anything as specific as what you need, which is basically "hard evidence the AP style guide sucks sometimes." There's plenty of studies on things like length of subject line and adding in calls to action and so forth, and plenty of anecdote-endorsed declarations about the importance of a clear consistent brand voice, but nothing as nitty-gritty as "here are the numbers on % vs. percent."
Might one way around this be to approach the VPs asking to test, rather than saying "I know this way is better so here's how we're going to do it, suck it up?" E.g., say "I'm working on some changes to the style guide to ensure we have a consistent tone and voice across our content. My feeling based on my experiences with X, Y and Z that we've done is that pushing us in a slightly less formal direction would help with engagement. Before we push through any major changes, I was thinking we might run a few test emails like so to see how this impacts open rates, etc."
posted by Diablevert at 7:37 PM on March 10, 2016
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by cubby at 6:29 AM on March 10, 2016 [3 favorites]