The New Doublespeak: Why No One Knows What Anyone's Saying Anymore 0060171340, 9780060171346

Citation preview

USA CANADA

when

ave you ever been confused

H

you’re

when your

enhance-

boss says you’re not

“transitioned”

been

you’ve

Doublespeak

or

“uninstalled”?

language that

fired,

Then

doublespeak.

of

victim

a

$32.50

politicians

refer to a tax increase as “revenue

ment,” or

$23.00

is

evasive, deceptive,

self-contradictory, or misleading.

Doublespeak turns

told

lies

is

by

politicians into “strategic misrepresenta-

augmentation,” or “terminological inex-

tions,” “reality

actitudes.” Killing

enemy

soldiers

“servicing the target,” after

dead are

called

is

a simple matter of

which the bodies of the

“decommissioned aggressor quantum.”

After being treated with doublespeak, ordinary

sewage

sludge becomes “regulated organic nutrients” that do not stink but merely “exceed the odor threshold.” In this lively sequel to his bestselling Doublespeak:

From Revenue Enhancement William Lutz exposes the

to

Terminal Living

doublespeak

latest

meates what passes for communication

shows

Lutz

our society

We may

that the pervasive use of is

in

,

that per-

our society.

doublespeak

contributing to a communications

in

crisis.

we know what we’re saying to each other, but too often we don’t. Worse, we continue on our way believing that we really do know what we’re think

saying and hearing. Lutz combats doublespeak by dissecting

how

works and

it

and a

how

how

and

als,

a society,

we

see ourselves and the world.

nation,

affects us as individu-

it

Most important, Lutz explains feel

it

affects the

way

why we don’t have to

powerless in the face of such language, explaining

that there are a great fight

number

doublespeak and bring

sist in

using

it.

He

details

to

of things

we

can do to

account those

how

who per-

our schools can teach

(continued on back flap) 0796P

Digitized by the Internet Archive in

2017 with funding from

Kahle/Austin Foundation

https://archive.org/details/newdoublespeakwhOOIutz

le

New Doublespeak

Also by William Lutz Doublespeak: From Terminal Living

to

Revenue Enhancement

Why No One Knows What Anyone’s Saying Anymore

William Lutz

HarperCoWinsPublishers

THE NEW DOUBLESPEAK. Copyright

©

1996 by William Lutz. All rights

reserved. Printed in the United States of America.

No

part of this

book may

be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission except in the case of brief quotations embodied in

critical articles

For information address HarperCollins Publishers,

New York, NY HarperCollins books

may be

Inc.,

and reviews.

10 East 53rd Street,

10022.

purchased for educational, business, or

sales

promotional use. For information please write: Special Markets Department, HarperCollins Publishers,

Inc.,

10 East 53rd Street,

New York, NY

FIRST EDITION

Designed by Irving Perkins Associates,

ISBN

96 97 98 99 00

Inc.

0-06-017134-0

/RRD

10

987654321

10022.

For

Barb and Lyle

Maureen and John Sharon and Dave Sisters, brothers, friends

Contents

Preface

1

.

ix

The Power and Problems

of Language

2.

Language and the Interpretation of Reality

3.

Abstracting

4.

The Doublespeak

of Law

5.

The Doublespeak

of Business and

Our Way

into

Doublespeak

Economics 6.

The Doublespeak and

7.

8.

1

27 57

85

115 of Government

Politics

151

How to Fight Doublespeak

191

Doublespeak Quiz

219

Notes

223

Selected Bibliography

235

Index

239

In 1946, three years before the publication of Nineteen Eighty-

George

Four

*,

“Politics

“The

published

his

and the English Language,”

great

there

Orwell

enemy of

clear language

now-famous

which he noted,

in is

essay,

When

insincerity.

a gap between one’s real and one’s declared aims,

is

one turns

as

it

exhausted idioms,

were

instinctively

to

long words

and

1

out ink.” Orwell

like a cuttlefish squirting

claimed that instead of being “an instrument for expressing thought,” language

had become a means

“for concealing or

preventing thought,” 2 a means not to extend but to diminish the range of thought.

The consequences

of

this

development were,

for Orwell,

quite simple: “if thought corrupts language, language can also

corrupt thought.” Orwell charged, “In our time, political

and

speech

indefensible.

writing .

.

.

Thus

are

largely

political

the

defence

of

the

language has to consist largely

of euphemisms, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness.

.

.

truthful

.

Political

language ...

and murder

is

respectable,

of solidity to pure wind.”

2

IX

designed to

and

make

to give

lies

sound

an appearance

Preface

I

described has

language

in

an age when the language Orwell

become

the language of public discourse, the

we

think

we

live

use to conduct the essential business of our

nation. For this reason,

talking about,

and we

I

certainly

Our

ing to one another.

think

we have no

that, like

an

public language has

the stage, removes

on with

its

We may

become

its

a lan-

as openness, a lan-

an

actor, plays a role to achieve

an audience, and once that

what we’re

have no idea what we’re say-

guage of deception that masquerades guage

idea

effect

on

has been achieved, leaves

effect

costume and makeup, and then goes

real business.

we know what we’re saying to one another, but as I hope I show in this book, too often we don’t. Worse, we continue on our way believing that we really do know think

what we’re

saying.

Alan Greenspan

is

Does anyone

is

what

saying? No, because Greenspan says

nothing, and prides himself

pretends he

actually understand

on saying nothing.

saying something.

Members

Yet everyone

of Congress

him about what he says, reporters report what he says, commentators comment on what he says, and we all go merrily along talking to one another about what Alan question

Greenspan

says.

And we do

knowing what we’re

The doublespeak

the lives of

all

the while not really

all

talking about.

of Alan Greenspan

of the public language the language of the

this,

I

examine

in this

is

just

book.

one example I

Supreme Court, a language

of us, yet a language that

is

look also

at

that affects

as false, deceptive,

misleading, and contradictory as any language found in Nineteen Eighty-Four, or

on any used-car

x

lot. I

examine

also the

language of economics, a

of study that has

field

come

to

on every person on the planet, as I hope I make clear, filled with

exert tremendous influence

yet a field of study that

is,

a language of utter nonsense that passes Finally, there

is

politics,

an area we have come

be

filled

be

free of doublespeak, politics

with doublespeak. Yet

more important than of our nation?

affairs

if

any area of our that field, for

is

the language

To concede

conducted in doublespeak continued

deterioration

itself off as

is,

we

to expect to lives

should

what can be

use to conduct the

that politics will always think, to

I

wisdom.

be

concede that the

and corruption of our

political

ness of

we want to rescue and with it the means by which we conduct the busiour nation, then we need to rescue the language of

politics

from the corruption of doublespeak.

processes are inevitable and irreversible. If politics,

Language

not irrelevant to

is

ordered society;

guage leads

it is

essential.

the

The

foundations

irresponsible use of lan-

to the destruction of the social, moral,

cal structure that

irresponsible

use

is

our

society,

and

politi-

our culture, our nation.

of language

ordered, just, moral society.

of an

corrupts

the

core

The

of an

Those who misuse language

to

mislead and deceive contribute to the destruction of the belief in the role of language in the

life

of the nation, and to

the destruction of the nation.

We

must

fight to reassert the

primacy of the responsible

use of language by everyone, from individual citizen to ical leader.

We

must

fight to

make

polit-

the responsible use of lan-

guage the norm, the requirement, for the conduct of public affairs.

We

must

fight to

make

xi

the language of public dis-

Preface

course illuminate not obscure, lead not mislead, include not

We can restore language to its proper role in public discourse. We not only can, we must. exclude, build not destroy.

Acknowledgments

My

thanks to Jean Naggar for believing in

me, and for her support during the struggle

Hugh Van Dusen

completion.

thanks to

him

for his support

to bring

it

to

demonstrated great

also

patience and understanding during the

My

book, and in

this

and

of

life

this project.

for his gracious

and

generous grant of time. To Harry Brent and Louise Klusek

owe more than

I

can ever pay. Only such dear friends would

give so freely not just of their support

but their home. For as

my

I

all

writing place,

I

the times they

thank them.

and encouragement,

let

me

Finally,

use their

my

home

debt to

my

beyond payment. She taught me so much about language and its importance. While I under-

wife,

Denise Gess,

stood language with it

also with

exist

my

without

is

my

mind, she taught

heart. In so

many

her.

Xll

ways,

me

this

to

understand

book would not

1 The Power and Problems of Language

ITEM: U.S.

In an extensive advertising campaign, the

Postal

Service

said

that

its

Priority Mail” service could deliver a

“Two Day two-pound

package in two days for $2.90. But a congressional report discovered that 23 percent of the

mail in the program took three days to deliver.

When

asked about

advertising

and the

this

discrepancy between the

Robin Marin would call Priority

actual service,

of the postal service replied:

“I

Mail a delivery commitment, but not a guarantee.”

1

1

The New Doublespeak ITEM: The

monitoring arms

sible for

was

U.S. State Department agency respon-

called the Office of

sales to foreign countries

Munitions Control.

When

Bush Administration began a campaign to sell more arms to other countries, that name was the

changed

to the

Center for Defense Trade. 2

ITEM: Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun, in his dissent in the Council

,

1993 case

Sale

v.

Haitian Centers

observed, “Today’s majority

.

.

.

decides

that the forced repatriation of the Haitian refugees is

word

perfectly legal, because the

not

mean

‘return’

does

return, because the opposite of ‘within

the United States’

and because the

is

not outside the United States,

charged with controlling

official

immigration has no role in enforcing an order to control immigration.”

3

ITEM:

Originally the U.S.

Patriot

missile

Army

“intercepted”

claimed that the

forty-five

army

of forty-

seven Scud missiles, but

later the

Patriot missile intercepted

between 40 percent and

70 percent of the Scuds. President that Patriot missiles

had

Bush claimed

killed forty-one of forty-

two Scud warheads they had

mony

said the

targeted. In

testi-

before a congressional committee, Brigadier

General Robert Drolet was asked to explain President

Bush was

correct.

2

if

General Drolet said

The Power and Problems of Language

the claim

was

“did not say

was

still

‘killed’

“intercepted.”

or ‘destroyed.’”

And what

What he

does the army

by “intercept”? Replied General Drolet, “A and Scud passed in the sky.” 4

ITEM:

just

Patriot

mean

Wars

the Star

said

mean

Secretary of Defense Les Aspin’s

announcement of “the end of didn’t

Bush

correct because President

1993 era”

Wars program was dead. It name had been changed from the

the Star

meant the

Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) to the Ballistic

Missile Defense Organization

(BMDO). Even

the

$3.8 billion budget remained the same. In other

words, Star Wars just continued under a different

As Frank Gaffney, a former Defense Department official, said: “It’s sort of rearranging name.

the deck chairs.”

As

5

these examples illustrate,

doublespeak continues to

dominate what passes for public discourse

in this nation.

Indeed, doublespeak has not simply increased in quantity,

has increased in quality. Doublespeak

now

it

goes far beyond

such simple phrases as “work reengineering” for laying off workers,

and “economical with the Doublespeak has become increasingly com-

“neutralize”

truth” for lying. plex, subtle,

and

for

kill,

difficult to penetrate.

3

The New Doublespeak A

Doublespeak

is

really doesn’t.

Description of Doublespeak

language that pretends to communicate but language that makes the bad seem good,

It is

the negative appear positive, the unpleasant appear attractive

or at least tolerable. Doublespeak

is

language that avoids or

language that

is

at

shifts responsibility,

or purported meaning.

It is

variance with

real

its

language that conceals or pre-

vents thought; rather than extending thought, doublespeak limits

it.

Doublespeak ing;

is

and

facts agreeing. Basic to

incongruity, the incongruity

unsaid,

left

not a matter of subjects and verbs agree-

a matter of words

it is

blespeak or

is

and what

between the word and the between the

really

referent,

essential function of

and what doublespeak does: inflate,

is.

between what

It

is

language— communication— mislead,

“terminological

said

between seems and be,

distort,

politicians into “strategic misrepresentations,”

or

is

the incongruity

circumvent, obfuscate. Doublespeak turns

mentation,”

dou-

deceive,

lies

told

by

“reality aug-

inexactitudes,”

and turns

ordinary sewage sludge into “regulated organic nutrients” that

do not

stink but “exceed the

odor threshold.”

As doublespeak fills our public discourse, we have become more and more hardened to its presence. Our tolerance for doublespeak has increased along with the growth of doublespeak.

While the simpler examples such

bribes

and kickbacks, “mental

insanity,

as “sales credits” for

activity at the

and “transportation counselors”

4

margins” for

for people

who

sell

The Power and Problems of Language

cars

still

skillful

usually

and

elicit

some contemptuous remarks,

the

more

forms of doublespeak too often pass

subtle

More importantly, they pass to the way in which they insult

unchallenged and unanalyzed. with no one calling attention

our

intelligence,

undermine

that

corrupt public discourse, and ultimately

which holds us together

as a nation.

The Importance of Language

Language

mean

is

the glue that holds us together,

and by “us”

not just the United States as a nation but

beings.

Without language we would have no

human

society of

Human

any kind.

all

I

human no

nations,

society can exist only

because of the phenomenon of language.

Language

human

is

also the

primary tool for the survival of the

Compared sorry lot when

species.

are a pretty

purely physical capabilities.

many

humans it comes to survival based upon But with language humans can

to

and have survived, sometimes non-language capable

species.

other animals,

to the detriment of

Language builds

society as well as providing the

means

many

culture

and

for survival in

an

often hostile environment.

Like anything that sive in

our

lives,

is

so important, so basic, and so perva-

language

is

goes unnoticed. Like the air

taken for granted and often

we

breathe,

necessary for our survival, language

5

is

and

as absolutely

simply there for us to

The New Doublespeak use.

But just

as

we have

learned that

we

tion to the quality of the air to learn to

pay attention

we need

to

pay

atten-

we need language we

breathe each day, so

to the quality of the

use each day. I

do not mean

that

we should

up our language”

“clean

in

we speak “proper” English, whatever that might be. Or that we should pronounce words correctly, whatever a correct pronunciation is. Nor do I mean that we the sense that

should avoid

all

obscene, vulgar, or improper language, what-

ever that might be.

What

do mean

I

is

that

we should

insist

that public language, the language of public discourse, the

language affairs,

we

use as a society and a nation to run our public

should be as

clear,

complete, and direct as possible.

Language and Reality

Whenever people— politicians,

citizens,

news anchors, or anyone engaging an opinion, we should

ment

television

in public discourse— voice

they include the clear

insist that

state-

that their language simply reflects reality as they see

words, and what they say

Their words are

that, just

reality, just their

version of

and even the obligation

I

believe there

believe that

we can

all

not

then have the right

to evaluate their

words, their version

hasten to add here that

reality.

is

it.

We

reality.

of reality, and determine whether I

pundits,

is

I

am

we

agree with them.

not denying the existence of

a “there” out there.

agree on a lot of that

6

And

reality.

I

also

You and

The Power and Problems of Language

I

can both see the cars on the highway, the

the potholes in the streets,

trees in the forest,

and the rain on the window.

I

find nothing to debate in perceiving reality.

However, something happens when we perceive

and then that’s

interpret that reality

by means of language. And

what we do with language:

one of

us, see

each of us uses

and experience

interpret reality as we, each reality.

personal interpretation of the world as sense distortion

Thus, the language

not reality but a representation of

is

is

reality

we know

reality,

it.

a

In this

inherent in the very act of using language.

As Werner Heisenberg noted, “what we observe is not nature itself but nature exposed to our method of questioning .” It is precisely because each of us sees and experiences the world differently that language becomes our most important means for coming to some kind of agreement on our 6

individual experiences,

on how we

Let’s take a simple example.

know

a doll

when you

see the world.

A

see one.

doll

is

a doll, right?

You

But when the Mattel toy

company started importing G.I. Joe action figures, the U.S. Customs people were not amused. Those are dolls and subject to the import tariff on dolls, claimed the customs people. Not at all, replied Mattel, these are action figures because these are for boys to play with. Since boys don’t play with dolls, these can’t

be

an eight-year court

dolls,

they must be action figures. After version of reality lost to

battle, Mattel’s

Customs version and G.I. Joe dolls are now subject to the import tariff on dolls. Mattel pays the tariff, but it still puts the label “action figure” on G.I. Joe and calls Joe an the U.S.

“action figure” in

all its

advertising

7

7 .

The New Doublespeak So what is

is

Joe?

A doll or an action figure? As

whatever we decide to

Customs Joe Joe Joe,

is

an action

and

For

figure.

its

little

advertising agency

boys

who

play with

probably an action figure because

This disagreement over what

dolls.

leads us to the

the

all

their parents, he’s

boys don’t play with call Joe

him. For the courts and U.S.

call

a doll. For Mattel and

is

we’ll see, Joe

problem of fuzziness

to

in language.

The Fuzziness of Some Labels

Whenever we

try to categorize a person, thing, or event

we

run into a problem inherent in language, when words

become,

put

as linguists

problem sometimes try to pin

it,

“indeterminate at the margins,” a

called fuzziness.

something

down

That

to a specific

whenever we

is,

word, to pin a label

on something, to place something into a category, we run into the problem of fuzziness. We run into this problem all the time, every day of our lives.

shaggy dog joke

is

built

on

dog shaggy or isn’t it? Another way of looking recall Alfred

might

say

scientists

T,’

ics

is, it isn’t.

included,

is

it

David

work on contemporary say a thing

problem of

line in the

fuzziness. Is the

at the fuzziness

problem

to

is

Korzybski’s observations that “Whatever one

something

echoed by

the

The punch

.

.

is

not

”8

Korzybski’s

Bohm and David

comment

Peat in their

theories of physics: “whatever .

is

we

[Ejvery kind of thought, mathemat-

an abstraction which does not and cannot

8

The Power and Problems of Language

.” 9

Whenever we label, classify, or describe, we distort because the word we choose cannot fully represent the complexity of the reality we are trying to describe, and because a word can represent only our perception of reality and not what exists. The painter Rene cover the whole of

reality.

Magritte illustrated

this principle in his

.

.

pipe: “Ceci nest pas une pipe” (“This text at the

bottom of the

painting of a pipe.

and not the

It is

not a pipe ”) 10 states the

painting. Magritte’s pipe

is

only a

not the real pipe but only a painting

The word

object.

is

famous painting of a

“pipe”

is

only a word and not

the object.

my

I like

my

coffee hot;

say the handle of the pot it

with her bare hand.

orange.

What

I

say the car

I

is

wife says

my

I

my wife grabs my wife says it is

say the shirt

is

red;

small; the salesman calls

is

scalding.

is

too hot to touch;

passes for a mountain in the

foothill in the

coffee

Midwest

it

mid-sized.

is

called a

West.

same object, action, or event but come up with quite a different word as the label for what we see or experience. A psychiatrist was giving a Rorschach Each of us can

see the

man. As you probably know, the test conof showing a series of inkblots to a person and asking

inkblot test to a sists

the person to identify the first

inkblot, the

love, the

door,

says,

At

third a picture of a

this

sees in each inkblot.

a picture of a couple

is

second a picture of a nude

and the

in hand.

man

image he

woman

The

making

behind a shower

naked couple walking hand

point the psychiatrist observes, “You seem to

have an obsession with

sex,” to

you’re the one showing

me

all

which the

man

replies,

these dirty pictures.”

9

“Hey,

The New Doublespeak Think of

An

problem.

this

“vehicles” into the public park.

probably

agree

excluded under

that this

cycles, children’s

cars,

ordinance forbids bringing

What

a vehicle?

is

We would

and motorcycles

trucks,

are

ordinance, but what about bicycles,

wagons, baby carriages, a

Or what about

tri-

child’s toy auto-

war memorial? To settle these questions of language, we usually do one of two things: In the original ordinance we list what we mean and don’t mean by the word “vehicle,” thus trying to remove all fuzziness, and making the ordinance read like a shopping list; or we wait until someone brings something mobile?

a military tank used as a

we call Then we go

into the park that

a vehicle

a vehicle.

to court

isn’t

word

“vehicle”

Two

means

and ask a judge what the

in this instance.

people did go to court

Service disagreed with

The husband and

and the user maintains 11

when

what they

called their violin

wife violinists, both

members of

York Philharmonic, depreciated the value of as tools of their trade.

Not

so

fast,

Revenue

the Internal

their

said the IRS.

bows.

the

two bows

Those bows

aren’t tools, they’re collectible art objects because they

made by

who

is

Francois Tourte, the master French

considered the

Stradivari

increase in value each year,

of

bow

and they don’t

So what do you say? Are those bows or are they “art objects”? Both Federal

New

were

bow maker

makers;

they

deteriorate.

“tools of the trade,”

Tax Court and

the

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit agreed that- the

bows

are “tools of the trade,”

and the two

violinists

depreciate their value for a deduction of $3,000. label can cost or save

you a

lot

10

of money, which

The is

could right

just

one

The Power and Problems of Language

reason that the power to label

Much

is

a very important power. 12

of the litigation in our courts centers on determin-

ing what words apply to an action, situation, or object. the payments “sales incentives” or bribes

Was

it

a

lie

and kickbacks?

or a “strategic misrepresentation”?

bery or an “unauthorized withdrawal”?

Were

Was

Was it

it

a rob-

murder or

self-defense?

The words we

use to ask questions or to label an issue will

influence our answers or alter the poll taken in

way we

see the issue.

A

1990 by the National Opinion Research Center

of the University of Chicago found that only 24 percent of

more money should be spent on but 68 percent were willing to spend more on

those surveyed thought “welfare,”

“assistance for the poor.” Likewise, those surveyed were will-

ing to spend

more

for “national defense”

and

“assistance to

other countries,” but they were not willing to spend the “military” or “foreign aid.”

How We

For the most part

13

Heal With Fuzziness

we go through our

only minor problems with labeling.

what

I

mean by

hot coffee, just as

means by hot

coffee.

dle of a pot

my

potholder. shirt,

but

We I

still

know

I

more on

I

daily lives experiencing

My

wife has learned

have learned what she

have also learned not

wife has just

don’t agree a small car

on

grab the han-

moved without the color of

when

11

to

I

see

it,

benefit of

my red/orange

no matter what

The New Doublespeak the car salesman

and

mountain when

see one.

I

the advertising says.

all

And

I

know

a

However, we may have more serious problems with other labels in

our

Labeling poison gas an “inhalation haz-

lives.

ard” could get us killed. Using the phrase “penile insertive

behavior” to discuss sexual intercourse between teenagers

might lead us

and

social

to

minimize or ignore the moral implications

consequences of

behavior. Labeling nuclear

this

waste “valuable, important nuclear materials” and a nuclear waste false

dump

“monitored retrievable storage” can give us a

sense of security in dealing with nuclear waste, and the

huge problems we important. to

face in

They can be

pay attention

all

of us,

Understanding one another

we would

to

a matter of

words,

to

what

is

life

all

a lot

would be nice unchanging meanings, and if words like.

idea or thing.

It

We

would

all

do with

Words are so we need

it.

or death,

the time.

more complicated than if words had precise, clearly referred to

one

learn these words, each of us

would use them in exactly the same way, and we would all agree on what to call things. Instead, there are the words I use to label things and the words you use. uses different words,

we have

When

work hard

to

each of us

to reach

some

kind of agreement.

While we pay a about what

to call

ment about what

lot

of attention to

some

things,

the disagreement

we do have

a lot of agree-

we didn’t, we would come apart.

to call a lot of things. If

much done and our society most part, we call a dollar bill a dollar

wouldn’t get For the

all

called a shoe, a

dog

is

called a

12

bill,

dog and not a

a shoe cat,

is

and

The Power and Problems of Language

Monday

We

is

Monday and

called

on December 25, and that December 25. If we didn’t agree on

agree that Christmas

December 25

called

is

we we

these kinds of things,

not Sunday by everybody

is

couldn’t conduct our daily

lives.

From time to time temporarily change the meaning of some commonly agreed upon words. At my university, for example, we regularly change the days of the week for scheduling purposes. So the class schedule often has something like the following notice: “Thursday classes will meet

on Tuesday, November 21, and all Friday classes will meet on Wednesday, November 22.” Since this change in the days of the week is made by agreement, no one has any problem following it. But if some of us decided that Sunday is Friday, and Friday is Sunday, we’d have some confusion. When some elected officials decide to call a tax increase “revenue enhancement,” “receipts strengthening,” or “user fees,”

we have an

sion. If I

am

instance of labeling that

told that

probably

call

enhancement.

And

will

my

my tax bill will

that

a

enhancement.”

The

to use

is

doublespeak.

“tax increase”

politicians,

however,

I

and not revenue

fellow taxpaying citizens will agree that

go up the best label

for discus-

go up $300 next year,

tax increase

I will call it

open

is

I

think most of

when

their taxes

and not “revenue insist that

we

are

wrong.

What do we do? label

everyone

labels, tion.

we come to some agreement on a or we continue each to use our own

Either

will use,

with the resulting disagreement and lack of coopera-

Of

course,

I

think that politicians

who

persist in using

terms like “revenue enhancement” in the face of overwhelm-

13

The New Doublespeak ing opposition should pay a price for using such language,

but too often they don’t. Even more often they simply

change

new

their label,

moving from “revenue enhancement”

such as “receipts proposals.”

label

When

The power

demonstrates.

Is

a Chicken Fresh?

can bring large financial rewards, as the

to label

continuing battle

isn’t

over

Now,

a problem here.

to

versus

“fresh”

“frozen”

mere mortals such

We know when

chickens

as us, there really

a chicken

is

frozen.

one of those laws of physics that the freezing point chicken

to a

is

It’s

for a

26 degrees Fahrenheit. We’re not talking rocket

science here.

When

I

look in

my

chicken right away. But then

I

freezer I can spot a frozen

don’t

work

for the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, where the laws of physics can be changed by government decree, or regulation, or doublespeak.

When

is

a frozen chicken a “fresh” chicken?

When

it’s

a

“deep chilled” chicken. For quite a few years the U.S.

Department of Agriculture has allowed poultry producers label as “fresh” chickens that to

make

pretty

good bowling

to 0 degrees Fahrenheit.

to

have been frozen hard enough balls,

frozen

all

the

way down

Frank Perdue, the poultry tycoon,

even ran television commercials in which he used a competitor’s

“fresh” chicken to

hammer

a nail into a board. But

such chickens are not frozen, says the

14

USDA;

they are

The Power and Problems of Language

merely “deep

And

chilled.”

that included chickens that

were

frozen solid, then thawed and sold as “fresh.” Since “there

or no market for poultry that cannot

is little

be labeled or marketed

as ‘fresh,’” according to the National

Broiler Council, the chicken dealers trade association, the

pressure After

is

on

to

keep the label “fresh” on frozen chickens.

much

“fresh” chickens sell for as

all,

as

$2 a pound

more than chickens labeled “frozen.” That works out to about $1 billion moving from consumers’ pockets to the pockets of those

who

sell

ment-approved “fresh”

When the is

frozen chickens under a govern-

label.

state of California

a frozen chicken and

it

decided that a frozen chicken

didn’t care

what

the

US DA

and

the poultry dealers said, the National Broiler Council sued in federal court,

laws.

“We

and won because

federal rules

preempt

state

affirm this absurdity,” wrote the court. “Congress

has given federal bureaucrats the power to order that frozen chickens be labeled fresh.”

But the until, in

that

fight against frozen “fresh”

chickens continued

response to complaints that calling “fresh” a chicken

had once been a

solid block of ice

was

just a

labels.

They proposed

any chicken

that

mis-

recommend

leading, the folks at Agriculture decided to

change in

little

a

that has

seen the low side of 26 degrees Fahrenheit should be labeled

“hard

chilled.”

mounted

poultry folks

a big effort to get the

labeling effort. get the

The

were not happy and

US DA

While the poultry

folks

USDA to change the proposed

“previously frozen.”

15

to

change

didn

t

this radical

win, they did

“hard chilled” label to

The New Doublespeak But even

this

change was too

much

for the poultry people,

so they went directly to the source of

all linguistic

wisdom:

Congress. Led by Virginia Senator John Warner, nineteen senators from the poultry-producing states in the Southeast

on no change in the labeling of frozen chickens. So Congress, in its wisdom, rejected the proposed change and let stand the current regulation. So you got Congress to decide

can

drive nails or go bowling with an official “fresh”

still

chicken

14 .

Language, of course,

is

the great tool of power.

That

is

the

point George Orwell makes in his classic novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Mao

Tse-tung was wrong; power doesn’t

from the barrel of a gun. Power language.

in

Those who know how

great power.

Doublespeak

is

an

modern to use

come

society resides in

language can wield

effective use of the

language

of power, the language of control, the language of manipulation.

The Mind’s

Interpreter and Doublespeak

Research conducted by Michael Gazzaniga and offers evidence for

speak. Gazzaniga

brain and mind.

mind

is

beliefs .”

many

others

one explanation for a source of double-

and other researchers distinguish between

The

brain

is

the physical organ, while the

the “rational processes that lead to the formation of 15

According

to these researchers, the brain

16

is

organized in

The Power and Problems of Language

modules composed of many subsystems, each processing data outside conscious awareness. These subsystems create moods and mood changes, cause us to behave certain ways,

and produce cognitive subconscious

activity All this activity goes

on

at a

level.

Through a system researchers call the “interpreter,” the mind tries to bring order and unity to the functions of the modules that make up the brain. The job of the interpreter is to monitor, synthesize, and make sense out of all this activity and what

it

And

produces.

through language that the

is

it

interpreter works.

The results

when

of the activity in the brain’s subsystems. That

confronted

with

the

And

sense out of them.

function of the interpreter

explanations

plausible

knows nothing. So

for

Thus we

we

interesting results.

our behavior, often

in terms that

scious

mind knows nothing of

it

really

rather unscrupu-

knows nothexplaining what

about which

we do

mind with

about which

the interpreter acts

rationalize

make some

to present the

is

actions

lously, blithely explaining things ing.

some

this leads to

to

tries

is,

subconscious

of the

results

processes of the brain, the interpreter

The

and express the

interpreter uses language to label

accept as true, even

it

when our

con-

behind our

the motives

behavior.

Gazzaniga example,

The

many examples

we just happen

interpreter has

frogs’ legs,

way.

offers

The

but

it

interpreter

this

phenomenon. For

to eat frogs’ legs for the first time.

no idea why

will

of

there

was an impulse

to eat

go ahead and produce a reason any“instantly

17

constructs

a

theory

to

The New Doublespeak explain

why

know why

does not actually frogs’ legs,”

it

selves saying

While the

the behavior occurred.

some

something

like, “I ate

learn about French food .”

16

was an impulse

there

will create

reason. So

American “It

find our-

want

to

At one time or another we’ve

all

wondering

to

similar,

I

came from. Perhaps that’s what led the in Vietnam to utter that famous statement,

officer

to destroy the village to save

interpreter, then,

it.”

can be a great source of doublespeak,

providing us with language to rationalize our actions. actions

by the

to eat

it

became necessary

The

we might

them because

found ourselves muttering something ourselves where

interpreter

and language interpreter

becomes the great

conflict,

to

we have doublespeak produced

rationalize

counterfeiter of

and the doublespeak

is

When

and soothe. Doublespeak

human

actions

and motives,

produced by the interpreter

attempts to explain actions about which

it

knows

in

its

nothing.

Doublespeak and Belief Persistence

Researchers have also belief

shown

that

we

will persist in

holding a

even when presented with information that disproves

the belief. Indeed,

we

will evaluate the

such a way as to support our

“We human and maintain

belief.

opposing evidence in

Gazzaniga observes,

beings, with our powerful tendency to create beliefs, readily

generate causal explanations of

events and actively seek out, recall, and interpret evidence in

18

The Power and Problems of Language

a

manner

our personal

that sustains

beliefs.

.

.

[W]e place a

.

amount of

credibility

on evidence

that sup-

ports an established theory

and tend

to discredit

opposing

disproportionate

evidence .” 17 This “belief persistence,” as researchers

call this

tendency, leads to doublespeak as

we

and explain our

of evidence that attacks or

beliefs in the face

use language to justify

undermines them.

Doublespeak and Cognitive Dissonance

The tendency

to

trary evidence

is

as cognitive

ever

we

hold on to our

best illustrated in the

dissonance

18

our

phenomenon known

Cognitive dissonance occurs when-

.

simultaneously hold two inconsistent ideas,

when we

opinions, or attitudes, or dicts

beliefs in the face of con-

beliefs.

When

to help us explain

away

this

act in a

way

beliefs,

that contra-

happens, the interpreter works

the contraction

between our oppos-

ing beliefs, or between our beliefs and actions, without

changing our

beliefs or

For example, people that

by

smoking

is

bad

our actions.

who smoke might

well acknowledge

for health, but they continue to

rationalizing their behavior.

They might

smoke

say that the

chances of their health suffering are not that great; that they stop smoking they will gain weight and their health; that

that

no one can avoid

smoking calms

all

that’s

bad

the dangers in

life;

if

for

or

their nerves. All of these reasons are

19

The New Doublespeak designed to reduce or eliminate the dissonance between belief

and behavior.

think

I

and

their

it’s

most Americans believe they

safe to say that

country are decent,

and reasonable. The same

fair,

certainly holds true for such national institutions as the military.

Thus, when the massacre

ing the Vietnam War,

many

Lai was revealed dur-

people, including public

military officials, faced a conflict

The

My

at

between

cognition that “our boys” don’t

kill

belief

and

and

action.

women and

chil-

dren was dissonant with the cognition that U.S. soldiers had indeed killed almost 500 women, children, and old men.

The dissonance between these two ideas was reduced in a number of ways. Some people denied that the massacre took place, claiming the

photographs were

of a massacre committed by

false or really pictures

Communist had

said the victims of the massacre

forces. it

Some people

coming

to

them

because they were Communists and therefore legitimate gets.

Other people said

that the

Communist

forces

mitted far worse massacres, so this one didn’t thing.

could

had com-

mean

any-

There were many other explanations of the massacre,

of them an attempt to rationalize

all

tar-

kill

women and

Certainly the U.S.

children.

Army

how American

soldiers

19

officer

who watched American

Ben Tre was faced with a contrawere in Vietnam to protect the

forces destroy the village of diction.

American

forces

Vietnamese from the Viet Cong, yet here were American forces cer’s “It

wreaking more destruction than the enemy. The

explanation for

became necessary

this situation

has

now become

to destroy the village to save

20

offi-

famous:

it.”

The Power and Problems of Language

One final example who was responsible and Russian

of cognitive dissonance. Paul Blobel, for the massacre of over 30,000

civilians at

Babi Yar, explained

“Human life Jews and Russians who were Nuremberg

that

is

be

to

shot.”

victim” reasoning. in so

we should

doing

difficult position

is

resolved through “blame the

Those who were

“had

be

shot,”

their killers incurred great suffering.

Thus

pity the

women, and

Our men who more than those who

killed] as to us.

20

Here cognitive dissonance and

at his trial at

not as valuable to them [the

took part in these executions suffered

had

Jews

killed

poor executioners

who were

to

placed in the

of having to slaughter thousands of men,

children. This

is

how

powerful the interpreter

can be in dealing with cognitive dissonance.

Some

of the doublespeak

tive dissonance.

we encounter

While CIA agents might

wrong, they can also believe that lying

committee put

it,

call

it

is

lie,

but for us

that’s

When Arms

Doublespeak

Middle East while Middle

to

is

to a congressional

CIA

agent

Congress— you could

keeping cover.” 21

Control

Means

Selling

also allowed President

his administration to

in the

believe that lying

acceptable because, as one former

“The whole question of lying a

flows from cogni-

More Arms

Bush and members of

advocate a policy of arms control in the

selling

more arms than ever

East.

21

to countries

The New Doublespeak “The time has come

tern of military competition

and

to

change the destructive

to try to

and

pat-

proliferation in this region

reduce arms flows into an area that

is

already over-

James Baker before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 7, 1991, three weeks after the Persian Gulf War had begun.

militarized,” said Secretary of State

One month Congress

later,

said,

“It

Bush before

President

would be

a joint session of

tragic if the nations

Middle East and the Persian Gulf were now, the war, to

embark on

a

new arms

in the

29, 1991, President

gers of

weapons of

Middle

East.”

He

Bush

Academy on

“Nowhere are the danmore urgent than in the

said,

proliferation

then went on to announce,

proposing a Middle East arms control included

wake of

race.”

In a speech at the United States Air Force

May

of the

“I

am

initiative,”

today

which

“Halting the proliferation of conventional

and

unconventional weapons in the Middle East.” But the arms race in the Middle East not only continues unabated,

being actively aided by massive States to the nations in the

Less

than

announced

total

would sell

the United

arms by the United

East.

hours

after

President

Bush

Defense Richard Cheney said the United

give Israel ten

package of

agreed to

is

proposal for arms reduction in the Middle

East, Secretary of States

Middle

twenty-four

his

sales of

it

fifty

twenty

F-15

fighter planes as part of a

The Bush

planes.

AH-64A Apache

Arab Emirates, and

eight

Administration also attack helicopters to

Apache

helicopters to

Bahrain.

Two

days

later,

Secretary

Cheney

22

said

that

President

The Power and Problems of Language

mean

Bush’s proposal for arms control did not

United

“We

would stop supplying weapons

States

simply cannot

into the trap of

fall

.

.

that the

to the region. .

[saying] that

arms control means we don’t provide any arms

Middle

he

East,”

said. Secretary

Cheney

to

the

said that he did not

think that arms sales to nations in the Middle East conflicted

with the

of President Bush’s plan for arms control in

spirit

the region. “There

is

nothing inconsistent with on the one

hand saying that we are interested in pursuing arms control and on the other hand providing for the legitimate security requirements that many of our friends in the region do have,” he said.

In addition to these sales, the administration announced plans to

sell

Saudi Arabia $365 million worth of weapons,

including laser-guided

MK-48 torpedoes, AIM-7M Sparrow air-to-air

bombs, 2,000

2,100 cluster bombs, and 770 missiles. After President

Bush announced

his proposal to

reduce arms in the Middle East, the United States sold more than $4.8 billion in weapons to Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey,

Oman, and Morocco, and an weapons

additional

$14

billion

in

for Saudi Arabia.

continued the rapidly increasing amount of weapons the United States sold to the Middle East. In 1990, U.S. weapons sales to Saudi Arabia alone totaled

These arms

$14.5 billion.

sales

From 1987

to

1990, the United States sold

$30.7 billion worth of weapons to the Middle East, increasing its sale of weapons to the countries in that area from $7.8 billion in

1989

to $18.5 billion in 1990. In the

doublespeak

of President Bush, Secretary Cheney, and Secretary Baker,

23

The New Doublespeak arms control in the Middle East means the nations of the

Middle East

selling

more arms

to

22 .

Doublespeak and Democracy

As

the ancient Greeks well knew,

open, and informed discussion of

democracy needs

free,

public issues. Indeed,

all

came into being with the establishment of a democratic form of government in Greece. The need to discuss issues of public importance promoted the growth of rhetoric and of public discourse. The Greeks argued, analyzed, debated, and discussed the the art of rhetoric

issues that

agora,

concerned them.

was the center of

The marketplace

this activity.

of Athens, the

Here Greek

citizens

shopped, gossiped, debated, and through language defined the problems that confronted them.

The

agora was a free

marketplace of goods, services, and ideas. While the vote on

would take place in the assembly held on the Pnyx, the heart of Greek democracy was the agora, for it was here that the Greeks defined and clarified issues, argued over various solutions, examined possible policies, and thrashed out what they thought and believed. The person public issues

who

tried to use

doublespeak in such a freewheeling arena

of debate would not have lasted long before being called to

account for his language.

The

clearest possible

language

24

is

essential for

democracy

The Power and Problems of Language

to function, for

it

is

only through clear language that

we

have any hope of defining, debating, and deciding the issues of public policy that confront us.

language-the language to

we

The

corruption of public

use to discuss public

affairs

and

decide public policy-is the corruption of democracy

Doublespeak preserve,

in public discourse does not help us develop,

and advance our

culture,

our

society,

our nation.

Doublespeak breeds cynicism, distrust, and, ultimately, hostility, the very qualities that undermine and destroy democracy.

25

ft

2 Language and the Interpretation of Reality

Although we use language

we

limited

are

Language

is

in

is

way we

not a neutral instrument that

world was

anthropologist and linguist refined

was

by

his student

called the

we

us,

use to interpret

and objectively Language by

biased. This theory of

see the

world around

our interpretation by our language.

the world impersonally

nature

to interpret the

how

language

its

very

affects the

advanced by the American Edward Sapir in 1929 and later first

Benjamin Lee Whorf. Their theory

Sapir-Whorf theory, and

theory.

27

later just the

Whorf

The New Doublespeak The Sapir Whorf Theory

Sapir stated the “weak” version of this theory this way:

Language

a guide to “social reality.”

is

.

.

Human

.

beings do not live in the objective world alone,

nor alone in the world of ily

social activity as ordinar-

understood, but are very

fact

at the

of expression for their society.

of the matter

mercy of

which has become the

the particular language

medium

much

.

that the “real world”

is

.

.

is

The to a

up on the lantwo languages are

large extent unconsciously built

guage habits of the group.

No

ever sufficiently similar to be considered as repre-

same

senting the

which

social

reality.

The worlds

in

different societies live are distinct worlds,

not merely the same world with different labels attached.

.

.

.

We

see

and hear and otherwise expe-

rience very largely as habits of our

community predispose

of interpretation

In a later

much

we do because

article,

the language

certain choices

1 .

Sapir argued that meanings are “not so

upon it, because form has upon our ori-

discovered in experience as imposed

of the tyrannical hold that linguistic entation in the world .”

Through a

2

series of studies, principally

of Native American

languages, Benjamin Lee Whorf, Sapir’s sometime graduate

28

Language and

of Reality

the Interpretation

student at Yale, refined Sapir’s thesis into what has been called the “strong” version of the theory. In 1940,

argued that each language conveys to worldview. “Every language

.

.

.

its

Whorf

users a ready-made

incorporates certain points

of view and certain patterned resistances to widely divergent points of view.”

.

.

.

Whorf then

3

language

ment

is

adds:

not merely a reproducing instru-

voicing ideas but rather

for

the

itself

is

shaper of ideas, the program and guide for the

mental

individual’s

for

activity,

analysis

his

of

impressions, for his synthesis of his mental stock in trade.

.

.

We

.

dissect nature

along lines laid

down by our native language. The categories and types we isolate from the world of phenomena we do

not

because

there

find

they

stare

every

observer in the face; on the contrary, the world is presented in a kaleidoscopic flux of impressions

which has

to

be organized by our minds-and

means

largely

minds.

We

cepts,

by the

systems in our

linguistic

cut nature up, organize

and ascribe

this

significances as

we

it

into con-

do, largely

we are parties to an agreement to organize this way— an agreement that holds throughout

because it

in

our speech community and terns

of our

language.

course, an implicit

codified in the pat-

The agreement

and unstated one,

are absolutely obligatory

by subscribing

is

;

we cannot

its

of

terms

talk at all except

to the organization

29

but

is,

and

classifica-

The New Doublespeak tion of data

which the agreement decrees.

are thus introduced to a

which holds

that

all

new

theory of

.

.

.

We

relativity,

observers are not led by the

same physical evidence

to the

same

picture of the

universe, unless their linguistic backgrounds are similar,

or can in

Unfortunately,

some way be

critics

calibrated

have distorted

Whorf s

describing his explanation as “everything

making

it

4 .

is

theory by thus

relative,”

impossible for anyone to learn a foreign language

or to translate from one language to another. Since

we can

both learn another language and translate other languages,

Whorf s

theory

is

simply wrong, they conclude.

However, Whorf never made such a claim. His theory claims only that language predisposes us to certain ways of

As Walter Lippmann noted, “For the most part we do not first see, and then define, we define and then we seed Whorf s theory is not that language determines what we can think but that language influences what we routinely experiencing.

5

think.

The language we

use influences the

our experiences. Using our language

mon,

so essential that

we

use

it

is

quite

way we

categorize

so natural, so com-

unaware of how

it

way we perceive and make meaning. This does not mean that we cannot engage in nonroutine thinking, affects the

only that the established habits of our language both guide

and promote the ways we

We

typically perceive, think,

tend to think in either-or terms, asking

opposed tive), is

it

to bad),

is

she attractive

difficult (as

opposed

(as

opposed

to easy),

30

is

and

that

act.

good

(as

to unattrac-

and so on. Our

lan-

Language and

guage encourages us

Thus we

of Reality

about the world in terms of

to talk

polarities, or opposites,

natives.

the Interpretation

and not

in terms of a stream of alter-

find ourselves debating such questions as:

“Are taxes too high?” “Should

we spend more on

“Should Medicare be reduced?”

defense?”

“Is the Social Security

fund

bankrupt?” These questions require us to take a position; they do not encourage us to give a considered response that discusses the complexity “either-or-ness” of

and

uncertainties of the issue. This

our language dominates our public

dis-

course.

Then

there are the

things. Consider, for

give

much

our family.

words we have

example, family relationships.

thought to the words

We

available for labeling

we

use for the

We

don’t

members of

have the words “uncle” and “aunt”

to distin-

guish between a male and female relative that stands in the

same

relation to us, while

a relative

who

if

the

word “cousin”

could be either male or female.

had separate words

What

we have just

for

What

if

for

we

male cousin and female cousin?

instead of just the words “aunt” and “uncle”

we had

on the mother’s side of the family as opposed to the aunt on the father’s side? And what if we had words that distinguished between older and younger brothers and sisters? Of course, we could go on with any number of other classifications, and create words specific

words

for each

new

to identify the aunt

classification of relatives.

But we see our family

relationships in certain categories because our language pre-

disposes us to classify our family relationships in these ways.

While we can step outside these terms if we need to (my female cousin on my father’s side), our language doesn’t pro-

31

The New Doublespeak word

vide us with a ready

to express a different classifica-

tion.

however, the use of pronouns in Japanese.

Consider,

When

speaking English,

However,

explicit declaration

in

of where the speaker stands on the social

English speakers,

person to

who

whom

Relativity

much

find

is

talk-

struggle with this pro-

and Language

Whorf’s theory

attractive

fundamental

in tune with the

the speaker

never gave any thought to a pro-

noun carrying such meaning, usually noun system when learningjapanese.

We may

doesn’t

Japanese every pronoun includes an

scale in relation to the ing.

when make dis-

use the same pronouns

Our pronoun system

addressing anyone. tinctions.

we

because

it

is

very

scientific revolution

of

the twentieth century: the theory of relativity. Einstein said that

how we

see the

phenomena of the universe

is

relative to

Whorf said that our worldview is we use. For Werner Heisenberg, dis-

our point of observation. relative to the

language

tortion inheres in the very act of expressing

we observe

is

not nature

method of questioning .”

A

researchers

idea:

“what

but nature exposed to our

6

famous study looked

tion affects the

itself

an

at just

how

our point of observa-

world we see and experience. In the study,

examined the reactions

to a football

between Dartmouth and Princeton.

32

Suffice

it

game played

to say that the

Language and

the Interpretation

of Reality

game was very rough, prompting numerous articles about how “dirty” the game had been. But what caught the attention of the researchers

game held by each

was

side:

the totally opposite views of the

Dartmouth supporters charged

the

Princeton players with deliberately setting out to terrorize

Dartmouth players, while Princeton supporters made the same charge against the Dartmouth team. The researchers showed a film of the game to a carefully selected sample of students from each college who had not attended the game, then had them complete detailed questionnaires on the game and on their own backgrounds. the

Analyzing

.

.

.

this

there

information, the researchers concluded that

is

no such “thing”

“out there” in “observe.”

its

own

The “game”

right

“game”

as a

existing

which people merely

“exists” for a

person and

is

experienced by him only in so far as certain happenings have significances in terms of his purpose.

Out

of

all

the occurrences going

ment, a person

selects those that

cance for him from his the total matrix

The

on

own

in the environ-

have some

signifi-

egocentric position in

7 .

students from

Dartmouth “saw”

engaging in unnecessary rough

the Princeton players

play, while the students

from

Princeton “saw” the opposite. Those two groups of students

experienced different football games.

These

results aren’t all that surprising.

body of research

that

all

arrives at the

33

There

is

a large

same conclusion: Our

The New Doublespeak global evaluation, that riences

our overall evaluation, of our expe-

never objective but

is

most

factors,

is,

of

which

we

“The

researchers conclude:

influenced by a variety of

is

As

two

protestations of even the

most

unaware

are

of.

virtuous and disinterested participants that they are capable

of independent judgments should be considered suspect .”

8

Our Language and Our World

Each of us experiences the world

in

our

own

way, from our

own point of observation, and for each of us the language we use reflects our perception of the world as we experience it. Our language reveals to others not the world as it “is” but as we see it, and how we experience it as individuals. I can call my coffee hot while my wife finds it scalding. The critic finds the

movie boring and cliched while

different.

For some,

others

it’s

it’s

“welfare.”

I

I

find

it

funny and

“aid to dependent children,” while to

may complain about

the billions of

dollars in “corporate welfare” that others call “subsidies” or

The words we and with words we

“tax incentives.”

use create the world in

which we

tell

live,

others

what the world

we experience it. The National Cattlemen’s Association understood this power of language when it advised its members to send a is

as

more

mon

positive

image

to the public

by replacing some com-

terms with newer, more self-enhancing terms. At a time

34

Language and

when

the public

term such

“market ready”

refer to

of Reality

so very health-conscious, advises their

is

newsletter, avoid a

the Interpretation

as “fat cattle.” Better instead to

Growth hormones and

cattle.

other

chemical additives should not be mentioned. Instead, refer

when

“promotants,” and don’t say “doctor the cattle”

to

promotes a

“provide medical care”

much

better

image.

Other changes include replacing “stockyard” with “livestock “operation” with “farm” or “ranch,”

market,”

and

with “cattleman” or

“cattle producer,”

“barn.” Finally, never

mention slaughtering

say “process” or “go to market .”

“operator”

“facility” cattle.

with

Better to

9

Signs and Symbols

Before

we go any

difference

the

further,

between

two terms,

we need

to clarify the

important

and symbols. Too often we confuse

signs

especially

when we

consider the symbolic

function of language.

While both

and symbols communicate information, differences between them. As we use the

signs

there are crucial

term here, a sign has a natural or

which just as

it

signifies.

thunder

is

taken as a sign of

gun and the

We

usually take

intrinsic

smoke

connection to that to

be a sign of

fire,

considered a sign of rain and a fever

is

Leave your fingerprints all over the take it as a sign that you handled it.

illness.

police will

In these instances there

is

a connection between the sign and

35

The New Doublespeak the information the sign communicates. After

all,

smoke

doesn’t usually just appear out of nowhere, thunder doesn’t

come rumbling

on a

the sky

across

sunny

bright,

day,

healthy people usually don’t have a fever, and guns don’t pick up fingerprints without being touched. So signs and

what they signify— their meanings— are connected. However, there

no

is

between the symbol and tionship

intrinsic

that for

between the symbol and

or

which its

connection

natural

The

stands.

it

meaning

rela-

purely arbi-

is

What any symbol stands for is determined by the peowho use it. A red light means stop only because we have

trary.

ple

decided

that’s

what

inherent in the color red that

symbol of the United

means

my

Every Fourth of July

wife and

I

nothing

“Old Glory”

stop.

States, yet there

is

were

many

honor of being a symbol of the United

tors for the

is

There

a red light means.

States.

display two flags: one

symbols of

this country.

the Revolutionary War.

intrinsic

letters.

Both were carried

this

for.

In

fact,

each Fourth of July

I

Money

is

it

and don’t know

perhaps one of the most

any other symbol

it

its

was no

flags

and what

have

to explain

people what the rattlesnake flag stands

they’ve never seen

flags that at

country. But there

connection between any of those

they stood

Both were

into battle during

There were many other

one time were symbols of

like

cir-

while the other has a coiled rattlesnake and the words

“Don’t tread on me” embroidered in big

to

a

competi-

the flag of the thirteen colonies, with thirteen stars in a

cle,

is

for

because

meaning.

common

symbols, and

has meaning only because of our

36

Language and

agreement

to accept

inherent in

money

illustrate the

uncle

it

the Interpretation

as a

symbol of value. There

that gives

it

During the

area with money.

Manila

for

in

joy

My

1944,

its

filled

fire

showering the

vault,

with clouds of fluttering

up

soldiers gathered

quickly

of the

turned

to

all

the

bills

disappointment.

bills.

many

heating their coffee.

With

the

But

as

he

they could, their

The

Japanese occupation money, so the soldiers used fires for

rich.

artillery

who was one

uncle,

an

soldiers fighting near the bank, described his joy

sky was

and other

me by

was very

the time he thought he

battle

nothing

value. Here’s a short tale to

destroyed a bank building, including

as the

is

inherent value of money, as told to

who remembers

American

of Reality

bills

were

to

make

it

end of the Japanese

occupation of the Philippines, the social agreement that gave that

money

There

is

value ceased to

exist.

another difference between signs and symbols.

Signs have a one-to-one relationship with their

symbols can have multiple meanings. a picnic

when we

We

meaning while

usually don’t plan

hear thunder rumbling across the sky, nor

and healthy someone who has a temperature of 102 degrees. But ask people what the American flag symbolizes, what it means, and you’ll get a lot of answers, all do we pronounce

fit

of them correct.

The

flag

finds important.

And

the

means America, freedom, the bravery of the men and women who fought and died to defend America, all the American virtues that any particular person

means

list

goes on. In other words, the flag

different things to different people.

multiple meanings, not just one meaning.

37

As a symbol,

it

has

The New Doublespeak Words Are Symbols

Words

are symbols, not signs.

There

no

is

connection between the word and what

we

means, what

we

unless

referent.

call its

decide to

call

it

A

it

natural, intrinsic

stands

spade

is

for,

what

not a spade

a spade. “Pig” does not

mean

because pigs are such dirty animals. Nor does a word “spit”

wise

it

pig like

mean what it does because of how it sounds, otherwhat can we say about “hojjfrz/able?” Nor is there a

“right”

word

because

for

that’s

everything.

what they

are

Pigs

and

are

not called “pigs”

that’s the

only word for

them. “Terrorists” are called “terrorists” not because

what they

are but because

someone has decided

to call

that’s

them

that.

Since words are symbols not signs, words can and do have

more than one meaning. In

fact,

the

500 most frequently

used words in the English language have more than 14,000 meanings.

A

quick look

at

my

desk dictionary reveals that

the verb “fix” has twenty- two meanings listed, the verb “see” thirty-three

the

noun

meanings, the noun “light” eighteen meanings,

“night” twelve meanings,

and

noun “ship” five many more mean-

the

meanings. In an unabridged dictionary ings are listed for each of these words. If

words had only one meaning, we could pretty well

inate

word

all

elim-

ambiguity from the language. However, since each

in a sentence

sort out

all

meaning

that

can have multiple meanings,

we must

those possible meanings to arrive at the one

we

think works.

We

38

do

this

every time

we

use

Language and

the Interpretation

of Reality

language, and usually we’re not even aware we’re doing

we have

Often,

words.

What

TODAY.”

meaning out of a group of

does the following telegram mean? “SHIP SAILS you’re

If

Caribbean

to puzzle the

it.

cruise,

expecting

friends

you might head

return

to

from a

for the docks to greet

them when their ship arrives. But if you’re in the business of making sails for sailboats, you might fill the order and ship some new sails to the customer. Without context, we might not know what the words mean. We often run into this problem with newspaper headlines. “Smith Gets Probation in Guitar

Case” requires a context

to

convey the message.

[hanging the Meaning of Symbols

Human things

beings love symbols.

we do

best,

and we

Making symbols

is

are constantly doing

one of the it.

In addi-

tion to verbal symbols, or words, we’re continually creating

nonverbal symbols.

And

just to

making process even more meaning of symbols.

Some

make

interesting,

the

we

whole symbol-

often change the

years ago, a deep, golden suntan was a symbol of

outdoor labor such

as

farming or construction work, and

some people considered a lower social status. So people who saw themselves as being of a higher social class— meaning they either had the kind of job that thus a symbol of what

allowed them to stay inside and out of the sun or they had

39

The New Doublespeak much money

so

hard that

to

keep

the time

Bahamas and ble. It will

Time

We

work

at all— worked

sun getting to see

away

to get

to places like the

their skin as tan as possi-

what happens

to the

meaning

we become more and more concerned with which is caused by too much exposure to the

skin cancer, sun.

in the

to

prized as the symbol of those

is

and money

be interesting

symbol

this

lie

have

Today, however, the deep tan

their skin pale.

once symbolized work

who have

of

that they didn’t

to

as

change the meaning of the symbol?

live in a

world of symbols. By simply agreeing

to

what

new symbol. new symbol means, we

a symbol means, any two of us can create a

And

unless

someone

tells

have no way of learning scious,

it’s

us what a its

meaning. For the fashion-con-

a constant struggle to keep

up with what new item

of clothing or jewelry, what brand of watch,

new symbol

car,

of status, prestige, and wealth. Are tattoos

is

the

a

good or bad symbol? What about pierced

lips?

New

or sunglasses

ears, noses, or

symbols are constantly being created, and the

meanings of old symbols constantly change. As anyone has raised a teenager knows, you have to

up with

all

their

new symbols and what

work hard

to

who keep

they mean.

Words

In addition to nonverbal symbols, ing

new

verbal symbols, or

we

are constantly invent-

new words. Usually we

40

learn the

Language and

the Interpretation

meaning of a new word through

may

of Reality

context, but sometimes

we

So dictionaries are constantly include new words and new meanings for old

resort to a dictionary.

revised to

words, and to drop words that are no longer used. When’s the last time you heard or read these words: bespawl (to spit on), glede (askew), pillowbeer (a pillow slip), or

On

cup)?

the

more of

or

yux (to hicother hand, you’ve probably come across one

these

new words: meltdown, bottom

and software.

doctor, fax,

verbal and nonverbal,

all

We

spin

keep changing our symbols,

the time.

Reification: Eatinq the

Toward

line,

Menu

end of the movie The Wizard of Oz, Dorothy the Wizard gives the Scarecrow a college degree,

the

watches as

which makes him smart, then gives the Cowardly Lion a medal for courage, which gives him courage, and finally Tin

gives the

gives

him

Of

is

it’s

we know

act of courage.

not the emotion

ence the emotion. ing,

that’s

not the

only a symbol of courage;

nor even an tion;

a watch in the shape of a heart, which

the capability to experience emotions.

course,

medal

Man

A heart

itself,

nor

A college degree

not the learning

itself.

it’s

is

things work.

not the quality

itself,

the ability to experi-

only a symbol of learn-

And many

people with college

degrees are not very smart, or even very educated.

41

A

only a symbol of emo-

is it is

way

The New Doublespeak We

must always remember

same

stands for are not the try; the

uniform

is

that the

is

not the

skill

Another way of saying “hamburger”

Is

is

symbol and what

word

the

is

not the thing.

it

stands

The word

not the hamburger. Eating the paper on

your hunger.

And you

word “money” on “sewage” doesn’t smell, “boom” word “mucus” isn’t disgusting.

much

printed won’t do

is

writing the

When we

col-

Not the Thing

which the word “hamburger” alleviate

not the

is

not the courage; the

is

that the

same thing is

not the coun-

or knowledge.

The Word

for are not the

is

not the religion; the actor

character portrayed; the medal is

flag

it

not the person; the crucifix, the Star of

David, or the Crescent

lege degree

The

thing.

symbol and what

certainly won’t get rich

pieces of paper.

to

by

The word

doesn’t sound loud, and the

confuse words with the things they represent,

we engage in a process called reification which simply means that we treat something we have created verbally as if it had real substance. We make something out of nothing. When ,

this

happens, words become traps, as Werner Heisenberg

observed, where “the concepts tion

from particular

own The

situations

initially .

.

.

formed by

acquire a

life

abstrac-

of their

.” 10

verb “to be”

tion. Since this

is

the principal

way we engage

in reifica-

verb accounts for about one-third of

42

all

the

Language and

the Interpretation

of Reality

verbs that occur in normal discourse,

engage constantly in that

we

what

reification. In

rarely notice we’re doing

process

this

doing

is

we have a tendency to fact, we do it so often

it,

and

to us

to

and notice even our attempts

to

less

com-

municate with one another. It’s

not unusual to run across something

like the following

comment: Don’t

call

them

“guerrillas” or “revolutionaries”

or “freedom fighters.”

Those who use

to kill innocent civilians in the

for

the

people are

Palestinian

name

bombs

of freedom

“terrorists”

we should

“murderers,” and that’s what

car

call

and

them.

What our commentator seems to be saying is that someone who kills another, whether intentionally or unintentionally, by exploding a car bomb might be called a “guerrilla” or a “freedom

fighter,”

but the

real

name

for such a person

Our commentator suggests that our would be a lot clearer if we would just use the murderer.

discussions real

the right words, for things instead of allowing false

curate words to be pinned

This, of course, “real”

thing in

name

is

on

very

much

“real”

name

like the practice

“real”

name

fairy tale of Rumpelstiltskin

the

and

the error of believing that there

which you keep your

who knows your

names,

is

inac-

things.

for something, that the

itself. It’s

is

name

is

a

inherent in the

of

some

societies

secret because

anyone

has power over you. (The

an

illustration of this belief in

power of names.) While we dismiss such a

43

is

belief as

The New Doublespeak we may

“primitive,”

well believe

“murderer”

is

what a person

is

someone who

“real”

name

What

that person

above believes: that the civilians

what our commentator for

is

one

is

thing;

quite another matter.

called is

In 1992, the U.S. Department of Justice investigated

ous environmental crimes

Rocky

the

at

The grand

nuclear weapons plant. crimes,

kills

and many other

Flats,

seri-

Colorado,

jury investigating the

believed the government

officials,

should have pursued criminal charges against the the Rockwell International Corporation, the

officers of

company

that

operated the plant under contract with the federal govern-

ment.

But

the

government

settled

the

Rockwell for a record $18.5 million

fine

Deputy head of

prosecutions.

Hartman,

Assistant the

Attorney

Justice

Resources Division, explained

charges

and no criminal General

Department’s

why no

against

Barry

Natural

criminal charges were

pressed: “Environmental crimes are not like organized crime

you have bad people doing bad things. With environmental crimes, you have decent people doing bad things.” Again, we have to remember that people are neither or drugs. There

11

decent nor bad. People or bad, but

When we

it is

may do

the action

things that

we

label decent

and not the person who

is

bad.

someone a bad person, we really mean this is a person who does what we call bad things. That is, a person isn’t bad or decent until we label him, and we base our label on the person’s actions. Mr. Hartman thinks that people have a “real” name, that there are bad people and decent people, and he can tell them call

44

Language and

apart. For

the Interpretation

of Reality

Mr. Hartman, the people running the Rocky

plant are “good” people,

Flats

and such people don’t commit

criminal acts. Therefore, anything they did couldn’t be crim-

because “good” people don’t commit criminal

inal

would argue

I

who, according

running the Rocky

that the executives

plant are neither

bad nor decent people, but they

to a

grand

acts.

jury, did

bad

things:

Flats

are people

They com-

Hartman knows they commit crimes.

mitted environmental crimes. But Mr.

some people

are “decent,” even

if

that

do

I

not

mean

me

of the accounts of how the people running the concentra-

tion to

to

camps

opera

make

in

too strong a comparison, but

Germany were such

at night,

it

reminds

cultured people, listening

reading Goethe, and playing with their

Were they “decent” people too? For Mr. Hartman, bad people sell drugs; decent people commit environmental crimes. Which really has to make you wonder what other children.

things “decent” people do.

Words and the World

There

is

a difference between the “world”

use to talk about that world.

On

and the words we

the one hand, there

the

is

world, which consists of things, processes, and events.

On

names we create for these The two are quite separate and

the other hand, there are the things, processes, distinct

and

in

and

events.

no way connected, except

connect them. Yet

we keep

as

we choose

to

forgetting this basic fact about

45

The New Doublespeak language and symbols, and because get ourselves into

some

we keep

we

forgetting,

kinds of trouble and end up saying

all

pretty stupid things.

Naming

on them— that is, using symbols— is an act of the human mind, and a very creative act. But it is just that: a creative act that has nothing to do things or pinning labels

name

with the “real” use comes from

us,

Any name we

of anything.

not from the thing

We forget this principle

at

our

itself

choose

to

or from nature.

peril.

Our commentator can call a person who sets off car bombs whatever he wants; that is his privilege. If he wants person a

to call that

tainly can.

bomb tator

and a “murderer” he

“terrorist”

But that doesn’t make those

either “terrorists” or “murderers.”

is

really saying

son should be

is

that this

is

who set off the car What our commen-

what he

called. In his political

cer-

thinks

such a per-

framework and from

his

of view, these are the appropriate labels

we

So too with Mr. Hartman of the Justice Department.

He

political point

should use.

can

call

the executives

who committed

environmental crimes

whatever he wants. But unlike our commentator, whose

words have no

effect

when Mr. Hartman some

the lives of the people he labels,

decides to use a label,

we might

say that

criminals escape prosecution.

Others that

on

some

may

not agree with our commentator.

I

am

people, including not a few high officials in a

sure

num-

ber of governments, would use such words as “freedom fighters,” “soldiers,”

the people,”

“heroes of the revolution,” “defenders of

and any number of

46

others.

While

it is

true that

Language and

the

words you use

point of view,

bombs

to describe is

it

the Interpretation

of Reality

such people depends on your

also true that people

who

set off car

name any more than anyone

don’t have a “real”

else.

Consider the following paragraph in place of the one previously cited:

Don’t

call

boys” or

bombs

them

“military personnel” or “our brave

Those who use

“air crews.”

laser-guided

to kill innocent civilians in the

freedom

American people

for the

and murderers, and

that’s

name

of

are terrorists

what we should

call

them.

You might personnel

object to

who do

my

their

version because U.S. Air Force

duty aren’t murderers. To which

I

would point out that U.S. Air Force bomber crews aren’t anything until someone pins a name on them. And the name that gets pinned on them will depend on the point of view of the name pinner. Whatever name is used will tell us more

who has chosen the name than about the named. The use of “terrorist” and “murderer”

about the person thing being tells

and

us about the political viewpoint of our commentator little

about the people

Finally,

who

you might note

set off the car

bomb.

the phrase “innocent civilians.”

What, you might ask, is a civilian, and what makes a civilian innocent? During World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and every war since then, “innocent civilians” have been

killed,

bombing of

many

cities in

quite deliberately, as in the massive

England, Germany, Japan, and

47

many

The New Doublespeak Were such bombing

other countries.

attacks acts of “terror”

and “murder?” Or were they an unfortunate but unavoid-

bombing campaign

able consequence of a strategic the enemy’s ability to

wage war? Or were they

to

reduce

instances of

“incontinent ordnance?”

The Three Umpires

The problems

of confusing words and things

the story of the three umpires

The

do.

first

umpire

and

I call

“There are

balls,

strikes,

see

them” The

them

says,

umpire

are describing

“There are

as they are.”

and there

third

who

first

“balls”

and

identify

which

he uses

identifies the reality.

word

is

is

I call

says,

them as I balls, and there

I call

them.”

“strikes” exist

and

his

job

to

is

which. This umpire assumes that the label

The second umpire

realizes that

not the thing and that whatever word he uses

simply his perception of illustrates the social

who

and there are

umpire confuses the word and the thing by

assuming that

the

and

“There are

are strikes, but they’re nothing until

The

balls,

what they

The second umpire

are strikes, says,

illustrated in

is

reality.

However, the

power of treating words

third

as things.

is

umpire

Those

put labels on things exercise great power, for the conse-

quences of labels are significant and far-reaching. After are those

who

planted the car

derers” or “guerrillas”

bomb

and “freedom

48

“terrorists”

fighters”?

all,

and “mur-

Language and

Naming

We

things

is

a

the Interpretation

human

act,

of Reality

not an act of nature.

it is

who

are the ones

through language create things out of the phenomena around us. Yet we forget that we control this

process and

let

we have

We

the process control us.

act as if the

very

beyond our control. Indeed, we act as if there’s nothing we can do about it. The world we create with words is not the same as the world in which we live. We confuse the two at our peril. The Cowardly Lion has no more courage after receiving his medal than before, the Tin Man is as emotionless after things

created are

receiving his heart as before,

and the Scarecrow

rant after receiving his college degree as he

thing.

The menu

not the meal. Forgetting

is

as igno-

was before the

The word

degree was conferred by the Wizard.

is

is

not the

this principle

can lead to a signal reaction.

Watch Out forlhose Signal Reactions

A

signal reaction simply

unthinking response to a tion observed

vates even

we have an automatic, symbol, much like the famed reac-

means

that

by Ivan Pavlov: Ring

when

the bell

A

the food isn’t there.

and the dog

signal reaction

saliis

a

reaction that occurs whether or not the conditions warrant. Yell “Fire!” in a building est exit.

I

doubt

whether there

is

a

if

and everyone

many

fire

will

run

for the clos-

people will look around to see

and then decide

49

to leave the building.

The New Doublespeak On

the other hand, a

tion, a reaction that

symbol reaction

conditional

is

symbol reaction involves some

we know

that there

symbol and

that for

opponent believes welfare

is

state,”

upon

analysis

the circumstances.

which

it

stands. “Like

in continuing the

says the candidate.

minimum

A

and thought because all liberals,

bankrupt

To which

my

policies of the

the object of his

like all conservatives,

to destroy Medicare, gut the social

vide a

a delayed reac-

no necessary connection between the

comments responds, “My opponent, wants

is

programs

that pro-

of care for millions of poor children, and

repeal the laws that protect our environment

from the

ages of the unchecked greed of big business.” If

rav-

we choose

to

respond to these statements not with a signal reaction as our speakers would like but with a symbol reaction,

we would

find both statements sorely wanting as examples of responsible public discourse,

no matter what our

When the Word Becomes

A

political beliefs.

the Thing

when we identify the symbol with stands, when the word becomes the

signal reaction occurs

the thing for thing.

which

which

it

A signal reaction means we’re acting without thinking, is

probably a good thing

when someone

yells “Fire!”

or “Duck!” But signal reactions can lead to results that range

from the

Gore

tragic to the absurd.

Consider these examples.

Vidal, in an article in Esquire magazine, recounts the

tragic story of Ibrahim, the

Egyptian soldier

50

who was on

Language and

maneuvers

in the desert.

the Interpretation

One

night,

of Reality

Ibrahim forgot the pass-

when he approached the guard post he could not give it when challenged. So Ibrahim says, “Look, I forget. I did know but now I forget the password but you know me, anyway, you know it’s Ibrahim.” But they shot him anyway because they had orders to shoot anyone who couldn’t give word, so

the password. “Oh, they were sorry, very sorry,” says the

narrator of the story, “because they

but you

see,

he did not

know

knew

it

the password.”

was Ibrahim,

Even Ibrahim

joined in the signal reaction that caused his death, because as

he was dying he said they were right

Then there’s this November 30, 1971,

story

to kill him.

from the New

12

York

Post.

On

armed men shot out the glass doors of a New York bank and entered the bank firing automatic weapons, wounding twelve people. One of the bank tellers ran from the robbers and made it to an upstairs women’s restroom. One gunman chased her, but he stopped door

at the

When finish

to the ladies’

room, shouting

at

her to come out.

she refused, he went downstairs to help his colleagues

robbing the bank.

The

old television

tions as the basis for ple,

five heavily

show Candid Camera used

many

of

its skits.

In one classic exam-

two telephone booths were placed next

One booth was

labeled

“Men” and

signal reac-

the other

to each other.

“Women.” As

no one who used the booths violated the signs. Men used only the booth labeled for men, and women used only the booth labeled for them. Even when there was a line for the men’s booth and the women’s the camera recorded the scene,

booth was empty, no

man used

51

the

women’s booth.

The New Doublespeak In each of these instances, people reacted automatically,

without thinking, without taking into consideration what the conditions warranted. Unfortunately for Private Ibrahim

meant teller

his death,

meant

it

refuge. For the

phone booths strating

while fortunately for the

why we need

the conditions warrant before

York bank

men and women using

in the Candid Camera

once again

New

we

segment

to think act

it

it

the

tele-

meant demon-

and consider what

on any symbol.

Sources of Signal Reactions

Signal reactions are an important part of advertising. advertisers seek a signal reaction

when

from consumers,

Many

especially

more expensive, upscale products that have little to distinguish them from their competitors, other than price, fancy packaging, and a big advertising campaign. Advertisers want us to react automatically to a product’s it

name

comes

(called

to the

brand recognition

in the advertising business)

so that without considering anything else about the product

we buy

it.

name],

must be good.

it

After

all,

if it’s

Now

[fill

in the

that’s a signal reaction that

pay big money for the manufacturer. To achieve signal reaction,

dollars

on

brand can

that kind of

companies spend hundreds of millions of

advertising.

Slogans are also a source of signal reactions. Slogans are

designed to short-circuit thought, not to stimulate

52

it.

Slogan

Language and

the Interpretation

of Reality

want an automatic, unthinking

writers

thoughtful, considered response. “America, It.”

“Keep America

in America.”

Love

It

not

a

or Leave

Dead Than Red.” Way With LBJ.” “It’s Morning

Beautiful.”

“Nixon’s the One.” “All the

reaction,

“Better

“Liberty, Equality,

Fraternity.”

“Deutschland

• •

Uber Alles.” I’m sure you can add a few dozen more. Some words, too, may produce a signal reaction. Sometimes

this

is

not a bad thing. After

all, if

someone

yells

“Duck!” you should react instantly and automatically, and not take the time for thoughtful reflection on your course of action. rare,

But such instances of signal reaction

and are an exception

words are

to

to the rule.

All kinds of people are constantly trying to induce a signal

reaction

words,

to

“Communist,”

words

such

using

as

“fascist,”

wing,”

“right

wing,” “racist,” “feminazi,” “welfare queen,” “ruling

class,”

and many

“bureaucrat,” is

to

“conservative,”

“liberal,”

The

others.

guard against signal reactions

respond

to

words with the

consideration

we should

Governments and

“left

list is

to

endless.

words and instead

seek instead

give to

all

symbols.

politicians also seek to induce signal

careful, analytical consideration. is

and

careful, thoughtful reflection

reactions to words. Often these groups don’t

words given

Our job

a knee-jerk reaction.

And

they

want

their

What

they

work hard

achieve a signal reaction and to use words to induce a nal reaction. Here’s just politicians

work

to use

one example of

words

to

voters.

53

how

to

sig-

hard some

produce signal reactions in

The New Doublespeak GOPAC and

In 1990,

GOPAC,

Signal Reactions

a conservative Republican group

general chairman was Representative

Newt

lished a booklet titled Language:

A

The

for use

booklet,

which was designed

didates for office, contained a

urged candidates

list

whose

Gingrich, pub-

Key Mechanism of Control

by Republican can-

of 133 words that

to use to attack their

GOPAC

opponents and

to

“The words and phrases are powerful,” mailing to candidates. “Read them. Memorize as possible. And remember that like any tool, these

praise themselves. said the

many

as

words

will

The

not help

booklet

Among

they are not used.”

included

Governing Words” vision.”

if

to “help define

the

words

flag,

rights,

freedom,

fair,

children,

truth,

humane,

“Optimistic

sixty-nine

listed

Positive

your campaign and your

were “environment, peace,

duty, we/us/our, moral, family,

hard-working,

care(ing),

liberty,

reformer, vision, visionary, confident, and candid.” Thus,

using

this

fident,

list,

a candidate could call himself a “humane, con-

caring,

who has that we can

hard-working reformer

vision of peace, freedom,

and

liberty

through a crusade for prosperity and

a moral all

build

truth.”

Words” to “define our opponents” and “create a clear and easily understood contrast.” The booklet recommended: “Apply these to the opponent, their record, proposals and their Included also was a

party.”

Among

the

list

words

of sixty-four “Contrasting

in this

sick, pathetic, lie, liberal, radical,

list

were: “traitors, betray,

hypocrisy, corruption, per-

missive attitude, greed, self-serving, ideological, they/them,

54

Language and

the Interpretation

of Reality

anti-flag, anti-family, anti-child, anti-jobs,

and coercion” Using

cracy, impose,

your opponent a

whose

“sick, pathetic,

this

ideology

With

list,

you could

call

incompetent, liberal traitor

self-serving permissive attitude

bureaucracy and an

unionized bureau-

promotes a unionized

anti-flag, anti-family, anti-child, anti-jobs

” 13

these

lists,

Republican candidates didn’t have

bother with thinking or knowing anything.

They

to

didn’t have

examine, evaluate, or respond to their opponents’ propos-

to als

and

ideas, just label

them using

the

words provided. By

following Gingrich’s advice, Republican candidates also didn’t

need

to get involved

their ideas

and

beliefs.

kind of thought.

words

them

off the if

with specific proposals or any

list,

The

No

details of

need for logic or reason, or any

candidates only had to pull a few

drop them in

asked questions.

their speeches,

and repeat

No

thinking necessary by either

own

version of the signal reaction;

candidate or voter.

George Orwell had he called

it

his

“duckspeak,” which was “to quack like a duck.”

Duckspeak has no meaning. With duckspeak it makes no difference what the subject is, “whatever it was, you could .” be certain that every word of it was pure orthodoxy. After all, “it was not the man’s brain that was speaking; it was his larynx. The stuff that was coming out of him consisted of words but it was not speech in the true sense; it was .

.

a noise uttered in unconsciousness, like the quacking of a

duck.”

With

the efficient use of duckspeak, the speaker can

ensure orthodoxy, which “means not thinking— not needing to think.

Orthodoxy

is

unconsciousness .”

55

14

The New Doublespeak Signal Reactions, Duckspeak, and Doublespeak

When we who

have speakers

who

use words without thought,

use words only for the automatic, unthinking reaction

they will produce, a response,

we

when we have an audience

are engaging in duckspeak, a kind of signal

With duckspeak,

reaction.

a signal reaction,

When

that has such

we

as

with words designed to induce

are not using symbols to communicate.

the Environmental Protection

Agency

using the term “wet deposition” for acid rain,

insisted

it

on

effectively

prevented people from thinking about the causes and conse-

no one knows what “wet deposican be no symbol reaction. When I read about

quences of acid tion”

is,

there

rain. Since

a “severe adjustment process” I’m not sure what reaction to

have since there

is

no way

I

can

know

that this

phrase for a recession.

The doublespeak

can work well to blunt

all

is

another

of signal reaction

thought and leave a void where

there should be meaning, thought,

56

and

action.

3 Abstracting Our into

Way

Doublespeak

Stepping into the Same River Twice

Heraclitus of Ephesus, writing around 500 B.G., gave us

what philosophers Everything

is

call

the doctrine of perpetual change.

in a constant state of flux, said Heraclitus, like

a flowing river.

We

because the water

cannot step into the “same” river twice

we

step into the second time

same water we stepped

into the

first

time.

So

we

think

is

it is

not the

with the

world.

The world

isn’t

the stable place

Heraclitus’s river, everything

change.

We

is

it

is.

Like

in a constant state of flux, of

give stability to this constantly changing world

57

The New Doublespeak through our

ability to re-create

and ignoring

When we

differences.

abstract,

we

it

by focusing on

This process

select the

called abstracting.

is

information

attention to while ignoring the rest, focusing

amount of information

that

able patterns. Abstracting

is

we

similarities

we

pay

will

on a

limited

then arrange into recogniz-

a continuous process that allows

us to give stability to a very unstable world.

and

All our senses are constantly selecting, organizing,

generalizing the information they receive.

When we

abstract,

we create a kind of summary of what the world is like. We may not be able to step into the same river twice, but by abstracting we act as if we can. Watching television is a simple example of how we constantly abstract without being

“picture”

on

aware of the process.

the television screen

A

when

there isn’t

We

see a

any

pic-

composed of hundreds of thousands of tiny dots. As some dots are lit and some aren’t, our brains collect the sensations and organize them into patterns that we see as moving pictures. Those tiny dots on the screen are lit about thirty times per second ture there at

all.

television picture

is

while our brains organize the dots they see into patterns

about ten times per second. Yet even this process,

and not

in

after

most of us think the picture

is

we understand on

that screen

our heads.

Consider

this

example of the abstraction process involved

in seeing a chair.

As any

physicist will

A chair is

tell

you, a chair

isn’t

a

composed of billions of atomic and subatomic particles in constant motion, and even those particles aren’t solid matter but are made up of bun“thing” at

all; it’s

an event.

58

Our Way

Abstracting

We

dies of energy.

moving

particles

world

not the

our

is

chair,

tion,

of

and the

all

because then

way we

see

it.

we

its

of world,

is

see

struct the entire chair

important

of

remember see

these

all

that the

when we

look

particles.

see the chair because

no one has ever

You can

see parts of

whole chair— top, bottom, sides— all

enough of and

at

a summary, an abstrac-

the chair that

act as if

we know

But sometimes our construction can lead us

we

it’s

made up

will

entirety, all at once.

the chair, but not the

we can

is

What we

motion of all those

Even then we don’t

once. But

our chair

that

at the rest

seen a chair in

Doublespeak

can’t see these particles, but

remind ourselves

to

into

we can

at

con-

whole

chair.

astray, as

when

the

don’t see the crack in the leg and find ourselves on the

floor

when our

chair collapses.

Still,

our assumptions about

enough most of

the time so that

our chair

will serve us well

we never

question the abstracting process. Indeed,

tinue our abstracting

events that

when we

make up our

use language to

we conname the

world.

Words and Things

Naming tion, it

in

things— using language— is a very high level abstrac-

and when we name something we “freeze” it by placing a category and making a “thing” out of it. But now we

encounter a curious but most important aspect of abstracting process. tion

we

label

When

an event a

this

through the process of abstrac-

“chair,”

59

we have

created a

word

for

>

:

The New Doublespeak something that does not “chair” all

in

exist

The word and summary of

the world.

an abstraction, a generalization

is

work

those things in the world that look and

way.

The word

“furniture”

and

includes our chair

anything

like a chair

And we

functions.

all

is

a

still

in a similar

higher abstraction that

those other things that don’t look

but share some similar features and

could abstract even further and include

our chair in “home decoration” and “personal

assets.”

Here’s another example, starting with a specific object

and moving through increasingly higher tion.

Notice

how

each

new

levels of abstrac-

level of abstraction ignores

more

and more differences while focusing on fewer and fewer similarities

Camry —» Toyota —» new car — —» motor vehicle —> vehicle —> private

1996 red Toyota automobile

—>

transportation

we

transportation

moved quite a distance from our 1996 red Toyota Camry. The higher the level of abstraction, the more detail we leave out, the more we ignore differences, and the more we concentrate on simiBy

the time

larities,

get to “transportation” we’ve

no matter how few or how tenuous those

might be.

When

I

talk

about transportation,

I

similarities

am

only those aspects of the 1996 Toyota that place

it

including in a cate-

gory that includes bicycles, airplanes, and trucks. Let’s look at a cat Phil

—

>

named

Phil.

— mammal —> animal —> living thing — thing

Maine Coon —» male

—> vertebrate

cat

—»

cat

>

>

60

Our Way

Abstracting

Phil

male time

and he

cat,

we

a

is

known

Maine Coon. He is also a mammal and a vertebrate. But by the

a breed of cat

is

Doublespeak

into

as a

way from the collection that make up Phil.

get to “thing,” we’re a long

of atomic and subatomic particles

There

is

usually less ambiguity at the lower levels of

abstraction. If

I

refer to

my

1996 red Toyota Camry, you

have a better idea of what I’m talking about than

my

if I

refer to

The words we use which we are operating.

“vehicle” or “private transportation.”

reveal the level of abstraction at

The word refer to

“thing” excludes a lot of detail

both

my Camry

my

and

other objects in the universe.

It is

and can be used

house, and a whole

word

a

lot

to

of

at the highest levels

of abstraction.

The less abstract our cific we are because we

language, the

more concrete and

are using language that includes a lot

of detail and refers to a very low level of abstraction. say, “I like to

ball cific

and

play sports,” or

basketball.”

spe-

I

Language

creates pictures in the

can

that

say, “I like to

is

mind of

more

I

can

play base-

concrete and spe-

the listener, pictures that

should come as close as possible to the pictures in your

mind.

Highly abstract language speak, especially is is

a

a

meant.

The government

many

And

the

common form

politicians.

good example of using a very

besides taxes. in

among

is

has

“Revenue enhancement”

abstract term to hide

many

what

forms of revenue

government can increase

its

revenues

ways, with a tax increase being just one of those

ways. Indeed, even the term “tax increase”

Which

of double-

tax will be increased,

61

is

fairly abstract.

and by how much? Are we

The New Doublespeak on corporations by 1 percent, or are we talking about increasing the income tax for anyone making $25,000 a year or less? Those are two very different tax increases, and we might want to talk about talking about increasing the tax

them.

However, some people would say that they don’t tax increase

is

Of

bad.

what they mean by

we might want

course,

“bad,”

and “bad”

for

to ask

whom?

any

care;

It’s

them

bad

for

To which we might say, what do “economy”? That’s a very abstract term,

the economy, they reply.

you mean by

the

my

probably as abstract as calling “transportation”

them to be a Using a high

like

dump

my cat Phil

and

little less

a “thing.”

abstract

specific picture

from the concrete the terms

They

little

more

we can

specific.

call

the

new

reality

no

abstractions

specific

their creators

want them

to

in

our minds since we’re

When

confronted with such

picture at

we have

call to

they are supposed to symbolize. In

do exactly what

create

Such terms do not

because they are so far removed

not sure what they mean.

some

Maybe we would

a “resource development park” and sewage sludge

mind any

do:

and a

level of abstraction

“biosolids” or “organic biomass.”

fact,

Camry

1996 Toyota

all

who use them to give us move down from their high levels

to ask those

examples, to

of abstraction to specific examples that clearly illustrate what

they are referring tion,

some

officials

to.

By using

were able

the doublespeak of abstrac-

to get approval to build a

dump in a residential neighborhood, won approval for a new sewage plant.

62

while other

new

officials

Abstracting

Our Way

into

Doublespeak

Reports, Inferences, and Judgments

At the lowest

reports. Reports are

heard,

felt,

ward:

we can use language that based on what we have directly seen,

levels of abstraction

or experienced. Reports are pretty straightfor-

“It is raining.” “I

have a temperature of 101.”

“I

paid

We can verify reports and confirm that We can look out the window and see the

$4.99 for that book.”

they are accurate. rain.

We

ature.

can use a thermometer to check a person’s temper-

And we

can see the

sales receipt to verify the price

paid for a book. Report language In our everyday lives time.

we

Did General Motors

is

concrete and specific.

accept reports of reports

really

make

a profit

last

The newspapers said so, and even though we that report, we accept it. Without giving it much accept reports of reports

all

and our doctor’s advice.

We

and

matics,

history,

the time.

We

all

the

quarter?

can’t verify

thought,

follow road

we

maps

read books on science, mathe-

and assume

that the authors are giving

us reliable information.

Inferences

Much

we might like all language to be in the form of we wouldn’t get much done if it were. Instead, we

as

reports,

use inferences to conduct our daily

63

affairs.

An

inference

is

a

The New Doublespeak statement about the guess, sometimes

unknown based on

the

known.

It is

a

an educated guess, and sometimes a wild

leap of logic.

An

inference starts with

what

notice the newspapers piling

Then you car

is

known

is

or observed.

You

up on your neighbors’ porch.

notice the mail overflowing the mailbox. Since their

gone and you haven’t seen anyone around the house

for

have gone on vacation. Your

a few days,

you

inference

based on your observations, observations that we

could

call

is

infer that they

reports because they are

all verifiable.

However, the

statement that the Bergers have gone on vacation ence, a conclusion

possible, of course, that

It is

ence.

drawn from your

killer fled in their car.

Or

you

are

wrong

We make

your

infer-

that

perhaps Mrs. Berger took the

out of town on business.

have forgotten

in

you could family has been murdered and the

dren to her mother’s in Florida for a

gone anywhere while

infer-

observations.

There are other possible inferences

draw. Perhaps the entire

an

is

visit

Or perhaps

their car

while Mr. Berger

the Bergers haven’t

and newspapers.

hundreds of inferences every day, and

most part our inferences work. Since infer that stores will

stop because

we

be open

infer that the

it

for business.

bus

is

being repaired and they

is

to collect their mail

chil-

is

for the

a weekday,

We

go to the bus

will stop there again

up passengers. We can test the stores are open or they

we

today

to pick

these inferences because

either

aren’t,

stop or

We

it

and the bus

will

won’t.

also

make

quickly verifiable.

other inferences that aren’t so easily or

We

infer a person’s

64

economic and

social

Abstracting

status

Our Way

from the quality of her

into

Doublespeak

infer the geopolitical strategy of Iran infer a person’s feelings

way he

from

about us from

we infer the existence we collect; we infer the

treats us;

based on

fossils

civilization

from the

his

we

We

its

actions;

we

words and the

of certain creatures

nature of Egyptian

and

ruins, written records,

examine. Without inferences,

car.

and

clothes, jewelry,

artifacts

we

couldn’t function in our

and without inferences our knowledge of the world would be greatly reduced. However, we have to be everyday

lives,

aware of our inferences because we can inferences without

A

knowing

easily

draw

false

it.

segment on the television evening news shows us a

home

for unmarried, pregnant teenage girls.

mentions that the

home

is

is

room

at the

home. This

followed by an interview with a politician

is

we have

reporter

overcrowded, that there are more

pregnant teenagers than there report

The

who

says

do something about teenagers having babies, which has become a crisis that demands action. Moreover, that

to

our politician adds somberly, teenagers having babies

more evidence of our moral

decline.

The

next day,

tion in conversation that there’s a serious

is

we men-

problem with

all

those teenagers having babies.

From

the television report

that there are a large

number

that

is

we have drawn

number of teenage

growing.

We

might even

girls

the inference

having babies, a

infer that there

is

an

“epidemic” of teenage pregnancies. But our inference would

be wrong. Teenage pregnancies are not increasing. In birth rate

among

teenage

girls is

lower today than

it

fact,

was

the

forty

years ago. In 1955, approximately 90 out of every 1,000

65

The New Doublespeak 1

women between

the ages of fifteen

and nineteen gave

while in 1993 the birth rate for that age group was

59 out of 1,000. ers

who

And most

is false.

And

is

So perhaps our

is false,

what about the inference

we are in a moral decline, assuming that we can all what we mean by such an abstract term? Drawing false that

ences

is

to

an epidemic of teenagers having babies

that inference

if

down

of those babies are born to moth-

are eighteen or nineteen years old.

inference that there

birth,

sometimes called leaping

agree infer-

to conclusions.

Judgments

Often we move from inferences tion

known

as

to a higher level of abstrac-

judgments. Instead of saying,

have a temperature of 101,” and

we might “I

say,

paid too

“The weather

much

are judgments.

is

“I

A judgment

or disapproval of what

we

is

paid $4.99 for that book,”

terrible,” “I

for that book.”

“It is raining,” “I

These

look

terrible,”

last three

statements

an expression of our approval

are describing. In other words,

judgments are nothing more than our personal opinions. get into trouble

when we

confuse judgments with reports.

Consider these sentences:

The man 2. The man 3. The man 1.

and

lying in the street

is

unconscious.

lying in the street

is

drunk.

lying in the street

is

a

66

bum.

We

Abstracting

The

first

sentence

second sentence

The

judgment. sentence

that the

may

is

first

sentence

drunk.

We

is

a

while the second

verifiable,

is

he

is

the

“Allen

man

drunk. That the

man based on

is

stupid,”

is

“Socialized

bum

a

know

is

a judg-

our inferences.

and judgments.

“The Toyota Camry is

don’t

Based on those observations we

often confuse reports

great writer,”

We

known.

accept as a report statements such as:

buy,”

The

only see him, his physical condi-

ment, our evaluation of the

we

fact.

an inference, and the third sentence

is

his appearance.

infer that

We

Doublespeak

a report, a description of

unknown based on

man

and

tion,

into

an interpretation of an observation, a statement

is

about the

is

Our Way

How

often

“Hemingway

the best car

medicine

is

do is

a

you can terrible,”

“Socialism and freedom are incompatible,” “Conservatives are fascists,”

world.”

and “America

Yet each of these

is

the greatest country in the

statements

is

a judgment,

an

expression of the speaker’s evaluation of the person or thing

being discussed. These statements say nothing about the people and things being discussed but do reveal something of the speaker’s values. Even

ments we do not have a Unfortunately,

we

if

others agree with our judg-

report, just a similarity of values.

too often treat judgments as

if

they were

reports.

Here’s

a

little

story illustrating

abstraction process to

make

how we

inferences

do not coincide with a description of the

67

can use the

and judgments facts.

that

The New Doublespeak A Tale

The

of Faulty Inferences

Hungarian countryside. In a

train rushes across the

compartment Nazi

a mother with her attractive daughter, a

sit

and a Hungarian

officer,

through a tunnel, the compartment

is

sound of a loud

When

the train emerges

is

one says a word, but the Nazi

certainly

showed

daughter looks

that

“What

from the tunnel, no bears the unmis-

The mother

a good daughter

I

Nazi he can’t fool with

stares

officer

“That Hungarian slapped,

and

Hungarian kiss

The

facts

was a noise sounded

at

get

ment.

have. She

The

her.”

He

nothing

steals I

official

a kiss

can do

The

kiss.”

and and

about

thinks, gets

it.”

me The

blankly as he thinks, “Not bad.

away with slapping

is

I

a Nazi.”

of the story are simple: In the darkness there that

sounded

like a kiss,

followed by a noise that

like a slap.

Based on these

drew a

clever.

is

there’s

and

Hungarian

the

official stares

my hand

looks at

her mother and thinks, “Mother sure

at

brave to take on a Nazi officer over one stolen

Nazi

by a

kiss followed

officer’s face

takable signs of having been slapped.

her daughter and thinks,

the train passes

engulfed in darkness.

the

Suddenly there shattering slap.

When

official.

facts,

each person in the compartment

different inference

The mother

and arrived

judg-

at a different

inferred that the Nazi

had kissed her

daughter and that her daughter had slapped the Nazi.

The

daughter inferred that the Nazi had kissed her mother and that her

mother had

retaliated

with a

68

slap.

The Nazi

inferred

Our Way

Abstracting

that the

into

Hungarian had kissed the

girl,

him in error. Each of these people then made

The mother

inference.

is

a

prompting her

daughter

The daughter

“brave” because she slapped the Nazi.

thinks the

Hungarian

“good”

is

thinks her

The Nazi

“clever” because he kissed the girl

is

The Hungarian,

but got the Nazi slapped.

what happened. While

to slap

judgment based on the

her

thinks

because she slapped the Nazi.

mother

Doublespeak

all

of course,

knows

the other people think they

know

the “facts” of the incident, they

know

only what they have

and the judgments they have made. Abstracting is a fundamental and necessary process

inferred

dealing with the world.

With

world with which we can that that

we we

are constantly

it

interact.

engaged

it

But we must remember

in a highly selective process,

in dealing with

can also get us into trouble

abstracting if

construct a coherent

are choosing to ignore large chunks of our world.

While abstraction can help us ment,

we can

for

and

start to treat

if

we

our environ-

forget that

we

are

our inferences and judgments

as

they are descriptive statements of the world.

Verbal

Some

years ago

I

was a guest

China. At the end of Beijing seeing

all

Maps

my

lecturer at a university in

lectures,

I

spent

the usual tourist sights.

69

some time

One

day,

I

in

struck

The New Doublespeak on my own without my guide and translator. Since my map was in Chinese, I was trying to find my way by matching the significant landmarks on the map with the landmarks as I walked past them. I soon became lost. Eventually I found someone who could help me, but I was puzzled. I couldn’t figure out how I got lost. That evening at dinner, my more experienced colleagues at the guest house laughed off

my

as they explained the source of

maps

the

distributed

problem.

Any knowledgeable

you cannot

on

rely

seems that

by the Chinese government were

least at that time) deliberately altered so

omitted.

It

the

tourist, I

important

was

maps provided by

sites

were

knows

told,

(at

that

the Chinese gov-

ernment.

We

all

We

countries.

bal

maps

lost,

maps of cities, maps of our world.

use maps, and not just also use verbal

are inaccurate like

my map

If

our ver-

we can

of Beijing,

and get

or a whole lot worse can happen to us.

In a sense,

we

live in

experiences, the world

small world because

two worlds. One

we know

it is

have directly seen, heard,

is

the world of our

firsthand. This

don’t exist unless

is

composed of only those felt,

or experienced. In

France, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Frank Sinatra, and

we have

a pretty

things

we

this

world,

Dan

Rather

visited these places or seen these

people in person. This world

is

very small because there

we know firsthand. Most of what we know we know through

very

states,

is

that

little

We

language, that

is,

most of our knowledge from

friends,

newspapers, magazines, radio, television, and school,

among

through words.

our

many

sources.

get

And

the

knowledge we

70

get

from these

Abstracting

sources

we

history, for

Our Way

Doublespeak

into

get through language.

Most of our knowledge of

example, comes not from our direct experience

The only proof we have that New Orleans ever happened is that we have

but from the reports of others. the Battle of

reports that

did.

it

And

even most of the reports are based

who were

not on the accounts of the people

And

other reports.

these reports are based

we

other words,

get

who

on

still

back in a chain

reports, with the reports extending

reach the reports of the people

there but

actually

saw

on

other

until

we

the battle. In

most of our knowledge about the world

through the reports— the language— of others.

The world

that

we know through our

our extensional world. extensional

world.

We

use report language for

Such language points

processes in the world around us. If today,”

I

am making

the world around me. result of

direct experience

a statement about

Most

what

is

95 degrees going on in

importantly, this statement

my direct experience,

and

it is

verifiable

this

observable

to

say, “It’s

I

is

by

is

the

others.

Our Verbal World

On

the other hand, there

know through

words.

is

the intensional world that

we

of the intensional world

The language

points to processes within us, not to the world around us.

Our

intensional world includes

all

the inferences

ments we are continuously making. today,”

I

am making

If I say, “It’s

and judgvery hot

an intensional statement, a statement

71

The New Doublespeak about what

were

is

going on in me, not in the world. Even

to agree

if

you

with me, you would simply be agreeing that

your intensional world

would have no

effect

is

on

same

the

as mine.

around

the world

Our agreement

us.

Our verbal world is a kind of map of the world. But just as a map of New York is not the city of New York but only a representation, so too is our verbal map of the world a representation of the world

and not the world

itself.

map, our verbal map should represent the

When maps

rately as possible.

bear a

their

way

quickly

my faulty map

become

lost,

like

any

territory as accu-

false or inaccurate rela-

who

tionship to their territories, those

And

use those maps to find

or worse, just as

I

did with

of Beijing.

Three Rules for Verbal Maps

We

must remember three important

map

the

is

Second, no

And

third,

rules

about maps.

First,

not the territory but only a representation.

map

every

can represent

map

all

reflects the

aspects of the territory.

mapmaker’s point of view.

While we must depend on our verbal maps of the world order to function,

we must always remember

in

these impor-

tant limitations of our verbal maps.

A verbal map to the territory

bal is

map

found

should correspond as accurately as possible

it is

supposed

to represent.

Moreover, a ver-

has to be constantly checked for accuracy, and to

be inaccurate we must adjust the

72

map

if it

accord-

Abstracting

Our Way

into

Doublespeak

ingly. Failure to constantly

map when

the

distortion,

The

check a verbal map, or to adjust found to be in error, produces confusion,

it is

and misunderstanding.

accurate use of verbal

ment. That

is,

when we

maps depends on

use labels that

ment we are using our verbal maps expand the verbal map “murder”

reflect social agree-

accurately. If

during war, then the bombing of

an

murder.

we

Often, however,

use in labeling an

act.

we

agree to

to include the killing of

civilians

act of

social agree-

becomes

civilians

map

don’t agree on which verbal

Are those who deliberately

to

set off car

bombs to kill civilians “terrorists” or “freedom fighters”? If we have international agreement that those who intentionally

engage in

of violence and destruction shall be

acts

no matter what

labeled “terrorists”

the term will have objective

some

No tive

their stated purpose, then

meaning and we can use

it

with

accuracy.

matter

we may

how

find

map

beautiful a

it,

the

map

Who

no matter how

is,

useless

is

if it

attrac-

does not show the

by

the travel

brochure, only to find a completely different place

when we

territory accurately.

got there? Likewise a

hasn’t been seduced

map

rately portray State Street or

O’Hare

we

Michigan Avenue, or leaves out

airport because there wasn’t

very useful map. that

of Chicago that does not accu-

want.

We

Of

can draw a

the middle of Philadelphia or

useful in finding our

is

we can draw any kind

course,

of parks in Detroit, but

enough room

map with an attractive a map with a beautiful

we wouldn’t

way around

73

those

find such cities.

not a

of

map

lake in

system

maps very

The New Doublespeak False Verbal

Just as

we can draw

false verbal

maps of

false

maps of

can create with language

kinds of

Of

tion to the extensional world.

But

false

they

maps

maps

that

false

have no

no harm

course,

false verbal

maps

to find

that distort, mislead,

rela-

will

be

our way

and con-

and even death. While words

fuse can lead to serious harm,

used

we draw

any other number of devices, we

all

done unless we use such

so too can

cities,

Using imaginary or

the world.

reports, false inferences, or

in the world.

Maps

mean whatever we as a society decide mean, once we have reached that social agreement we as labels

must use words

can

do not

carefully so they

distort the territory

they purportedly represent.

We

can accumulate

we make

false

maps

false

maps

in a

for ourselves

maps. Second, we have

false

number of ways.

by misreading accurate

maps given

to us

sources as government, advertisers, business, and ers

who want

third,

First,

by such

many

oth-

maps and not our own. And maps ourselves, constructing them by

us to follow their

we make

false

not having enough information, or by misreading the

terri-

tory.

We must remember not verbal

map must be

against the territory

always ask whether

critically it

this

is

maps

automatically.

Every

examined and then

tested

to trust

supposed

map

gets us

to represent.

We

where we want

must to go.

Moreover, we have to check our verbal maps constantly.

The world changes

continuously, so our

74

maps have

to

be

Abstracting

We

adjusted accordingly. particular

gave

it

to

Our Way

also

into

Doublespeak

have

to ask

where we got a

map. Did someone give us the map? If so, who us, and for what purpose? Does the map take us

where we want

where the map giver wants us to go? Good map reading is an essential skill for economic, political, social, and cultural survival. to go, or

Verbal

Maps

Most of us haven’t been were

to visit those countries

limited. So, as

we do with

picture of a country. rate,

to

articles

we were

China or Cuba, and even

if

we

our direct experiences would be

everything

else,

we

create a verbal

Sometimes our pictures are

When my apprehensive. We had

and sometimes they’re

visited Paris

of China and Cuba

not.

about the rudeness of Parisians

fairly accu-

wife and

I first

read numerous

to tourists, especially

we met nothing but friendly, charming, helpful people during our stay. The Paris we experienced wasn’t at all like the verbal map that had been created for us by others. So too with our knowledge of much of the American

tourists. Yet

world.

Our

maps of the world, and it is up to us to determine whether their maps are accurate. And we certainly don’t have to accept their maps political leaders

offer us their verbal

just because they offer them. In fact, our job their

maps

to close, careful, critical examination.

75

is

to subject

— The New Doublespeak Here

are

two verbal maps

Bush

that President

one

offered,

forming the basis of American policy toward China, the other toward Cuba. Since

I

have removed the name of each

you have to figure out which country he is describing in which speech. Which of these maps corresponds to the verbal map you have of each country the president

is

discussing,

country?

MAP

On May 20,

MAP 2

1

1991, President

President

Bush

“We want

declared,

Bush made a radio broadcast in which he reiterated

tive

America’s “unwavering com-

through the force of our

mitment

for a free

democratic

—

C

.”

and

The

from

shall turn us

presi-

president called

the leaders of

C

—

away on

“to free

political prisoners in

change in the world

our

purity.

.

.

.

We want to

advance the cause of free-

this objective.”

The

posi-

example, not simply profess

dent emphasized that

“Nothing

promote

to

C

dom, not just snub nations that aren’t yet

wholly

He

right to export

said, “It

is

the ideals of freedom

democracy

to

C

free.”

and

— C— C— .

...

It is

we

and allow the United

wrong

Nations Commission on

hope

Human Rights

to investigate

This nation’s foreign policy

human rights violaThe president C

has always been more than

possible tions in

went on

— C— .”

to challenge the

leaders of

“to put

to isolate

to influence

if .

.

.

.

simply an expression of

American

interests. It

is

an

extension of American ideals.

76

,

Abstracting

democracy

Our Way

to a test: permit

and a

free press to thrive.

Hold

free

and

American policy

Our

.

C

nation

—

.

.

.

democracy. ...

and

fully free

means

are plain If

C

—

and

holds

tions

.

.

.

we can

white.

The

cantly.”

improve

evils.

That’s

and

Very few moral president said he

G

would hold

rela-

between our two coun-

tries to

trying to chart a

absolutes.”

human

expect

in

times, that

the real world, not black

under international supervirights

engaged

Many

world of lesser

fair elections

sion, [and] respects

requires us

moral course through a

goals for the .

active,

the world.

fair elections

.

remain

to

under international supervision.

Doublespeak

This moral dimension of

organize

political parties to

into

strictest

—

human

to the

rights stan-

dards and spoke of the sanc-

signifi-

2

tions that

on

C

—

had been imposed

in the past.

Mr. Bush said that he

means

to bring the influence

of the outside world to bear

on

C

—

.

the point

“Critics ... act as if is

as if hurting will

punish

C—

to

somehow

’s

The

—

economy

help the cause

of privatization and rights.

C

human

real point

is

to

pursue a policy that has the best chance of changing

C

77

—

’s

behavior.”

H

The New Doublespeak So what’s your guess? Which speech

a verbal

is

which country? Here’s some information

that

map

of

might help

you. At the time he offered these maps, President Bush was

being

criticized

because he declined to impose any kind of

on the government of China after the massacre of students in Tiananmen Square. At the same time President Bush also declined to make any diplomatic moves to sanctions

improve relations with Cuba, a country that did not have the

same kind of record of human response to

this criticism,

rights abuses as China. In

President

Bush

offered these two

verbal maps.

Speech his

map

1 is

Mr. Bush’s

of China.

What

map is

are really interchangeable.

of Cuba, while Speech 2

interesting

is

is

maps how you

that these

Look again and

see

could read the names of both countries into each speech.

Then

what’s the difference between the two speeches?

Only

the president’s point of view, only his opinion, only

his

words.

Verbal Maps, Courtesy of the Government

One

of the functions of government

is

to

propose verbal

maps for us as a nation to follow. When we talk about “our China policy” or “our Cuba policy,” we’re really talking about our verbal maps of these two countries. There was a time when the official verbal map of China portrayed a

78

Abstracting

Our Way

into

Doublespeak

country that was implacably hostile to us, a country bent on

our destruction, a country that sought only war, a country that couldn’t officially

bal

be

trusted. Indeed,

as country didn’t

recognize that China existed.

Now

map, denying the existence of a few

said that

China

some

ver-

billion people.

But

that’s

existed but that

it is

a country with which

could be friendly. Nothing in China had changed. There

was no change

no change

in the leaders of the country,

the system of government. Yet almost overnight all

even

magic of a new verbal map, we not only

then, through the

we

we

things Chinese

became popular

in the

United

in

China and States.

By simply changing the verbal map China was transformed from our enemy to a country that, if not our friend, at least was a country with whom we could have normal relations. From a country that U.S. citizens could not legally visit,

nor with

whom

any U.S. business could

trade,

China

became almost overnight a popular destination for tourists and businesspeople. The whole episode echoed an incident in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four.

At

this

moment

.

.

.

Oceania was

Eurasia and in alliance with Eastasia. or private utterance was three powers

ever admitted that the

any time been grouped along Actually, as Winston well knew, it

had

different lines.

it

war with In no public

at

at

was only four years since Oceania has been with Eastasia and in alliance with Eurasia. 1

79

at

war

The New Doublespeak The Semantic Environment

Language occurs

in a situation, a context,

which language occurs

creates the

and the context

meaning communicated

by the language. As researchers have pointed being

than

rather

operation.

.” 5 .

.

We

a

thing,

becomes

ships

out,

“meaning,

an

event

or

shouldn’t think of meaning as a “thing”

but as the result of a situation in which to create

in

all

the parts interact

meaning. As the parts change and as the relation-

between the parts change, the meaning

will change.

Meaning is not static but dynamic. Words in one context or semantic environment can take on an entirely different meaning in another. There’s a big difference between saying “I do” when a friend asks you if you like your steak cooked rare, and saying “I do” when the minister says “Do you take this man to be your lawful wedded husband?” So when we examine language, we have

to

examine not just the words but the semantic environment

in

which the words

occur.

A semantic environment any situation in which language plays a role. A semantic environment composed of (1) the is

is

people using the language, both the speaker and the audience to

whom

the language

the speaker

is

addressed;

and the audience;

(3)

(2)

the purposes of both

the language normally

expected and used to achieve such purposes; and

(4)

the

actual language used in a particular situation. In other words,

who

is

saying what to

whom, under what

80

conditions and

cir-

Abstracting

Our Way

into

Doublespeak

cumstances, with what intent, and with what results?

There

are

many

kinds of semantic environments: science,

law, politics, war, business, economics, religion, sports,

any number of

others.

Each of

which people use language or against other people.

should look

ronment

at the

which

in

a context within

is

do something

to

When we

to or for, with

examine language, we

language in terms of the semantic enviit

occurs, considering the relationship of

which

the language to the situation in

Oliver North and the

A

these

Gash

it is

used.

of Semantic Environments

serious conflict of semantic environments occurred

Colonel Oliver North

testified

when

before a congressional com-

mittee investigating criminal charges that were

The

and

made

against

was which semantic environment would control the hearings. Colonel North insisted on using him.

basic

issue

the language of patriotism, while the tried to use the

members of Congress

language of law. While the committee

bers spoke of bribes, illegal payments,

arms,

illegal

illegal

mem-

purchase of

dealings with foreign governments, falsification

and destruction of official government documents, and other legal matters, Colonel North spoke of following orders, doing his duty, obeying the president, supporting freedom fighters,

and being devoted

to his family

.

81

6

The New Doublespeak President Push’s Semantic Environment

Another example of a

conflict

between semantic environ-

ments occurred when President Bush used the language of patriotism in pardoning six former holders of high govern-

who had

ment

office

affair.

These

played major roles in the Iran-Contra

six officials

cally forbidden

by

had

secretly

engaged in

law, including dealing in

rorist state, failure to obtain congressional

sales

to

another

and

state,

some of

arms with a

illegal acts

the officials lied under oath

ter-

approval for arms

transferring

Nicaraguan contras. After these

acts specifi-

arms

to

the

were exposed,

and destroyed evidence

of their crimes.

Bush called the people who comcrimes “patriots” and said their legal troubles

In his pardon, President

mitted these

were simply a matter of a “criminalization of policy ences.” President

Bush applied

differ-

the label “patriots” to govern-

ment officials who acted secretly in the service of a president by committing acts specifically forbidden by law, and who when they got caught by Congress lied and covered up for one another and for the president. President Bush also applied the label “policy differences” to the selling of arms to

Iran and giving arms to the Nicaraguan contras, as well as lying to a grand jury ically

and

to Congress, all acts that are specif-

forbidden by law. Thus, by using the semantic envi-

ronment of patriotism instead of the semantic environment of law, President Bush could declare breaking certain laws

82

is

Our Way

Abstracting

simply a “policy difference” that

commit

know map and

lawyers

their verbal act.

excusable

is

if

those

who

the crime are “patriots .” 7

Maps

Verbal

Good

Doublespeak

into

Lawyers

for

“junk bonds”

argued during

Courtroom

that their job

to get a jury to accept

is

thus accept their labels for their client’s

Michael Milken, once called the king of

(which

is

an interesting case of

his trial that

and “kickbacks” were clients to

in the

what prosecutors

really “sales credits,”

labeling),

called “bribes”

and

that helping

evade taxes was just “account accommodation”

The

jury did not accept the proffered maps and came up

with

its

own map and

its

own

which

label,

saying that Mr. Milken was convicted

Doublespeak

thrives

when we

is

way

another

of

8 .

deliberately use the lan-

guage of one semantic environment in another semantic environment. So we’re examining it

is

used.

We

we must determine whether is

the language

appropriate for the environment in which

need

to ask

who

is

whom,

saying what to

under what conditions and circumstances, with what

and with what

results?

This

is

as

any when examining language, and for doublespeak.

83

good a

intent,

starting point as

especially

when

looking

The Doublespeak of Law

In the interest of

ning of

this

full disclosure, I

chapter that

I

must admit

have a law degree,

admitted to the Pennsylvania Bar, and

American Bar Association. However, lawyer since

from

I

do not

practice law.

I I

My

am

a

at the beginI

have been

member

do not

call

interest in

of the

myself a

law stems

my interest in language.

Legalese, legal gobbledygook, legaldegook— all are terms for that arcane

form of English used by lawyers and judges,

and by few other

rational

human

beings.

plain about legal language, they usually

When people mean

the language

in these examples:

For purposes of paragraph

(3),

described in paragraph

shall

(2)

85

com-

an organization be deemed

to

The New Doublespeak include

an

501(c)(4),

or

(5),

paragraph

described

organization (6)

(2) if it

in

section

which would be described

in

were an organization described

in section 501(c)(3).

No

savings

and loan holding company,

directly

more

transac-

or indirectly, or through one or tions, shall

.

.

.

acquire control of an uninsured

more than one year

institution or retain, for

after

other than an insured institution or holding com-

pany

thereof,

the date any insured institution

subsidiary becomes uninsured, control of such institution.

Trial court did not abuse

ing

post-judgment

a

its

discretion

by order-

temporary injunction

to

enforce a permanent injunction that was part of a

judgment when the court made adequate findings that the permanent injunction was violated and tailored the post-judgment injunction to final

only enforce the provisions of the permanent injunction.

Examples such Yet

we make

as these,

a serious mistake

and confusing language law. In fact,

Law

is

and even worse ones, abound.

is

such language

the is

if

we

think that such confused

problem with the language of

not the problem.

the profession of language.

86

Law

is

language.

To

The Doublespeak of Law

learn law, to

ence the all

full

work with law, to experience law is to experiforce and power of language, and to experience

the imprecisions, limitations,

the use of language. In

much

like

many

and problems inherent

respects, reading

reading poetry. But just as

law

we might

is

in

very

miss the

power of poetry by concentrating on the syntax of the poem, so too can we miss the power of law by concentrating on its sometimes convoluted syntax and odd vocabulary. Our examination of the doublespeak of the law

will

go beyond

such limited considerations.

The Power

to Define

and

make your

Power means being

in a position to define

definition the only

one people use. The great power of law

to

power to define, and to apply its definitions. What is a crime? Whatever the law says is a crime. Each year Congress, state legislatures, and municipal governments create new crimes and erase old ones. In fact, what is resides in

its

a crime in one city or state

In

some

places

it is

legal to

may

not be a crime in another.

walk a

city street

with an alco-

one hand and a gun in another, while in having either object in your hand will get you

holic drink in

another city

Much

arrested.

ways

in

of law involves learning definitions and

which those

definitions can

situations.

87

be applied

to specific

The New Doublespeak How Hot

What

Is

Too Hot?

are simple questions in everyday

of litigation

when we

In Chapter

1 I

mentioned the concept of

meaning of a word.

doesn’t agree with

We

fee.

tion,

my

and what

is

is

mentioned

also

I

fuzziness, the prob-

definition of

what

and

in headlines in

my

wife

this defini-

newspapers across the country.

famous McDonald’s hot seized

on

this

coffee case.

case as an example of the

system gone mad, proof that Americans

spill

of a cup of coffee. After

all,

how

was hot when she bought

we should look

First,

it,

so

why wasn’t

at the facts

will sue at the

could anyone sue

because she spilled hot coffee on herself? She

knew

the cof-

she careful?

of the case before

drawing our inferences. As we examine

remember train

that

constitutes hot cof-

legal

start

not included

have worked out our disagreement over

am referring to the Many critics have

fee

the stuff

but for others, a disagreement over hot coffee ended up

in court, I

become

enter the semantic environment of law.

lem of determining exactly what in the

life

case,

this

the story in Chapter 3 of the four people

we

on

the

and the inferences they drew and the judgments they

reached based on the “facts” they were sure they had. Stella

Liebeck was

sitting in a

her cup of coffee in her

lap.

parked car when she

The

hot coffee caused second-

and third-degree burns, requiring skin with scars.

When

grafts

and leaving her

she asked McDonald’s to reimburse her

medical expenses, the restaurant chain offered her half of

spilled

what she had

spent.

less

than

So Ms. Liebeck sued, asking

her medical expenses.

88

for

The Doublespeak of Law

During the serves

is

the jury learned that the coffee

trial,

McDonald’s

kept at 180 degrees, or 40 degrees higher than

home

coffeemakers produce. Moreover, McDonald’s had received over 700 complaints about

numerous claims $500,000.

A witness for the

McDonald’s knew injuries, yet

it

hot coffee, and had even settled

some claims in excess of McDonald’s corporation dismissed

for burns, with

700 claims as

the

its

“trivially

that

its

from

different

zero.”

In short,

hot coffee was causing numerous

refused to lower the temperature.

The jury responded

to

McDonald’s seeming

indifference

by

awarding Ms. Liebeck $160,000 in compensatory damages, and then sent a message to McDonald’s by awarding her $2.7 million in punitive damages.

designed to do:

known

It

The damage award

drew public and corporate

did what

it is

attention to a

hazard. However, the judge reduced the award to

$480,000, and Ms. Liebeck later settled for a lower, undisclosed

amount

by McDonald’s.

to avoid a long process of appeals

1

What inferences are we to draw now about the tort system? Do we change our minds and say that the system seems to be working and we shouldn’t change it? Not at all. Remember, this is

only one example, and

ranging inferences and

The

we should never draw

final judgments

quality of our inferences rests

on

from just one example. the quality of our infor-

mation, and one example, one anecdote

is

seldom a

solid basis

for

an inference. So before we reach such judgments

tort

system

is

or

is

not working,

we need

information than the story of one case in

However, there case:

How

hot

is

is

still

too hot?

wide-

as the

to gather a lot

more

New Mexico.

the fundamental question of the It

seems

89

safe to say that the folks

The New Doublespeak at

McDonald’s

coffee,

didn’t think 180 degrees

was too hot

for their

while over 700 of their customers, including Ms.

Liebeck, and the jury thought that 180 degrees was too hot.

So what should McDonald’s do? While

accommodate our

my

wife and

its

coffee for each

customer. But what McDonald’s can do, and what bly should have done, was determine

how

can

McDonald’s

differing ideas of hot coffee,

can’t very well adjust the temperature of

I

hot

it

proba-

its

coffee

should be based on a variety of information.

At the

trial,

McDonald’s

degrees to maintain eration, tion,

that

its

peak

flavor.

While

that’s

one consid-

not the least of which was the over 700 claims for burns

had been made. Then

home.

happens it.

kept the coffee at 180

it

McDonald’s should have considered other informa-

sidered that 140 degrees at

said

Finally,

to

is

too,

McDonald’s might have con-

the temperature for coffee served

McDonald’s might have considered what

human

skin

when

180-degree coffee

is

poured on

In other words, McDonald’s should have realized that the

definition of hot

and too hot depends on the people using

the coffee. In this instance, a court decided for

what the

definition of too hot

McDonald’s

is.

What lime

Is It?

While trying

to

the source of

some disagreement, we don’t normally have a

determine what

90

is

hot and too hot can be

The Doublespeak of Law

problem answering a question

like

“What

time

is

it?”

Yet in

the semantic environment of law there can be instances in

which the question

not easily answered, and

is

we might

not

was

in

agree with the answer.

A

mentions

to

on business

last

friend

California

you

replies,

she

you ask when

“Around

hour.” Yet there are times

when

week, she had a car accident. In

talking about the accident,

Your friend

that

five o’clock,

when

it

happened.

during the rush

the answer to this simple

question— “What time did the accident occur?”— is not so simple.

A

couple of years ago, on

C-141B

Force

November

two U.S. Air

30,

transport planes collided during a night

refueling mission over

Montana.

All the

men on

the two

planes were killed. Shortly before the accident, nine of the

men had

signed up for a $100,000 supplemental

ance policy that was scheduled to take 1.

effect

is

insur-

on December

Since the military operates on Greenwich

(which

life

Mean Time

seven hours ahead of Mountain Standard Time),

two transports read 4:30 However, the Department of Veterans

the clocks in the cockpits of the

A.M.

December

1.

Affairs said that because the transports crashed at 9:30 P.M.

Mountain Standard Time, no supplemental benefits would be paid. So what time was it when the transports crashed: 0430 GMT, the time showing on the clocks in the cockpits, or 2130 MST, the time showing on clocks on the ground? And how do we determine which time is the “real” or “correct” time?

2

91

The New Doublespeak When No Means

Yes

mean

In the semantic environment of law, no can

was the case

least that

After a

woman

yes.

At

in Pennsylvania not too long ago.

brought rape charges against a

man

for forc-

ing her to engage in sex with him, the charges were dropped

when

The woman had

with words.

Under

saying no

is

that”

tried to protect her-

by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court,

a ruling

not enough to sustain a rape charge. So in the

is

no means yes

state of Pennsylvania,

There

protested only

and “don’t do

said “no”

had not physically

repeatedly, but she self.

woman had

the prosecutor said the

some evidence

in the language of sex.

that this principle holds true in

another activity in Pennsylvania. 3

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Nicholas Papadakos said he

was “offended”

describe

the

cash

word “bribery” was used to members of the Philadelphia

that the

“gifts”

Roofers Union delivered to various Philadelphia judges during

the

Christmas

envelopes

Papadakos

instead. For those for

very easily

$300

containing insisted

mean

yes.

the envelopes were

These

season.

to

whom

$500

I’m sure

handed

to

$500

term

the

that

in

cash.

“gratuities”

in cash

that’s

consisted

“gifts”

what

is

a

of

Justice

be used

“gift,”

no can

the judges said as

them: “No, no, don’t give

me

that envelope.”

We

can view a

ing the definition trial,

trial as

a formal proceeding for determin-

we want

to

apply to an action. During a

a defense attorney will argue for one definition while

92

The Doublespeak of Law

the prosecutor argues for another. will

be which definition

The

decision of the court

and what the conse-

will prevail,

quences of that definition will be.

Courts constantly struggle with defining words, and often the words they seek to define are words that we use every day not just in our conversations but in our legal discourse as well. In

one

case, the U.S.

what

determining

is

a

Supreme Court was faced with

country.

Chief Justice

Rehnquist wrote that “country” simply

refers to

William

some land

mass and does not require the existence of an actual political state or sovereign. Other definitions enunciated by the Supreme Court have serious and far-reaching consequences.

Who

The

Are the “People”?

word “people” mean, espeFourth Amendment, which states, “The right of

question

cially in the

is,

what does

the

the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, effects,

against unreasonable searches

be violated

.

.

.

”? This question

case of United States

v.

and

seizures shall not

came before

Verdugo- Urquidezp in

and

the court in the

which a

citizen of

Mexico was charged with conspiring to ship tons of marijuana into the United States. Mexican officials had seized the accused drug dealer and turned him over to U.S. authorities. After his arrest, and while he was being held in a U.S. prison,

Mexican and U.S.

officers

93

searched the various

The New Doublespeak houses he owned and seized evidence. Did these warrantless searches violate the defendant’s Fourth

Upholding

warrantless

the

Amendment

searches,

rights?

Chief Justice

Rehnquist said that the term the “people” was “a term of

employed

in

select

Rehnquist then defined

who

of

parts this

are part of a national

the

term of

constitution.”

art as “a class

Justice

of persons

community or who have

wise developed sufficient connection with considered part of that community.”

Of

this

art

other-

country to be

course,

we might

means to have a “sufficient connection” with this country, and what is meant by a “class of people,” and what the “national community” is. But Justice Rehnquist achieved what he wanted with his definition. The want

to ask

what

it

evidence gathered in the warrantless searches was admissible in the

trial.

However,

this definition resulted in

dox.

Now

have

classes of “people”

something of a para-

under the various Supreme Court decisions we

who

enjoy the protection of the

Amendment and classes who do not. Foreigners livtheir own countries are subject to warrantless searches

Fourth ing in

by U.S.

agents, while U.S. citizens living abroad are secure

from warrantless searches by U.S. agents. However, within the United States the rights of foreigners against a warrantless

search depend

country.”

The

on

their status or

defendant in

this case

“connection with

held a green card, so

obviously possession of that card doesn’t special class of “people”

who

Amendment. Of course, U.S.

94

move you

are protected

agents

this

had

into that

by the Fourth

better

be careful

in

The Doublespeak of Law

Mexico because no searches

are allowed in

Mexico without

a warrant.

Women and

A basic principle

and

color.

We

any group of items

in classifying

basis of classification

couldn’t classify

Other Nonpregnant Persons

all

must be

is

that the

consistent. For example,

we

the cars in a parking lot according to size

could classify them according to

size,

then

them according to color. But if we were to classify them on both size and color we would run into problems. The red Corolla belongs in the same group as the red Cadillac based on color, but based on size the two cars reclassify

belong in different

be careful

do

to

So when we

classes.

it

classify

according to one principle

we have at a

to

time.

Classifying according to two principles simultaneously leads to not just a

confused classification but an invalid one. Yet

this is

exactly

what the Supreme Court did

cases

on sex

discrimination,

Electric

Company

v.

Gilbert

Geduldig

v.

in

two landmark

Aiello

and General

5

.

In these two cases health benefits were denied to preg-

nant women. Justice Rehnquist wrote that in each case the health plans did not discriminate against

women

because

program divides potential recipients into two groups— pregnant women and nonpregnant persons,” and pregnancy unique to women.” Because is just “an additional risk “the

0

.

.

.

95

The New Doublespeak not

all

women

are pregnant, there

Moreover, pregnancy

Of course, cific

the

is

is

no discrimination.

“voluntary,” said the chief justice.

same health plans covered such non-sex-spe-

voluntary conditions as vasectomies, circumcisions,

and prostectomies. Dividing the members of the insurance plans into pregnant

women and

nonpregnant persons

the basis of classification.

That

on two bases would incur a grade of F ing his group

We

is,

a case of shifting

the chief justice

at the

in

is

same

time,

is

classify-

an

act that

any science or philosophy

members of the insurance plan as pregnant and nonpregnant women, or as pregnant and nonpregnant persons, but we can’t mix women and persons in the same classification, since the class “women” includes course.

might

classify the

women but excludes men, while the class “persons” includes women and men. Even the class “nonpregnant persons” includes women and men. Yet as based in error as it was, this definition

held as the law of the land until Congress

passed the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978.

What

Is

a Person?

someone asked you “What is a person?” you might think the question a little odd because the answer is so obvious. You might point to yourself, your questioner, and the people around you and say, “That’s a person.” But remember now If

that we’re asking

our question in the semantic environment

96

The Doublespeak of Law

of law, so the obvious

obvious, and often the obvious

isn’t

is

wrong. In 1959, Congress provided that a poor person would not

have

pay a

to

California

Mens

state prison suit.

filing fee for a federal lawsuit.

Colony

The lower

right to

file

as a

“pauper” in a law-

court ruled that the association of inmates their lawsuit

Supreme Court ruled

fied for the

v.

a group of inmates in a California

,

wanted the

was a “person” and the

7

In Rowland

could proceed. However,

that only a “natural person” quali-

waiver of filing fees and denied the association of

inmates the status of “person.”

The Court reached

this decision

even though Congress

has provided that “in determining the meaning of any Act of

Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise” the words

“person and whoever include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, nies, as well as individuals.” it

and joint stock compa-

But the word “person” does not,

seems, include an association. So General Motors

son, but a group of inmates in a California prison

Which

a per-

not.

brings us to that most curious of definitions of

“person,” the corporation. ten,

is

is

corporations as

When

the Constitution

we know them

did not

was

exist.

writ-

But

in

1809, a Pennsylvania corporation wanted to sue a Georgia tax collector. Normally, the corporation

would have sued

in

a Georgia court, but instead the corporation sought to sue in

a federal court. Article III of the Constitution states that federal courts States.” is

can hear disputes “between Citizens of different

Chief Justice John Marshall wrote that a corporation

nothing other than a group of individuals associated with

97

The New Doublespeak one another.

And

because they are

citizens, this association

should not keep them out of court. Corporations, Marshall

mere

noted, are inventions of the state, “being the law.” Thus, a corporation

is

and

a person

creatures of

and can bring a

a

person with Fourth

Amendment protection. However, for Amendment (“No person shall be

purposes of the Fifth

lawsuit

federal

in

court,

is

.

.

.

compelled in any

criminal case to be a witness against himself. tion

not a person and

is

So what

nation.

is

it’s

a “legal” person.

One Man, One

You enter

a group of It all

Vote, But

the voting booth

as a citizen

and

cast

.”)

a corpora-

your

its

If

a creature

members, and some-

depends on the

Only

it’s

definition.

You Vote the Right

Way

ready to exercise your rights

all

ballot for the candidate of

your

more fundamental, more impordemocracy? The Supreme Court has written that citi-

choice. Is there tant to

it’s

.

not protected against self-incrimi-

a corporation? Sometimes

of the law, sometimes time

is

.

any

activity

zens have “a constitutional right to vote and have their votes

counted.” Indeed, the Court has emphasized that “no right

more precious

in a free country than that of

in the election of those

good

citizens,

who make

we must

live.

the laws

Other

basic, are illusory if the right to vote

98

is

rights,

is

having a voice

under which,

as

even the most

undermined .”

8

The Doublespeak of Law

Secure in

this

knowledge, you look

discover that there

happen

is

in the

to be.

name

if

you

is

for office,

to vote

know he won’t

him than not voting

In Burdick

lose.

and you

whom you

a crook for

So you exercise your right

vote for

only to

he were the only candidate, which he

of your choice. You

ter a write-in

Well,

one candidate

to think that this candidate

wouldn’t vote even

happens

just

at the ballot

Takushi

v.

at

the

,

by writing

win, but bet-

all.

Supreme Court

ruled that despite the sacredness of the ballot, despite the basic

and important nature of

count because count

if

the

a write-in vote,

it’s

city, state,

write-in votes.

You

and

write-in votes don’t

county, or whoever has a law banning

According

Supreme Court, you do not vote for any particular candi-

to the

have “a fundamental right date.”

your vote doesn’t

voting,

to

are “simply guaranteed an equal voice in the elec-

tion of those

who

govern .” 9

This certainly sounds

way they used to run elecof Communism: You could

like the

tions in Russia before the fall

vote for anyone you want, as long as

party candidates. So

now

it

was

for

one of the

in Hawaii, Louisiana,

Nevada,

Oklahoma, South Dakota, Kentucky, and Virginia your right to vote does not include the right to write in the

name

of the candidate you support. But you are free to

vote for any of the party hacks, crooks, and other incompetents

who happen

to vote, as defined

to

be on the

ballot.

by the doublespeak of

Court.

99

This

is

the right

the U.S.

Supreme

The New Doublespeak When

Sitting in Jail Isn’t

Punishment

Perhaps the most fundamental principle of American criminal law

is

the presumption of innocence.

proven guilty in a court of

until

law.

You

are innocent

Because of

this pre-

sumption of innocence, the government cannot imprison

you are

the

you are found guilty of the crime with which you charged. At least that’s the way things used to be. Then Supreme Court stepped in and with a little doublespeak until

transformed the presumption of innocence into the presump-

and granted

tion of guilt,

police

and courts the power

keep you in prison before you’ve even had a

Under

the Bail

that a suspect that

he was

held

this

Reform Act of 1984,

trial.

courts could order

be held in “preventive detention” on the basis

likely to

commit

further crimes.

Lower

law unconstitutional on the grounds that

a suspect’s right to due process of law

Eighth Amendment’s right to the

Supreme Court decided

without a

trial

to

bail.

v.

someone all, nor was

Salerno

10 ,

in prison

that putting at

violated

it

and violated the

In United States

wasn’t imprisonment

courts

it

punish-

ment. Pretrial

someone

detention, as the in jail without bail,

Supreme Court is

is

holding

simply a “regulatory” proce-

dure. According to Justice Rehnquist: “the

person

calls

mere

fact that a

detained does not inexorably lead to the conclu-

sion that the government has imposed punishment.” So, as

you

sit

in jail for

months awaiting your

trial,

you can keep

reminding yourself that you are not being punished, that

100

The Doublespeak of Law

your stay in that

when

and

a regulatory stay,

jail cell is just

that

you innocent, all the time you spent be returned to you by the court that put you there.

the jury finds

jail will

Today,

thousands

of Americans

in

charged with federal

will

under preventive detention. Some of them be found guilty and sentenced to prison terms, others

will

be found not guilty and released, and others

crimes

in jail

sit

have

will

charges against them dropped, and they too will be

all

released.

them

But

will

brought

The

all

will share

one

have served time in

common jail

experience: All of

before they were ever

to trial.

to

weapon of totalitarian governments is the power throw people in jail and keep them there without benefit

of

trial.

we

great

But that can’t happen in the United

States

because

believe that people are innocent until proven guilty in a

court of law, and until they have had their day in court the least that’s the

way

Supreme Court rewrote

the

government cannot keep them it

used

to

be,

Constitution with

until its

the

in

jail.

At

legal doublespeak.

“Harmless” Errors

We

As Dick “Night Train” Lane of the Detroit Lions once said, “If I were perfect, no one could all

make

afford to pay

mistakes.

my

salary.”

When

the police

make

a mistake,

there can be serious legal consequences. For example,

101

when

The New Doublespeak the police coerce a confession

from a defendant, the courts

have always thrown the confession out. sion

is

used

to obtain a conviction,

the conviction are

And

Amendment

the confes-

both the confession and

thrown out and the defendant

At one time the Supreme Court

again.

if

called

right against self-incrimination

is

tried

this

Fifth

“one of the fun-

damental tenets of our criminal justice system .” 11 But no longer.

In Arizona

v.

Fulminante

12 ,

the

Supreme Court decided

that a

conviction could stand although a coerced, involuntary confession

had been admitted

by the jury

in reaching

as evidence

its

decision.

and was considered

The Court found

the

admission of a coerced confession could constitute “harmless error” because, in

its

defendant guilty even the

would have found the the confession hadn’t been used in

opinion, the jury if

trial.

According sion

is

to the Court, the issue isn’t

whether a confes-

unconstitutionally coerced; the question

is

whether

the confession influenced the jury’s decision, whether the

“error” affected

of introducing a coerced confession in the the jury’s

decision,

“harm” or was “harmless”

trial

whether the “error” caused

in the jury reaching

its

decision.

don’t

how do we know if the error was harmless or not? We know until the trial is over. Then someone will have to

look

at the trial

But

and decide whether the defendant would

have been found guilty without the coerced confession. as if the

Court said

that

the criminal law process

vinced the defendant

is

It’s

any violation of the Constitution is

okay

guilty.

102

if

the

Supreme Court

is

in

con-

The Doublespeak of Law

Those Honest Mistakes Will Get You

The

had a search warrant

police

third floor.

When

doors, both open. the police

began

If

You Don’t Watch Out

for the apartment

on

the

they got to the third floor they found two

Assuming

there

was only one apartment,

their search, finding drugs,

money, and

drug paraphernalia. But then they discovered there were two apartments, not one, and that they were in the wrong apart-

Was

ment. If

their search a warrantless search?

you were

bly react as

to

read the

I did.

The

facts

of the case, you would proba-

police thought they were following

the law but in fact they weren’t.

say the search was legal, is

how

While you might want

could you?

The

to

Constitution

pretty clear, requiring that a place can be searched only

with a warrant “particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” Clearly the police

had no such warrant

named another apartment

searched because their warrant

and named

apartment they

to search the

different things to

be

The Supreme Court upheld

seized.

the search

by

calling

it

an

made a mistake, but they didn’t mean to make a mistake. They made their mistake in good faith, unlike a mistake made in bad faith, whatever that is. How do we know that the police made an honest mistake “honest mistake.” Yes, the police

acting in

good

Just ask them.

faith?

And

We

don’t, but the

the police do,

Court keeps hearing about faith,

and

When

it

all

Supreme Court

the time. In fact, the

police mistakes

keeps saying that the search was

made

in

good

fine.

the police stopped a motorist for a

103

does.

minor

traffic

The New Doublespeak computer check and found there was

violation, they ran a

an outstanding

him and searched

They

warrant against him.

traffic

his car, finding a

arrested

bag of marijuana.

But the computer was wrong, and the warrant had been

removed over two weeks

the

earlier. Still,

man was

tried for

possession of marijuana. Again, the Court said the police search was in “good basis for the search,

faith.” it

was

So even though there was no legal.

The

court did not find

very significant that the police computer system

made on

it

the

average 12,000 inaccurate or invalid reports on suspects

every day. So,

hope

better

if

you’re ever stopped by the police, you’d

that you’re not

made by

one of those 12,000 daily mis-

Crime Information Center’s computer. Because you have no protection against a “good faith” search by the police. While the police and prosecutors enjoy the benefits of “good faith” and “harmless error,” defendants do not. In the Court said that if inmates fail to Coleman v. Thompson meet all the state court system’s procedural requirements, for takes

the National

13

,

almost any reason, they

forfeit their right to

challenge the

constitutionality of their conviction in federal court.

Robert Coleman’s attorney missed a three days, he forfeited

all

case in the federal courts.

with nor did

state filing deadline

by

constitutional rights to appeal his

The Court was

not concerned

care about the merits of Coleman’s argu-

cared only that his attorney had failed by three

ments;

it

days to

file

one

it

So when

a petition with the state court.

to face death

because his lawyer

said the Court, “the petitioner

Is it fair for

made an

must bear the

104

some-

error? Yes,

risk of attorney

The Doublespeak of Law

Ydu d better be very careful if you ever need to hire a lawyer. To be safe from the rulings of the Supreme Court, you d better hire a perfect lawyer, one who never makes miserror,

takes.

But then

lawyer?

The

how

could you ever afford to pay such a

price of perfection runs high. Just ask Night

Train Lane. In the language of the

Supreme Court, “harmless error” and “good faith” mistakes are made only by the police and prosecutors, and never by defendants and their attorneys. The power to define is indeed awesome, especially when exercised by the Supreme Court in criminal cases.

Consensual and Other Encounters

Imagine that you’re waiting for friends sitting

on

the

hood of a

police officers pass by.

car in

One

meet you. You’re your neighborhood when two to

of the officers asks

if that’s

your

“Then why are you sitting on it?” asks the officer. “I’m just waiting for some friends to pick me up so we can go shoot some pool,” you say. “Then where’s your pool stick? How can you shoot pool without a pool car.

“No,” you reply.

stick?” the officer asks. You’re

pool hall has to

lots

own your own

thing the officers

some

about to point out that the

of pool cues to use and you never wanted

cue anyway, but before you can say any-

move

closer

and ask you

to

show them

identification.

What do you do? Do you

refuse

105

and walk away? That’s

The New Doublespeak what you’re supposed People

(.

v.

According

Lopei

u

standing by

left

)

Supreme Court.

the

Court you are involved

to the

meaning

encounter,”

to do, according to a California ruling

that the police don’t

in a “consensual

have any right

to

you so you can walk away at any time. So, if the police stop you on the street, question you, and order you to produce identification, you are merely engaged in a “consensual encounter” and are not entitled to any constitutional protections against warrantless searches and seizures because all you have to do is just ignore the police and walk away. detain

And what do you

suppose would happen

if

you did

Sheriff’s deputies in Fort Lauderdale, Florida,

that?

took their

cue from the Supreme Court and created a technique they call

“working the buses.” They wait

state

highway

at rest stops

for long distance buses.

the deputies board the bus, walk

When

down

the

on

the inter-

the buses stop,

aisle,

and, with-

out any reason to suspect any passenger of anything, they question passengers and ask whether they can search their luggage. If

you were a passenger and they asked you, would

you refuse? According

to the

Supreme Court

can say no because

and the search deputies don’t

have bus

testified that if

is

you

that

v.

Bostick

15 ,

you

another “consensual encounter”

a “consensual search.”

is

tell

this

in Florida

you have a

Of

course,

the

right to refuse. Riders

they thought they would be taken off the

they refused to cooperate, so they cooperated.

The

Court’s use of “consensual” in both these cases gives a

whole new meaning

to the

word, a meaning that could have

interesting implications in the relations

106

between

men and

The Doublespeak of Law

women, employers and employees, and

a whole range of

relationships.

What

Counts,

Words or Intent?

In recent years, the Supreme Court has rendered decisions that were so clearly contrary to the intent of the legislation as

passed by Congress that Congress has passed subsequent to correct the Court’s rulings. Yet

bills

purpose of the Court, intent

When

will

when

it

serves the

outweigh words.

Supreme Court completely reversed a 1971 ruling that had been delivered by Chief Justice Warren Burger for a unanimous Court, it did not say it was reversthe U.S.

ing the 1971 decision. Instead, the Court implied that for the last

eighteen years lawyers, judges, Congress, and the Court

had been misreading the decision: “We acknowledge some of our earlier decisions can be read as suggesting

itself

that

otherwise. But to the extent that those cases speak of an

employer’s ‘burden of proof’ with respect to a legitimate business justification defense, they should have been under-

stood to

mean an

employer’s production— but not persuasion-

burden.” 16 In the case of United

States

v.

X-Citement Video,

17

the

faced a problem. If the Court read the law as written, clearly unconstitutional

didn’t

want

Court it

was

and the defendant won. But the Court

the defendant to get

off,

so

words of the law and read the law the way

107

it it

just ignored the

wanted

it

to read.

The New Doublespeak Under

was

consideration

Against Sexual Abuse Law.

the

Under

knowingly transports or ships” or

of Children

Protection that law,

“any person

who “knowingly

who

receives

or distributes” a “visual depiction” of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct faces

up

to

up

to ten years in jail

and a

The defendant was convicted of were made by a well-known sex film

$100,000.

videotapes that

fine of

selling

actress

before she was eighteen years old.

The problem with As

“knowingly.”

the law

written,

it

modifies “transports or ships”

and does not modify anything erally,

the placement of the adverb

is

Read

else in the sentence.

lit-

the law requires only that the transport, shipping,

or

receiving,

distributing

be intentional,

with

no such

requirement for the sexual contents or for the age of the per-

As Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote, the literal interpretation “would produce results that were not merely odd, formers.

but positively absurd”

“We do such cial

How

to solve the

problem? Easy.

not assume that Congress, in passing laws, intended

results.”

Because “the age of the performers

is

the cru-

element separating legal innocence from wrongful con-

duct,” the

Court should invoke a presumption

that a knowl-

edge requirement applied.

This

is

a wonderful

law the way

it’s

is

principle of law. Don’t like the

way you want it would have none of this new principle.

written, then just read

to read. Justice Scalia

The Court

new

it

the

“not in the business of rewriting statutes.”

No

matter what Congress’s intent might have been, what the

law actually says is

is

that “all a person has to

shipping a visual depiction.”

108

know

is

that

he

The Doublespeak of Law

words don’t mean what they appear to say, or even what most of us would agree that they say What they So, written

mean

what the Supreme Court there any greater power than this? Is

really

says they

is

there

source of doublespeak than this? This that affects

our

lives in

mean.

Is

any greater

the doublespeak

is

ways we cannot begin

to imagine.

Pro-Life or Pro-Choice

The

debate about abortion

is

essentially

a debate

over

semantic environments and definitions, and which environ-

ments and definitions

will prevail. I place this brief discus-

sion of the language of abortion in the section

because, in reside.

on

my

Although

politics, the

days,

I

believe

judgment, I

could place

arena where

it

that’s

it

this

where the

on law

issue should

discussion in the section

seems

be conducted these

to

more properly belongs

in the semantic envi-

ronment of law.

The problem with flicting

on abortion is one of consemantic environments. Those who are opposed to the debate

abortion operate in the semantic environment of morals and religion, while those

who

ate in the semantic

environment of

two environments

are not

opposed law.

in the language each

to abortion oper-

We

can see these

group

uses.

While

both groups use some of the language of science from time to time, neither conducts

its

discussion in the semantic envi-

ronment of science.

109

The New Doublespeak we can

Before

among

discuss

we must

abortion

which the

the various semantic environments in

now

cussion

takes place,

which we might want

it

differentiate dis-

and the various environments to take place.

in

Only then can we

begin to examine the language of the debate, and only then

can in

we hope

to

have even a chance of making any progress

our discussion. I

think

it is

safe to say that those

who oppose

abortion see

the issue as a moral one, basing their arguments in morality, ethics,

and

religious doctrine,

drawing from

and interpretation of the Bible or Thus, they operate

in a semantic

their reading

similar religious works.

environment in which they

use the language and definitions of their morality and their religion.

declared I

think

Their purpose, of course,

is

have abortion

to

illegal. it is

also safe to say that those

who

are not

opposed

to abortion see the issue as a legal one, basing their argu-

ments in in

law.

Thus, they operate

in a semantic

which they use the language and

purpose, of course,

is

to

environment

definitions of law.

have abortion remain

Their

legal.

In the discussion of semantic environment in Chapter 3, listed the

I

elements of a semantic environment. In addition to

people— including both speaker and audience— a semantic

environment consists of the purposes of both speaker and audience. Since the purpose of both groups

on

is

to achieve a

would seem that we should be in the semantic environment of law. That is, the language of law should be the language of any debate decision

the legal status of abortion,

it

over abortion. Yet, while both groups have a legal goal, one

110

The Doublespeak of Lazo

group uses

language while the other does not.

legal

even the group that uses itself to just

And

language does not confine

legal

the language of the law but draws language

from

a variety of other sources as well.

A

semantic environment consists also of the language normally expected for a particular environment, and the lan-

And

guage actually used.

problem

here

lies

a significant part of the

in the discussion of abortion.

While we can the discussion

is,

what

readily discern

we

have,

I

think, a

the actual language of

much more

difficult task

what language is normally expected for this Those opposing abortion believe the discussion

in determining

discussion.

should take place in terms of the language of their religion

and

their morality,

Those not opposed

even though

their

purpose

a legal one.

to abortion believe the discussion

take place in terms of law.

While both

guage of science from time

to time, neither

position or

is

sides

mix

should

in the lan-

group grounds

language in the semantic environment of

its

its

sci-

ence.

Here, then,

When we

is

the intractable problem in this discussion.

have two competing semantic environments we do

not have a discussion.

have people talking

at

each other,

no communication taking place. For as we saw communication takes place within a context, within a

but there earlier,

We

is

semantic environment where

same language.

When we

all

the participants share the

have conflicting semantic environ-

much is communicated, and little Remember the conflicting environments

accom-

ments, nothing

is

plished.

of Oliver

North and the congressional committee, and President Bush

111

The New Doublespeak and the findings of congressional committees and the Court decisions.

Since the debate about abortion will be resolved

mately in the courts,

I

think

we must admit

ulti-

that the semantic

environment for any discussion of abortion should take place in the semantic environment of law.

our semantic environment, we can

By

at least

clearly defining

begin to have a

we can communicate with one

discussion in which

another.

And by conducting our discussion within this environment, we will be able to use words that have some fairly established definitions, while dropping that

A

do not belong

from the discussion words

in this environment.

major function of our

legislatures

and our courts

is

to

become the basis for law and the enforcement of law. Through these institutions, we reach agreement on what some words mean, and These

define words.

then

we

legal definitions then

we have

agree to abide by these definitions. So

legal

definitions for murder, insanity, bankruptcy, burglary, per-

son, death, religion,

Those on both words choice,”

as

and many

others.

sides of the abortion debate

who

use such

“preborn baby,” “product of conception,” “pro-

and

“pro-life”

use words that have no definition

except the private definition of those

who have

invented and

who

use these words. Moreover, these words have a conclu-

sion

imbedded within

cussion even before the discussion

Having

said

on

it

their

meaning so

begins.

that they

end a

dis-

Such words cannot advance

abortion.

all this I

must admit

in the discussion of abortion.

On

112

that

I

do not

the contrary,

see progress I

see a hard-

The Doublespeak of Law

ening of the discussion, with each side retreating more and

more

into

its

cussion with

own vocabulary, carrying on its side of the disits own words, and ignoring and rejecting the

words of the other

side.

Worse, neither side seems

willin g to

work on any kind of new vocabulary, one that will allow for a discussion of the various positions. As long as this continues,

we have

little

hope of resolving the

discussion, of

com-

some agreement. Language will play a crucial role in the debate on abortion, for it is through language that we as a society will ultimately come to agreement. For any agreement in human affairs must ultimately be reached through ing to

language.

So

let

us begin our journey to a resolution of our disagree-

ment over abortion by examining our language within

the

semantic environment of law. Let us define our words in law,

which

is

the proper function of our legislatures. In the

process of defining our words,

we

some agreement. Instead of talking

will at

be forced

come

to

one another using our

own special words, we can begin to talk we work to build a shared vocabulary.

113

to

with one another as

,

The Doublespeak of Business and Economics

How Do Fire Thee? Let Me Count the Ways I

Business

filled

is

with dozens of doublespeak terms for firing

much

of

number

of

or laying off employees, probably because there’s so that going

workers

on

who

these days. Estimates vary, but the

have been given the boot

is

enormous, with

almost 3.5 million workers losing their jobs from 1989 to 1995.

1

And

as corporations continue to eliminate jobs

and

get rid of thousands of employees, they continue to invent 2

new ways to avoid saying that they’re firing all these people. The doublespeak for firing thousands of employees falls

115

The New Doublespeak generally into three categories.

make

sound

it

as if laying off

Some companies want

workers

is

to

a positive experi-

ence for the workers and not a negative one, as in “construc-

which means losing your job

tive dismissal,”

kind of kid.

like that bad-tasting

However,

I

am

is

good

for you,

medicine you had to take as a

willing to bet that the experience

constructive for the

company than

for the people

is

who

more have

just lost their jobs.

Then

there are the companies that don’t really fire work-

ers;

they just

tally

happen

make some

other changes that only inciden-

to result in the layoff of

There might be a “production factory

is

thousands of workers.

cessation,”

which means the

closed and everyone working there

job, or the “elimination of positions,”

is left

without a

which means

that since

the jobs have been eliminated there’s

no need

for

all

those

workers to hang around. Finally, there

company even future,

is

new

the

better,

strategic plan that will

make

the

ready to face the challenges of the

engage in global competition, and, oh, by the way,

lay off 13,000 workers.

Such

is

the result of Procter

8c

Gamble’s plan for “Strengthening Global Effectiveness.”

Meanwhile, General Motors of Canada was working on

its

“lean concept of Synchronous Organizational Structures.” Officials at layoffs.

GM conceded that this “concept” would result in

How many

wouldn’t

workers would lose

their jobs,

they

say.

However,

I

think the winner for the best doublespeak for

firing

comes from the computer

fired;

you’re “uninstalled.” Gall a vice president at this corn-

116

industry,

where you’re not

The Doublespeak of Business and Economics

pany and the voice mail message

will tell

you

that

“you have

reached the number of an uninstalled vice president” I’m

we

hope he gets installed someplace else real soon. As more and more companies lay off more and more workers, the doublespeak flows more thickly. Workers are sure

all

never laid

they’re

off,

“redundant,”

“excessed,”

“transi-

tioned,” or offered “voluntary severance.”

Your job can be

declared “excess to requirements,” which

means

haven’t been laid

off,

By

your job no longer

the way, since

you

come

just that

that

you

your job has been eliminated. exists, there’s

no need

work anymore. You can always be “correctsized,” which means, I guess, that you were the wrong size all along and never knew it. But now the company has taken care of that problem, and made you the correct size, even if you don’t want to be, and your new correct size means you’re out of a job. for

to

When

to

one firm

fired 10 percent of

to “a refocusing of the

offered

some of

its

company’s

its

workers

skills set.”

it

referred

General Motors

employees a chance to participate in a

Those who entered the program had to leave the company once they had completed the program. Entering that program just might make you “career transition program.”

think of the inscription over the gates

of Dante’s

hell:

“Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.” At Stanford University it’s “repositioning,” while Tandem Computers calls it “reducing duplication” or “focused reduction.”

Digital

National Semiconductor had a

Equipment Corporation

“reshaping,”

referred

to

while

“involuntary

methodologies” that resulted in the “involuntary severance”

117

The New Doublespeak of 3,500 employees. Pacific Bell announced the elimination of

“employment

its

security policy” for

managers. Once

its

Bank of America and Security Pacific Bank was completed, up to 14,000 workers lost their jobs, a consequence that the Bank of America called a “release of the merger of the

resources.”

Window

The

Sun announced

Baltimore

Program (VWIP)

“Voluntary

its

more than 1,200 union and non-union employees.” This program is Incentive

available to

part of the newspaper’s “restructuring,”

manent

Wal-Mart

‘downsizing.’”

which “involved

stores called the layoff of

1,200 workers “a normal payroll adjustment.” Atlantic City,

New

Jersey,

per-

“restructure”

The

casinos in

departments and

“realign” their workforce.

Some companies implement “chemistry

change,”

a

“vocational

assignment and relocation.”

Then

adjustment,”

“skill-mix

or

relocation,”

“career

there’s a “realignment” or

“rebalancing” of the workforce, or a “consolidation of operations.”

Varian Associates of Palo Alto, California, decided to

“undertake a major repositioning” and “scale down”

its

workforce. At Sunset Publishing 20 percent of the workforce

was declared

“duplicative.”

in California,

“One hundred and

support personnel

been

who have

be

Pacific National

fifty

administrative

“involuntarily

It

was an

separated

from

the

payroll.”

offer” to

600

offer they couldn’t refuse.

With economic hard

many

and

overlapping positions have

Meanwhile, Sears made a “severance package employees.

Bank

Labs announced that 140 employees

displaced.” Bell

would

At Security

times hitting the health care business,

hospitals are laying off workers, but like

118

most other

The Doublespeak of Business and Economics

businesses,

they don’t say they’re laying off employees.

Instead they use such doublespeak as “operations improve-

“work

ment,”

and “operation

“proactive downsizing,” hospitals

“employee

reengineering,”

even ask employees

should be made. This

is

excellence.”

to help decide

called

repositioning,”

Some

where reductions

“employee empowerment,”

although some employees are empowered right out the door. Harris

Bank of Chicago announced

“rightsizing the bank,”

substantially reduce

count.” If the

its

which

a

payroll costs through reducing head

bank were

should

be

who were

called

described as “a program to

it

the

wrong

size all those years

they’re just getting the size correct now,

executives

program

in

rightsized.

maybe

all

and

those

charge of the wrong-size bank

employees

Fifteen

at

Clifford

of

Vermont weren’t laid off. “This was not a cutback nor a layoff. It was a career-change opportunity,” said Jim McNulty, president. Stouffer

Foods Corporation did not lay off 300

part-time workers. “These are called schedule adjustments,

not

layoffs,” said

Roz O’Hearn,

Research reduced tion,”

while

IBM

its

public affairs manager.

Cray

workforce through “voluntary termina-

asked for “voluntary resignations” from

its

program

to

“population.”

When AT&T

embarked on a

lay off 40,000 workers, the

company

using the words “fired” or “laid out

its

“force

well-publicized

off.”

assiduously avoided

Instead,

AT&T

carried

management program,” which was aimed

reducing an “imbalance of forces or

were not “invited” back

to the

“unassigned.”

119

skills.”

at

Employees who

company found themselves

The New Doublespeak A recent survey of employees trial

at

some of the

largest indus-

corporations revealed that for 69 percent of the employ-

term “reengineering” meant an excuse for

ees surveyed the

Moreover, 75 percent of the employees said they

layoffs.

feared for their

own

jobs,

and 55 percent

said that after

“reengineering” had been carried out at their

company they

were overworked. 3

The

question

we might want

to ask

some of the extremely

highly paid corporate executives in charge of this reengineering

is

why

invent

all

these

new terms?

Why

not just say

knows what’s going on, so what do you think you’re hiding, and from whom? you’re firing workers? Everyone

Certainly not the employees

who

lose their jobs.

Reengineering as a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

Indeed,

all

company announce stock

its

those stock analysts

on Wall

lays off lots of workers. All a

that

it’s

goes

laying off half up.

But

it

its

Street love

it

company has

when to

do

a is

workers and the price of

wasn’t

always

like

that.

Announcements of layoffs “used to be viewed as admissions of failure which prompted investors to dump stock, not buy 4

it.”

Then

all

that changed.

Around 1987 that

the stock market learned to love a

was “undergoing a

radical restructuring,”

and

company this

new-

found love for massive unemployment “turned restructuring

from a shame

into a bracing

embrace of change.” 5

120

And

the

The Doublespeak of Business and Economics

era of downsizing

was born.

Now

sudden change is that nothing what companies were doing was no this

had done had done

before.

They were

is

interesting about

really changed.

different

That

is,

from what they

laying off workers, just as they

now

in the past, only

what

the stock market decided

was a good thing and not a bad thing, so instead of selling the company’s stock people started to buy it. And the this

price of the stock increased.

And

as the stock of the downsiz-

ing companies went up, other companies decided to get in on the game. Soon, everyone was laying off lots and lots of workers, and those companies that weren’t watched their stock suffer as they tried to explain the latest

corporate fad.

It

all

why

they weren’t joining

looks like a

self-fulfilling

prophecy 6 because a number of studies have concluded downsizing has actually harmed a lot of companies.

that

7

But the doublespeak does have an important function. Through the use of such abstract words as “downsizing,” “restructuring,” terrible cost in

and “reengineering,” companies can hide the

human

lives that their “streamlining” causes.

In a long article in the

Wall Street Journal 8 Susan Faludi ,

one downsizing exacted from 63,000 employees when Safeway Stores decided to get lean and recounts the

toll

just

mean. Faludi recounts suicides, attempted suicides, divorces, bro-

ken

families,

who had

to

whole towns devastated economically, children

drop out of

college,

and thousands of people

left

On

the

without jobs, or the hope of finding another one. other hand, the few executives at the top of the

company

shared a personal gain of $800 million after four years.

121

The New Doublespeak Was

the restructuring necessary to

more competitive? According

make

to

company

to Faludi, in the four years

before the downsizing, Safeway was doing

companies were supposed

the

be doing

to

all

the things

be more competi-

tive:

It

was remodeling

stores,

its

“superstores” that have success.

and creating upscale

now proved

such a big

was experimenting with employee pro-

It

ductivity teams, phasing out money-losing divisions,

and thinning

that included less painful

its

some

work

layoffs

methods

force with a

program

but generally relied on

like attrition.

9

And how was Safeway doing? Was it making money? Was it competitive? Again according to Faludi: All these changes

produced earnings that more

than doubled in the to a record

first

four years of the 1980s,

$231 million in 1985. The stock price

tripled in three years,

and dividends climbed four

years in a row.

But Wall

all

that wasn’t

Street,

where

enough

for takeover-crazed

virtually

no company was

invulnerable to cash-rich corporate raiders. 10

And

so Safeway Stores went the path of downsizing to

please Wall Street, very, very rich,

and

in the process

make

and thousands of employees

122

a few executives very, very poor.

The Doublespeak of Business and Economics

This

one example of the reality hidden behind those abstract words for laying off millions of workers. just

is

Words must be connected Doublespeak will quickly

is

fill

to reality or they

always disconnected from in the reality

it.

Reality

trying to avoid

it

may be

so people

used the doublespeak

that

because the company thought they were

swallow

reality,

nothing.

behind the doublespeak. Then

company

they won’t trust the

mean

all

gullible

enough

to

unpleasant, even frightening, but

by using doublespeak,

especially a double-

speak so transparent, never works. Ask the people

who were

“reengineered.”

The Economy, and Other Abstractions

We

like to talk

about the “economy.” There are

all

kinds of

business magazines and television programs devoted to analyzing, discussing,

people

make

perform

omy

is

and even predicting

their living predicting

in the next

how

months, the next

in excellent shape,” said

the economy. Lots of

economy will “The U.S. econ-

the

year.

Robert E. Lucas

press conference discussing his 1995

Jr., at

Nobel Memorial

11

the

Prize

Economic Science. Lucas’s observation drew this sharp response from Sumner Rosen, a former professor of economics at Columbia University: in

I

see stagnant real wages, large-scale unemploy-

ment and underemployment,

123

increasing inequality

The New Doublespeak of wealth and income shares, rising poverty, persistent racial disadvantage

and much more

Are we looking

that bur-

at the

same

economy? Or have economists so narrowed

their

dens most people.

.

.

.

vision they cannot connect the intellectual world

they live in with the real world they purport to explain?

Do

these

12

two eminent economists see the same thing?

They can’t both be right, can they? Well, yes they can. But first we must remember whenever we read statements like these that there

is

no such thing

The “economy”

does

not

exist.

we have we use to

expressed in a word that of abstraction

process

abstractions that

Chapter 3? Just

omy

does not

we

think are

so

many

other

chair in

at the

hundreds, thou-

we

we should

simplistic at best,

we do with

so

join together into the realize that to

speak of

and downright mislead-

many

of our abstractions,

if it is real,

as if

it is

a thing,

speak about something that does not exist in the real

world. the

create

Looking around

we have reified this abstraction. To speak of the “economy” as to

same

created using the

so too the econ-

ing at worst. Yet, as

is

an abstraction

exist,

abstraction the “economy,” is

is

our chair does not

as

exist.

“economy”

It

Remember our

real.

sands, even millions of pieces that

the

“economy.”

as the

It

exists

only in our words, our symbols.

“economy” with words. Consider,

for example,

engage in the same process in creating the trade Japan.

124

We

create

how we

deficit

with

The Doublespeak of Business and Economics

Language, remember,

we

a set of symbols

is

communicate about the non-verbal world.

we we

use to

When

say that the U.S. has a trade deficit with Japan, are using word symbols as a form of shorthand

communicate a broad general description of a complex set of transactions. to

In the trade

at

first

place, the U.S.

all.

The

words,

Japan” are symbols used

The governments

states.

in

the

business

and Japan do not

“United States” and

to designate

two nation-

of both countries are not

of trading.

They govern

their

respective nation-states.

So when we speak of the U.S. trading with Japan,

we

really

within the U.S.

mean sell

that individual businesses

goods and services

to people

in Japan. Likewise, individual businesses in Japan

goods and services

sell

Yet thing,

the

we

to

people in the U.S

treat the trade deficit

with Japan as

13 .

if it is

something we can measure and manipulate.

“economy” too

as if

a real

We

treat

some control, and

a thing, a thing that has

it is

kind of palpable realness that we can work on, manipulate, like an automobile engine.

We

speak of “fine tuning” the economy, “jump starting the

economy,” “revving up the economy,” “idling the economy,”

and “slowing the economy,” of car that

we

economy

not a

does not

is

exist,

drive to get car,

it is

economy is some kind where we want to go. No, the as if the

not a thing;

know

but you’d never

125

it is it

an abstraction that

to hear us talk

about

The New Doublespeak we

“economy,” that thing

the

on

see pictured

television

news.

when an

Television likes pictures, not words, so topic like the ture.

The

television

“economy” comes along we have

to

abstract

have a

pic-

next time you’re watching the evening news on

and a reporter

starts to talk

about the “economy,”

watch what pops up on the screen. There might be a few

maybe

scenes of people working, or

New York

floor of the

ment

rate,

maybe

a graph or

in prices, the

unemploy-

Stock Exchange, or

some

chart illustrating

a shot of the trading

rise

or

or whatever. This

fall

is

“economy” according

the

to

television news.

When we

look

“economy” we

at the

the economists quoted above are correct. excellent

shape,

and the economy

Because that “thing” we abstraction,

we can

and we’d be

call

in

is

an economy

am

maybe even

in

is

shape.

terrible

such a high-level

is

we want about

the president,

executive of a corporation, the economy, great shape. I’m

The economy

say just about anything

correct. If I

both of

realize that

CEO,

my

it

or senior

economy,

making hundreds of thousands of

is

in

dollars,

millions of dollars. (“Chief executive officers of

America’s largest publicly held companies received higher

pay than ever million.”

14

Life

in 1994, with is

65 percent earning

good.) So too

if

making enough money

standard of living that

your neighbor off.

Nothing so

is

I like.

to

pay the

After

all,

laid off; a depression

large, so

$1

I’m a stockbroker, brain

surgeon, bricklayer, machinist, or anyone else ing and

at least

who

bills

when

work-

and enjoy a

a recession is

is

is

when

you’re laid

complex, so changeable and chang-

126

The Doublespeak of Business and Economics

mg

can ever be accurately frozen into one abstraction such

as the

Try

“economy” this exercise to get a better

word “economy” being

idea of what

I

mean by

so abstract. In Chapter 3

I

the

outlined

the process of abstraction, starting with a 1996 red Toyota

Camry and ending up

with the very abstract word “trans-

portation” Follow this same process, starting with “econ-

omy and working backward and keep getting more and more

is,

go as

far as

specific.

you

can.

That

Try something

like

this:

economy -» sales

car sales -> General

of Chevrolet

—> Tom’s

(a

—»

Bob’s

Chevy

can keep doing

going through a get the idea.

speak as

Lucas, our

list

ers

who

—>

how

money

Nob el- winning

is

just a

is

little

in

think

I

you

so vast that to

absurd. Robert

economist, finds the “economy”

This would be news

who have been

—

over and over, each time

to the millions of

“downsized,” the millions of work-

who can workers who have

are unemployed, the millions of workers

only find part-time jobs, the millions of

watched

the

“economy”

call the

a single entity

in “excellent shape.”

workers

this exercise

—

dealership sales

of entirely different items.

What we

if it is

sales

car salesman at Bob’s) car sales

Tom’s paycheck — » Tom’s bills Tom’s pocket after bills are paid

We

Motors

their earnings decline year after year,

no matter

hard they work. 15

To say

that the

“economy”

ply a nonsense statement.

is

Some

127

in “excellent shape”

is

sim-

people and businesses

may

The New Doublespeak well be in excellent shape— executive salaries, corporate prof-

stock dividends, and merger fees, for

its,

items that fits,

we

Of

availability,

in terrible shape.

course, low wages, declining benefits, fewer jobs,

job insecurity

own

make

for

corporation,

a

amounts of

good

“economy”— wages, beneand disposable income, for

consider part of the

job security, job

example— are

example— but other

for

an excellent economy,

run a corporation,

The same economic

stock.

one person and bad

economic condition

is

good

people suffer because of price of

it

happen

if I

own

or

and

large

condition can be

for another.

for everyone,

To speak

as if

doublespeak of

(low wages help keep

false,

an

even when some

down

the

goods so you can buy more with your low wages)

to use the

to

is

deceptive, or misleading

verbal maps.

The Verbal Maps of Economists

Economists are in the business of creating verbal maps. That is,

they create a world with words. As with

there

is

no necessary connection between

the reality they purport to represent.

all

verbal maps,

their

words and

The only

connection

between what economists say and what the world does that economists claim their

world.

and

(Remember

his

dissenting

is

words accurately represent the

maps of our Nobel economist colleague; each was convinced of the

the verbal

accuracy of his map.) Economists are constantly disagreeing

128

The Doublespeak of Business and Economics

with one another over economic “facts” and the inferences and judgments derived from them. You can go shopping for the

economic map of the world

act as if all

the

it’s

that appeals to you,

and then

the only accurate one around. Politicians

time. Just

look

at

the

do

this

arguments between the

Republicans and the Democrats over which economic we should follow.

map

Remember the three important rules about verbal maps. First, the map is not the territory but only a representation. Second, no map can represent all aspects of the territory. And third, every map reflects the mapmaker’s point of view. If we don’t remember these fundamental limitations of all verbal maps, we’ll get into trouble when we use any map to find our way.

Do

high government

low employment

deficits

rates cause inflation?

deficits increase interest rates?

affect the lives

slow economic growth?

of

all

Do

Answers

Do

high government

to these questions

of us because government

officials, busi-

ness executives, investment bankers, and lots of other people

make economic maps,

know

to these questions.

that the

on the answers, the verbal And you might be interested to

decision based

answer

to

depending on the verbal

each of these questions

map you want

yes or no,

is

to use. Pick the

you want: no unemployment .

.

.

there

is

ating inflation.

model more

basis for the conclusion that rates threaten

And

permanently

low

acceler-

according to an alternative

consistent with

129

the

data,

inflation

map

The New Doublespeak might actually be lower levels

than

we

at

lower unemployment

are experiencing today.

16

what you may have been told, research shows no consistent relationship between growth rates and government spending. Contrary

to

17

.

.

.

budget

have fluctuated widely in the

deficits

past 20 years, yet the

by theory have

est rates predicted alize.

The

accompanying

shifts in inter-

failed to materi-

18

unemployment and two decades and is one of

between

relationship

inflation has held for

the best-documented linkages.

Take your

pick.

advanced by an

Each map, each

19

inference,

entire school of economics,

is

passionately

and each map

supported by reams of research data that “prove” rect.

But the question

maps

are based?

Reads

the

statistics

is,

John

how good

are the data

Paulos, in his

book A

notoriously

imprecise

and

cor-

is

on which

the

Mathematician

Newspaper, points out that “our standard are

it

is

economic

unreliable.

” 20 .

.

Consider these headlines, which are just a few of the dozens I

have collected:

“Economic

Statistics

Seldom on the Money” 21

“Washington’s Useless Forecasts” 22

130

The Doublespeak of Business and Economics

“Forecasts Erroneous, but Vital ” 23

How

Does Your Economy Grow? Economists Know Surprisingly Little About the Cause of Economic Growth ” 24

“Does Anyone Have a Clue ?” 25

One

reason no one has a clue

Sumner Rosen’s question

to

is

that the

answer

to

our Nobel-winning economist,

“have economists so narrowed their vision they cannot connect the intellectual world they live in with the real world

they purport to explain?”

from a

top-of-the-line

“Monte

Carlo

is

yes.

Consider just two

titles

economics journal:

Methodology

and

the

Properties of Instrumental Variable

Finite

and

Sample

Statistics

for

Testing Nested in Non-Nested Hypothesis”

“Semiparametric Estimation of Utility Functions for

Monoton and Concave

Polychotomous Choice Model”

In citing these two examples of what passes for economic

wisdom, an economist observed: that I will cancel subscriptions to for a

one

article. ...

“Economics

may

is

In trying to it

useful .”

26

have a rule of thumb

economics journals

whole year without being able

have not made or

“I

to

understand

make economics

if I

go

at least

scientific,

they

As another economist observed,

giving elegant answers to questions that

may

not matter.” 27 But then economics has also been

131

The New Doublespeak called “the science of the utterly obvious, or, sometimes, the

science that denies the utterly obvious .”

28

and unreliable”

So, using “notoriously imprecise

statis-

tics,

economists forge ahead and create their verbal maps

and

call

them

“economy” Worse still, we follow these fact that most economic forecasts are

the

maps, despite the

no more on

“fatuous nonsense,

marksman with hundreds

of chalked bull’s-eyes on the wall

of his barn, each with a bullet hole in

asked that

how he

he

around

first it

.” 29

its

center.

could be so accurate, the farmer

made Yet

the shot is

it

the farmer

target than

maps

we pay and

ing, housing, transportation, medicine,

what we

call

bull’s-eye

that business

government use when making the decisions jobs; our pay; our taxes; the price

admitted

.

and then drew the

these verbal

specific acts that constitute

.

.

When

and

that affect our for food, cloth-

those other

all

our economic

life,

or the “economy.”

How’s Business?

Another abstraction

How

is

that

is

popular

the

is

word

business? What’s good for business?

regulated? Business

is

ailing.

Business

is

Is

“business.”

business too

recovering. Business

views with alarm. Business hesitates. Business Business

is

good.

anti-business.

The

Some

is

terrible.

people are pro-business, some are

business of America

132

is

business.

The Doublespeak of Business and Economics

As with economy,

word

the

means nothing. It is so abstract that we can fill in just about any specific referent we want. The only way the word can have any meaning at all is in the context in which it occurs. But even then we may have trouble. Try this exercise. The next time you hear or see the word “business,” try to create a picture in your mind of what the word “business” means in the sentence you just heard or read. As we did with “economy” above, “business”

work backward to get a concrete, your mind of what the word means. try to

Speaking of business

We

speaking of the trade

like

is

specific picture in

deficit.

words (which are nothing more than symbols) communicate about a very complex reality, a reality that

to

are using

has no connection with the words

we

except the connection

And

as

easily fact I

we have

seen,

manipulated

to

we

use to describe

arbitrarily assign to

words

it

our words.

that are highly abstract can

be

when

in

appear to be communicating

they aren’t. can’t think of

anyone

against business. Yet

we

I

know

of or have heard of

often hear

who

is

someone accused of

being anti-business.

When we

ask exactly what

means. In what way can one be against

something

means

it

hear that charge,

as abstract as business?

that

we have

Often the charge simply

someone advocates something with which

speaker disagrees.

The

to

the

next time corporate executives or

members of Congress charge someone with being anti-business, ask them what they mean by business, and, given what they mean by business, what they mean by anti-business.

133

The New Doublespeak The Environment and Other Doublespeak

When

the oil tanker Exxon

William Sound in Alaska, a

rocks in Prince

Valdez hit the lot

more than crude

Faced with such a monumental environmental

Exxon swallowed

folks at

to clean everything

As

oil

flowed.

disaster, the

and proceeded

hard, bit the bullet,

up with doublespeak.

the residents complained of polluted beaches

slow to nonexistent cleanup, the executives calling almost thirty-five miles of beaches in

at

and the

Exxon were

Alaska “environ-

mentally clean” and “environmentally stabilized.” But then

maybe they never bothered to actually visit the beaches and look at them. Paul Nussbaum, a reporter for the Philadelphia Inquirer did walk on the beaches that had been declared ,

clean or stabilized and found that they were

with

They glisten in the and come away with

oil.

stone

rock

“still

sun, slick with crude.

a handful of

oil.

covered

Wipe any

Beneath each

a pool of uncollected sludge. In the shallow pools cre-

is

ated by the outgoing tide, minnow-sized fish

rainbows of

oil

sheen.”

The

swim beneath

reporter for Newsweek magazine

walked the same beaches and found “the rocks were sticky

gritty,

and dark brown. Droplets of spray formed beads on

the surface, as they

would on waxed

paper.”

But that didn’t

bother Otto Harrison, Exxon’s general manager of the

Valdez cleanup operations, because he had a whole nition of the

word

“clean”:

off every rock. ...

stain

is

tants

can

live there

It

new

defi-

Clean “doesn’t mean every

means

oil

that the natural inhabi-

without harm.” In a twelve-minute film

134

“The

shown during

Doublespeak of Business and Economics

the

Exxon

shareholders’ meeting, the narrator

of the film described the Prince William shoreline as “the socalled beaches, mainly piles of dark, volcanic rock” In its press releases,

Exxon stopped

referring to the beaches as

being “cleaned” but called them “treated .” 30 This is a very effective form of doublespeak. Exxon has simply redefined a common word and used it the way it

wants

Since words are symbols, and since the only meaning a symbol has is the meaning we assign to it, Exxon can to.

go right ahead and say what “clean” means. But if there is to be any communication at all between Exxon and the rest of planet Earth, then the folks at Exxon need to use words the

way

the rest of us have agreed to use them.

to say that

few people would

covered with

oil”

call

I

think

beaches clean that are

and where “the rocks were

and dark brown” with

it is

safe “still

gritty, sticky

oil.

keep repeating that we need to test words by looking behind the word to find what it stands for, to find that to I

which

refers.

it

Now

the folks

if

beaches are “clean,” then

I

at

Exxon

think those

suggest that they picnic

on those

beaches with their families and go swimming in the water with their kids. I suggest we apply the same standard of “clean” to their clothes, their homes, their food, their offices.

Maybe bring

then they would adjust their meaning of “clean” to

it

upon by

in line with the

meaning more commonly agreed

the rest of the English speaking world.

135

The New Doublespeak Biodegradable, Recyclable, Degradable, Environmentally Friendly,

and Other Meaningless Terms

Surveys have shown that there

is

great

consumer

“environmentally friendly” products. In

much

interest that

is

there

fact,

is

consumers spend 15 percent more

products with such labels as “biodegradable.”

however,

interest in

The

so for

problem,

and

that terms like “recyclable,” “degradable,”

“environmentally friendly” have no fixed meaning. According to

Minnesota Attorney General Hubert H. Humphrey

these terms

“mean everything and

nothing.” So

III,

we have

the

war of environmental doublespeak. When Glad brought out a plastic trash bag it called “biodegradable,” Mobil Oil, the maker of Hefty trash bags, maintained that the plastic trash bag is impervious to degradation. But the sales of Glad trash bags went up while those of Hefty went down. So Mobil brought out its own “photodegradable” trash bag. This doublespeak attracted the attention of the attorneys general of seven states,

lawsuit against

Mobil

for claiming that

its

have a “special ingredient that promotes after

exposure to elements

like sun,

who

filed

Hefty trash bags their

wind and

breakdown rain.”

Hefty boxes carried the claim that once nature has gered” their

down

new

The “trig-

additive “these bags will continue to break

into harmless particles

landfill.”

a

even

after

they are buried in a

31

Meanwhile, Mobil admitted that ducted in 1988

it

in

its

own

tests

con-

took thirty days in the blazing sun of the

136

The Doublespeak of Business and Economics

Arizona desert for a bag to reach a satisfactory level of decomposition, and then it simply dumped its contents

on

the ground. In other less

days for the bag to

won’t break

quoted

down

sunny climates it takes about 120 break down, and in a sunless landfill it

at

all.

Mike Levy, Mobil’s

lobbyist,

was

“We’re talking out of both sides of our mouth. Degradability is just a marketing tool.” 32 Mobil did stop using the word “photodegradable” for its Hefty trash as saying:

bags because of the lawsuit

filed

by the attorneys

general.

terms such as “biodegradable,” “recyclable,” “degradable,” and “environmentally friendly” have no fixed meanIf

ing, if

mean

they

“everything and nothing,”

why

are people

buying these products? Because this is the kind of doublespeak that works best. This is the doublespeak of abstraction.

own

who

People

read these words on the boxes

definitions,

shares.

definitions

that

believe

But since these terms do not have fixed

clear referents, Mobil, Glad,

are free to

make up

Exxon and

its

their

own

and

word

in their

everyone definitions,

of other corporations

lots

definitions.

Of course,

as

with

definition of “clean,” they’re not too anxious

to share their private definition

the

they

fill

doesn’t

mean what we

with us think

it

lest

we

realize that

means.

Mobil may well believe that a trash bag that sits in the hot desert sun for thirty days and then dumps the garbage it contains on the ground is “photodegradable,” but I don’t think people disposal

who

are concerned about the

would agree with Mobil’s

they accept

its

claim that

less in a landfill.

this plastic

definition.

bag

But the doublespeak

137

problem of trash

is

is

Nor would

ultimately harm-

a great marketing

.

The New Doublespeak tool. It tic

works;

it

sells plastic

trash bags. Lots

and

lots

of plas-

trash bags.

A

As we saw

earlier,

Different Kind of Downsizing

“downsize” has been a popular double-

speak term used by corporations

who want

to lay off thou-

sands of workers without saying that they’re laying off workers.

But there

another meaning for “downsize” that you

is

probably haven’t even noticed, yet

you go shopping “Downsizing” ufacturers

is

you every time

the doublespeak of choice for those

who want

to increase the price of a

who make

folks

affects

for groceries.

out increasing the price. Here’s

The

it

how

man-

product with-

“downsizing” works.

Velamints shaved the edges off their

mints, thus reducing the weight of a package of twelve mints

from 0.85 ounces same. Voila! other words,

And by

A

to 0.71 ounces.

But they kept the price the

downsized product with no price increase. In

you

get less for the

same amount of money.

the way, those folks at Velamint labeled their

new

“New Improved.” That’s not exactly my idea of either a new product or an improved product. But then from their point of view it’s certainly new downsized package of mints

(after all, it’s smaller)

and

it’s

certainly

improved (improved

in profit margin)

And

the folks at Velamint aren’t the only ones downsizing

their products.

Brut deodorant spray was reduced from

138

five

'The

Doublespeak of Business and Economics

ounces to four ounces, then labeled “Now More Brut!” while Mennen Speed Stick deodorant went from 2.5 ounces to 2.25 ounces. Even diapers are not exempt from downsizing.

The number

of Huggies

diapers

per package was

reduced by 10 percent but the price was reduced only 7 percent. In response to their competitor’s downsizing, Procter 8c

Gamble promptly downsized

the

number of

diapers in their

Luvs and Pampers brands. “Pampers and Luvs to better serve the consumer,” Procter

statement. will give

Believe that and

you a quarter

affairs director

you

11

at night,”

8c

are

Gamble

working said in a

believe the tooth fairy said Detroit

consumer

Esther Shapiro.

you think this kind of downsizing Downsizing has been going on for quite If

is

new, think again.

a while. In 1983 the

one-pound can of Maxwell House Coffee Master Blend suddenly contained only thirteen ounces, an almost 20 percent decrease. The label on the can assured buyers that thirteen ounces of coffee “makes as

many

cups as one

full

pound,” a

statement almost as reassuring as Volkswagen’s claim that

Eurovan was “the world’s

largest

bly didn’t notice, but over the

Gamble has

van

for

its size.”

last several years,

steadily reduced the size of

its

its

You probaProcter

8c

Bounty paper

towels from eighty-five square feet per roll to sixty square feet,

a hidden price

increase

StarKist tuna downsized

its

of more than 40 percent.

6.5-ounce can of tuna to 6.125

ounces but kept the price the same. By the way, that

little

0.375-ounce reduction means StarKist saves over 4 million

pounds of tuna a bigger profits.

A

year.

A little less

tuna per can means

much

can of Brim coffee beans went from 12

139

The New Doublespeak ounces to 11.5 ounces in the same old price.

Then

which came

in a

size

NutriGrain wheat

there’s Kellogg’s

“New

cent bigger, but the

Larger

can and for the same

Size.” Yes, the

amount of

cereal,

box was 15

cereal in the bigger

per-

box

increased by just 2 percent.

Downsizing, of course, raise prices

without raising prices.

increases will never

show up

living chart, they will hit

shopping. is

nothing more than a

is

With

in

And

way

to

while these price

any government

cost-of-

your budget every time you go

the doublespeak of package downsizing, less

more. 33

The term

“downsizing” demonstrates that just reading a

label doesn’t necessarily give

you

all

the information

you

To understand downsizing, you need to place the information on the label in a larger context. While reading a label will give you literal, factual information, to really understand what you’re reading you need to go beyond the label. Understanding doublespeak and becoming a good reader, and a good detector of doublespeak, means a lot more than knowing the meaning of words. need.

Educational Television Programs for Children

The 1990

Children’s Television Act was supposed to raise

the standards of television programs for children

by

requir-

ing television stations to “serve the educational and informational

needs of children.” Stations must also provide docu-

140

The Doublespeak of Business and Economics

how

mentation of

they are meeting

requirement

this

when

they

file

how

well television stations were complying with this the Center for Media Education in Takoma

law,

to

renew

their licenses with the

FCC. To

see just

new Park,

Maryland, examined a bunch of the renewal forms that stations had filed. According to their own statements in these

how broadcasters are fulfilling their obligations under the new law. Instead of creating new programs, broadcasters created new definitions, new ways of seeing old programs. Here are some examples of how television is “serving the educational filings, this is

and informational needs of

children.” Station

WGNO

of

New

Orleans said that Bucky O’Hare, a rabbit in space who fights alien toads with guns and lasers, is “educational and informational” because “issues of social consciousness and responsibility are central themes of the program.” also claimed that reruns of Leave It

WGNO

Beaver were educa-

to

tional.

Other

stations claimed

such programs as The Jetsons The ,

Flintstones

“issues

,

G.I.

foe

,

Superboy

,

and Super Mario

of social consciousness

and

show

the value of “communication

cited

Chip

n Dale Rescue Rangers

,

trust.”

station

evil plot.

efforts are the focus in this episode.”

stations claimed that episodes of the Turtles

One

and

which the “Rescue

Rangers stop Chedderhead Charlie from an rewards of team

contain

responsibilities”

and in

Bros,

The

Other

Teenage Mutant Ninja

teach about nutrition and physical fitness, while an

episode of

To,

Yogi! in

which the hero

defeats a bank-robbing

cockroach promotes the value of “using

141

his

head rather than

The New Doublespeak his

muscles” Newsweek magazine called these characteriza-

tions “imaginative”

and “shameless flimflam

.’’

34

This reinterpretation and definition of these television pro-

grams

worthy of any

is

hidden meanings in such poems

“Humpty Dumpty.”

who

literary theorist

finds

‘Jack and

as

dark and

and

Jill”

Again, the doublespeak of redefinition

works wonders, transforming what many people would

mindless entertainment or at worst trash television

at best

and

into incredibly meaningful, educational, sion.

Why we

trations

we

don’t

ask some parents

if

inspiring televi-

they consider these

programs “educational and informational”?

television

don’t

call

Why

some parents if these programs are good illusof the meaning of the words “educational and inforask

mational television for children”?

As long words

as

we

that affect

manipulated,

friendly,”

our

and

“biodegradable,” tally

allow others to control the definitions of lives,

we

misled

be controlled,

will continue to

by

“recyclable,”

such

words

“degradable,”

“photodegradable,”

as

“clean,”

“environmen-

and “educational and

informational television for children.” Until

we

fight

back

and take control of such words, take control of how such words are defined, those who wield doublespeak

will con-

tinue to be successful, as successful as the

Exxon Corporation,

Glad, Mobil Oil Corporation, and

those television

tions that continue to

show

the

all

same old programs

sta-

for chil-

dren yet claim they are meeting their obligations under the law.

142

The Doublespeak oj Business and Economics

Wien

Well,

you

a Commercial Isn’t a Commercial

think, at least there’s public television,

kids can watch commercial-free programs.

where

my

PBS may have cuts, money had

once been commercial-free, but with budget to be found somewhere, and what better source than advertising? is

Of course PBS had

a slight problem because by law

noncommercial and not allowed

advertising.

it

accept commercial

to

So the Public Broadcasting System does not run

commercials. However,

acknowledgments

it

does offer “enhanced underwriter

.”

Such “acknowledgments” include “value-neutral tions of a product line or service”

descrip-

and corporate logos or

slo-

gans that “identify and do not promote.” Such “enhanced underwriting” port.”

is

designed to attract “additional business sup-

While publicly maintaining

ments” are not commercials,

that such “acknowledg-

officials at

Public Broadcasting

Marketing, a company that represents public radio and vision stations,

promote the

sion’s children’s

tele-

“sales potential” of public televi-

programming

Advertising Age, the president of

to corporations. In a letter to

PBM pointed out,

“Through

Public Broadcasting Marketing, corporations can place messages adjacent to ‘Sesame Station,’

and

‘Mr. Rogers,’ ‘Shining

Time

‘Barney,’ tapping the sales potential of these

acclaimed programs.

PBM’s

Street,’

More and more

corporations recognize

unique, high-impact environment.”

According

to

the

Communications Act of 1934, these

“enhanced underwriter acknowledgments”

143

may

well be

ille-

The New Doublespeak This act

gal.

forbids

specifically

from accepting compensation “promote any son

who

is

aren’t ads.

service, facility or

PBS

and

But with

profit.”

this

little

legal

reaping the benefits of running ads that

is

35

that

running ads on public television and

them “enhanced underwriter acknowledgments”

such a big deal, but

it is.

advertising determines

which

product offered by any per-

has maneuvered around

You might think calling

stations

for broadcasting messages that

engaged in such offering for

doublespeak restriction

noncommercial

don’t.

Pittsburgh

As

public

isn’t

on and

Public television’s dependence

which programs go on the

Michael

Fields,

station

manager

WQEX,

station

television

air

of

bluntly

explained as he canceled three programs:

“We

keep shows on the

community doesn’t

want

to support.”

35

air that the

business

By using doublespeak

can’t afford to

to hide

its

depen-

dence on corporate advertising and hiding the influence of such advertising, public television misleads

watch public tribute to

television,

and

all

all

those

who

who

con-

those individuals

it.

CIA-Approved Television

In

November

1991, the Public Broadcasting Service ran a

three-part series, Korea: The

Unknown War. However, the pro-

on PBS was not the same as that originally broadcast in England, where it had been produced. Instead,

gram

aired

144

The Doublespeak of Business and Economics

American viewers saw the “revised” version

who

“corrected” after General Richard Stilwell,

Korean War headed the Far Eastern Policy

Coordination,

CIA’s

the

is

Stilwell

argued that “the

during the

division of the Office of

covert

operations

screened the program and objected to some of

General

had been

that

its

arm,

contents.

present form,

series, in its

not appropriate for an American audience.”

The documentary series was Thames Television, with WGBH

originally

Boston and Australian

in

National Television as coproducers.

produced by

The

chief historian for

was Bruce Cummings, professor of East Asia histhe University of Chicago and author of five books

the series

tory at

on Korea. The

when

the

General

Of

series

was reedited

series

Stilwell

took two years to make. However,

was allowed

for

American

to “review”

the twenty- two objections he raised,

ally inaccurate or plain lies,” said

the series. Professor

twenty- two

Cummings

objections

were

Jon

it

television,

“for accuracy”

many were

“factu-

Halliday, the writer of

said that eighteen of the

“wrong or misjudged,” and

ignored the scholarship that had been done on the war.

Cummings, went ahead and made twelve changes based on

Despite the protestations

WGBH

of Halliday and

S til well’s objections, and refused to consult with or to

Cummings

Halliday and broadcast.

Nor

did

see the revised

let

program before

WGBH take into consideration the doc-

umentation Halliday and Cummings provided

to

refute

Stilwell’s objections.

Among the

changes

to the size of the

made

in the broadcast

were references

South Korean army, the number of North

145

The New Doublespeak Korean war dead, the

role of the U.S.

China entered the war, and

retreat of U.S. forces after

tions that U.S. forces

army during

committed

the

allega-

atrocities against civilians.

Cut from the original program was a discussion of President Truman’s plans for invading China and using nuclear weapons against Korean and Chinese cities. The revised program also downplayed the fact that much of the South Korean military leadership collaborated with the Japanese occupation government during World War II. Cummings also charged that added misleading commentary by Dean Rusk and Paul Nitze, and that the version

WGBH

WGBH

misrepresented the role of General Douglas MacArthur.

Cummings wondered have been

if

rhetorically

the producers

an “accuracy” review

what the response would

had submitted the program

to the

KGB’s

covert operations chief

for East Asia at the time of the war.

wrote in Nineteen Eighty-Four. the future;

who

shown

37

As George Orwell

controls the past controls

controls the present controls the past.”

Sony

When

“Who

for

Corrects History

Bernardo Bertolucci’s film in Japan in 1988, the

The Last Emperor was

movie was missing a key

part:

old newsreel scenes of Japanese soldiers in Nanjing, China, in 1937 shooting ies.

The

Chinese

civilians

and dumping

their

bod-

movie’s Japanese distributor explained that the

scenes were cut because

“we had

146

better avoid unnecessary

The Doublespeak of Business and Economics

confusion in the movie theaters.” Such confusion is regularly avoided in Japan where foreign movies and books that contain elements the Japanese find

shown or published

when

Thus,

Company

in the country. 38

the

ofJapan

uncomfortable are simply not

Matsushita

giant

Electric

Industrial

March 31, 1990: $37.75 billion) bought the American company MCA (total sales for the year ending March 31, 1990: $3.38 billion), there was some concern about a Japanese company (total sales for

the year ending

taking over one of the major movie, television, record, and

book publishing companies in the United States. Would MCA refuse to make movies or publish books that contain unflattering or unpleasant accounts ofJapan?

This

was

concern

when

heightened

reporters

asked

Matsushita president Akio Tanii whether the company would feel free, for instance, to

produce a film on the

role played

by

World War II, a subject strictly taboo in Japan. Replied Tanii (who according to press accounts was “visibly shaken”) “I could never imagine the late Japanese

emperor Hirohito

in

:

such a

case,

so

cannot answer such a question.”

I

asked whether movies practices

critical

of Japanese social or economic

could be made, he responded that “because of

broader U.S. -Japanese cooperation as countries ... that such a

movie

will

later “clarified” Tariffs

interpretations.” all

not be produced.”

MCA

Columbia

39

A

I

believe

press release

remarks blaming “conflicting English

Of course MCA’s management would make

creative decisions, said the statement.

runs

When

the

way

the

pictures, history

is

But

if

Sony corporation in for

147

Matsushita is

major rewriting.

running

The New Doublespeak February 1991, Columbia released, through

In

Home

Times

Video, the original 1943 Batman

not quite the original pitted against the

by

serial.

serial.

In the 1943 version,

Good Well,

Batman

is

Japanese master spy Dr. Daka, as played

Carrol Naish in bizarre, exaggerated, and hilarious

J.

Japanese makeup. Daka heads a sabotage ring composed of

American

traitors

and men

The

into living zombies.

whom serial

the evil doctor has turned

has long been considered

high camp and quite funny, unintentionally of course.

It

has

also served as a graphic illustration of the virulent racism

that swept the

United

States during that war.

now Sony owns Columbia, and some changes have been made. The narrative in the serial shifts the emphasis from the Japanese enemy of World War II to unidentified foreign spies. For example, as the camera pans down a But

deserted city

American

street,

citizens

the original narrative called Japanese-

who had been

interned “shifty-eyed Japs”

rounded up by a “wise government,” and Daka ter Jap spy.”

generic “vile foreign spy.” So

With

“the sinis-

In the new, improved Sony version, the govern-

now just a camp, so much for

ment rounds up “immoral hoods” and Daka racism,

is

and so much

Sony

for honesty.

control

in

much

Matsushita in control of

of

MCA

for

is

40

Columbia

Pictures

and

the possibilities for avoiding

“unnecessary confusion in the movie theaters” are almost endless. Bora

vers,

The

attack

on

Pearl

Harbor

as depicted in Bora, Bora,

can be remade as misunderstood Japanese naval maneu-

and The Bridge

on the River Rzoai can

become an Anglo-

Japanese cooperative development project designed to help

148

The Doublespeak of Business and Economics

an underdeveloped country of the Third World that is rudely interrupted by terrorists. But as for all those John

Wayne

movies,

maybe

well,

Department of History

new George Orwell

two companies

at the

work overtime preparing new

the

will

versions, keeping in

have

mind

department’s motto, borrowed from George Orwell: controls the past controls the future;

who

to

the

“Who

controls the

present controls the past.”

who run them

Corporations and those

source of doublespeak, manufacturing

sometimes

suspect,

even

it

an endless

are

automatically and,

unconsciously.

When

I

the

Rockefeller family sold a 51 percent interest in Rockefeller

Center

to

Japan’s

Mitsubishi

Estate

Company,

David

Rockefeller said in a press release that the sale preserved

commitment to New York City, which my made more than 50 years ago and which present gen-

“the abiding father

erations of the family continue to

feel.”

41

This comment, of course, turns the meaning of “commit-

ment” on

its

head. If the sale of a controlling interest in

Rockefeller Center represents the Rockefeller family’s com-

mitment

do

if

to

New

York, imagine what Mr. Rockefeller would

he didn’t have an “abiding commitment

New

York

maybe his “abiding commitment” is someabiding commitment corporations have to their

City”? But then thing like the

to

employees these days.

149

6 The Doublespeak of

Government and

Once upon beliefs,

Politics

a time (so every fairy tale begins), politicians

had

they had principles, they had a vision for a better

world, and these beliefs, principles, and visions prompted

them to run for office. And these same beliefs, principles, and visions formed the substance of their campaigns for office.

who

Now, however,

and

have market researchers

and conduct focus groups to find out what what they want, or what they think they want.

take polls

people think,

The

politicians

results of this research

become

the beliefs, principles,

visions of politicians.

When

Bush was preparing for his reelection campaign, he had his chief researcher Bob Teeter conduct a President

151

The New Doublespeak number

of public opinion polls, focus groups, and other

market research

develop a

all,

it

process

this

so ordinary as to warrant

1

little

is

that the press

or no comment.

how candidates run for office these days. All who can afford them hire high-priced consul-

this is

the candidates tants to

a research-created

selling the president in 1992.

remarkable about

is

considered After

of beliefs, principles, and

Bush had Bob Teeter develop

marketing strategy for

What

set

1992 presidential campaign. In other words,

visions for the

President

to

conduct the market research and construct the mar-

keting strategy for their campaigns. In addition to driving

up

the costs of running for office, market research has given us

a politics not of leadership but of marketing,

designed to give customers what they want, or

a politics

at least

what

they think they want. Market research has also given us

more doublespeak in politics than ever before. I do not mean that politicians change their beliefs and principles to accommodate polls and focus groups, although some politicians seem to do just that. No, what I mean is that politicians adjust their beliefs to the results of the polls

and focus groups by using doublespeak. Thus, live in

politicians

two worlds: the world of what they believe and the

world they want the public words, they

live in a

to think they believe. In other

constant state of cognitive dissonance,

using doublespeak to resolve the continuing contradictions

between words and

and

actions, using

doublespeak to explain

justify their actions, or to say that they didn’t

they did, or what they did

Confusing?

No more

isn’t

do what

what we think they

did.

so than the world of Winston Smith.

152

The Doublespeak of Government and

The Spin Doctor Will Confuse You

Because of ideas

and

The job

their

of the spin doctor tell

Now

dependence on marketing-research-created

beliefs, politicians

designed to

Politics

is

have come

to rely

on

spin doctors.

to construct a verbal reality that

the public that the politicians’ reality

and what the public saw or heard

isn’t

what

it

is

correct

is

saw or heard.

In a popular 1992 television commercial, Andre Agassi uttered the immortal words, “Image tics

image

tors,

is

everything.” In poli-

indeed everything. Thus the need for spin doc-

is

those “political henchmen, the minders and puppeteers

who make their living by calling the The term “spin” is derived from basketball in

which the

right spin

where the player wants tant art of

bending the

it

Titanic the

Love

on

the ball can

3

make is

2

and

sports such as pool

to go. In politics, spin

truth.”

Boat.”

it

go

“the bla-

Spin doctors insult our

intelli-

make up our own minds by assuming that they can tell us that what we saw isn’t what we saw, or what we heard isn’t what we heard. Spin doctors tell us that only they know what the candidate said or didn’t say, only they know what the candidate gence and try to usurp from us our right to

meant or American

When

didn’t

mean. Spin doctors continue the great

tradition of “snake oil salesmen

and

faith healers.”

4

faced with blatant contradictions between words

and deeds,

politicians

and

their spin doctors

pour on the

doublespeak. Consider the following examples, which are fairly representative,

any and

all

of how political doublespeak can resolve

contradictions, of

something other than what we

how

see.

153

deeds are

made

to

be

The New Doublespeak Putting the Spin on Taxes

new

After pledging “no in 1988,

and saying

Union address

in his State of the

proposed 1991 budget contained “no new

Bush proposed $21.7

campaign

taxes” during the election

in

billion

“user fees” in his 1991 budget. 5

taxes,” President

proposals” and

“receipts

Of

that his

between a tax and a user

didn’t explain the difference

Bush

course, President

fee or

a receipts proposal.

But then President Bush had already increased revenues

when

the previous year

me

“It is clear to

that

in a written statement

both the

size

he declared,

of the deficit problem and

the need for a package that can be enacted require

revenue increases.

“Read

my

lips.”

.

.

How

much

So

.”

Marlin Fitzwater:

can President Bush say one thing dur-

“We

feel

he’s saying the right thing it’s

true now.”

Representative

when

now. Everything

we

said

was

7

Later,

say, ‘Raise taxes.’

only

resolution

true

6

Newt Gingrich defended

very explicitly didn’t

Republican

in

he said the right thing then and

President Bush’s

statement about “tax revenue increases” by claiming,

revenues.’”

tax

.

according to White House press secretary

Easy,

then and

.

campaign pledge,

for the

ing the campaign and propose exactly the opposite office?

.

one

that

day

opposed

He after

any

said, ‘Seek

“He new

supporting tax

a

increases,

Representative Gingrich said he would “support and sponsor” such increases. “I think I’ve said there will be

more revenues and

154

all

along that

I

think

that they will only

be

The Doublespeak of Government and

acceptable cuts

and

if

real

Politics

they are pro-growth and include real spending

budget reform,” said Mr. Gingrich. 8

Secretary of Transportation Samuel Skinner joined the

how

cussion and explained

not

be

considered

a

Skinner

Secretary

new

said

that

taxes “was mainly geared

what people generally perceive to be income not what I call user fees. I think the gas tax is a user

towards taxes,

a “user fee” on gasoline should

tax.

President Bush’s pledge of

dis-

.

fee.”

He

“8%

to

.

.

said that the administration’s budget request for an

10%

viewed

as a

increase” in user fees

model

for

an increase

on

airline tickets

in fuel fees.

could be

9

President Bush, Representative Gingrich, and Secretary

may

no new

“new revenues” or new “user fees,” but I am sure many people would disagree with this characterization and use instead the more common term “tax increase.” Indeed, when Congress and the Bush Administration teamed up to enact a new tax that they Skinner

called

a

see

“passenger

taxes but only

facility

charge,”

few people outside

Congress and the administration bought the doublespeak.

It’s

What

is

Not a lax;

It’s

a Passenger Facility Charge

a “passenger facility charge”? This

airports levy

on

all

is

a “charge” that

departing passengers. So each time you

board an airplane you pay $3 on top of the regular federal tax on your airplane ticket. Thus, on a round-trip flight from

155

The New Doublespeak New

York

Los Angeles with a change of planes

to

Chicago you can pay up posed

go

to

to

improve

The money

$12 more.

to

on

all

sup-

is

the $7 billion

airports, just like

already collected from a tax

in

airplane tickets. However,

Congress and the various administrations have refused

spend the tax money in collected to

improve

the budget deficit.

So

this

separate fund (which

airports)

and instead apply

now we have

be used

to

pay

new

a

is

supposed

because Congress uses the

So we

doesn’t because the for

something

else.

And

now have

money

to

this

now

pay

is

supposed

under

understand

who

ready to confront politicians

is

for but doesn’t

reduce the

a nontax to pay for the stuff

collected

Do you

it’s

airport facilities that

all

to

pay

this

for but

tax

this? If

then you’re ready to run for Congress, or

demand

is

reduce

to

new nontax

airline ticket tax to

an already existing tax

that

it

tax that isn’t a tax because

new and improved

for

the airline ticket tax

deficit instead.

was and

10

called a “passenger facility charge.” to

to

is

used

you

do,

maybe you’re

use such doublespeak and

that they account for their false, deceptive,

and mis-

leading language.

While want, using

it

is

we can it

true that politicians can use

any word they

reply that language works only

when

those

agree on what words mean, and that the meaning of

words cannot be

unilaterally

changed by some without the

agreement of others. These examples

illustrate

cians ignore this principle of language

want with and

to language.

This

is

how

politi-

and do what they

the corruption of public

language that leads not just to a lack of communication but

156

The Doublespeak of Government and Politics

breakdown of public discourse and to a distrust of and contempt for those who would corrupt the language for their to the

ends.

The Doublespeak of Redefinition

use the simple doublespeak of redefining a

Politicians

term and then using

their

new

common

definition without telling us

or seeking our approval and agreement. Thus, Representative

Newt Gingrich can

say

“it’s

not a peace dividend.

It’s

a

peace non-expense” 11 and avoid discussing what will happen to the military

for

budget

now

that

an end

reduced military spending. Even the

little

sense.

expense”? niently

left

war calls new phrase makes

to the cold

What is a “non-expense,” let alone The invention of this nonsense

a “peace nonterm,

conve-

undefined, does not promote discussion of the

no information on which to base a response. Political doublespeak works best when it appears to say something but on closer inspection means issue but leaves the listener with

we figure out has moved on to

nothing. But by the time

that the language

empty, the discussion

other topics and

are

left

So

is

we

sputtering our questions and protestations.

it is

that in El Salvador the

their housekeeper,

and her

murder of six Jesuit

priests,

sixteen-year-old daughter, as well

murder of hundreds of civilians by army units, is nothing more than a “management control problem” as the

12

according to the U.S. ambassador to El Salvador, William

157

!

The New Doublespeak Walker. Doublespeak works well to explain away not just

murder but the slaughter of thousands,

as

governments

all

over the world well know. Just look at “ethnic cleansing” in

Bosnia

or “purification” and “purifying the target” in Iraq

1

I

Didn’t Do

Doublespeak tradiction

What

I

Did,

and

I

Certainly Didn’t

Say What

also allows politicians to explain

between

their

words and

triumph of word over deed, the

I

Said

away

their actions.

the con-

This

verbal

politician’s

is

we have perceived it. After Secretary State James Baker had condemned the flow of Soviet arms

of to

Central America as the biggest obstacle to

in

improvement

a

map

replacing reality as

guerrillas

14 .

in relations

Soviet Union,

it

between the United

was revealed

killed in a plane crash in

that five

States

CIA

and the

agents were

Angola while carrying arms and

other military equipment to guerrillas

who were

fighting the

Angolan government. Confronted with this apparent contradiction between word and deed, Margaret D. Tutweiler, the State

Department spokesperson,

said the crash

would not

Bush from protesting Soviet arms shipments because there was no comparison between American involvement in Angola and Soviet involvement in Central America Why was there no comparison, a comparison that most people would normally make? No answer from Ms. stop President

15

.

Tutweiler. Just take our

words and ignore our deeds. Live

in

our verbal world. With such language, and such thinking,

158

The Doublespeak of Government and

Politics

can there be a basis for discussion, for any kind of agree-

ment? Saying one thing and doing another has become practice for politicians.

them

to

use

between

their

women do

it

doublespeak to explain the contradictions

words and

George Bush

didate

So too has

common become common for

their actions.

“We

said,

.

.

For example, as can-

need

.

to

assure

that

not have to worry about getting their jobs back

having a child or caring for a child during a serious illness. This is what I mean when I talk about a gentler after

nation.

about

Leave

.

.

.

It’s

not

When

it.”

Bill,

right,

and we’ve got

to

do something

Congress passed the Parental and Medical

President

Bush vetoed

it

because, according to

White House, he “has always been opposed to eral government mandating what every business the

country should do.” 16 Wouldn’t

Bush had After

told us this during the

the

slaughter

of the

Tiananmen Square on June

many

it

have been nice

if

the fedin

this

candidate

campaign? student

4,

demonstrators

in

1989, in Beijing, not too

people in America wanted to pretend nothing had

happened. In

fact, I

think

it’s

safe to say that the

overwhelm-

ing consensus in this country was that the Chinese govern-

ment should somehow be punished, that we as a nation could not look the other way and pretend nothing had happened. In response to this widespread opinion as expressed in

newspapers, on talk radio, and in other media, the White

House

issued a statement

on June

20, 1989,

suspension of U.S. “participation in

159

all

announcing the

high-level exchanges

The New Doublespeak of Government

with

officials

Chinese leaders

as usual.”

It

know

it’s

wasn’t until December

Republic

People’s

Bush

China.” In addition, President tant the

the

of

very impor-

said, “It’s

not going to be business 9, six

months

later,

that

Bush publicly sent National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft and Deputy Secretary of State Lawrence President

Eagleburger to China. However, on December 18 the White

House admitted statement

lic

Chinese

that in July, barely

two weeks

suspending high-level

government,

after his

exchanges

pub-

with

the

Bush had secretly sent China to meet with Chinese

President

Scowcroft and Eagleburger to

leaders. Calling the trips “contacts,” not exchanges, President

Bush denied he had been misleading:

“I said

no

high-level

exchanges.” It

was

also revealed that despite the public

usual” policy, the

“no business

Bush Administration had allowed Chinese

military officers to return to the United States to

work on

as

resume

a $500 million arms sale to China, authorized

licenses for three

communications

satellites for

China, and

allowed the sale of passenger airliners to China,

among

other projects that continued immediately after the massacre

Bush also waived restrictions on the Export-Import Bank’s power to grant loans to American companies that do business in China. In short, despite his public position, President Bush continued business as usual of the students. President

with the Chinese government. His words were clearly

at

variance with his deeds. 17

And

the doublespeak continued because President Bush’s

doublespeak forced Secretary of State James Baker to use

160

The Doublespeak of Government and

doublespeak.

On December

10, Secretary

Politics

Baker said

in a

television interview that the

“the

first

December 9 mission was time we’ve had-we’ve had high-level United States

offi-

cials

go

to the People’s

interview the

first

it

Republic of China.”

was revealed

that the

A week after

this

December mission was not

mission to China and that Secretary Baker had

known about

the

first trip

but had chosen not to disclose

during the interview. Secretary Baker then issued a

it

state-

ment claiming that he had not lied when he said the December mission was the first to China since the June suspension and regretted “that he may have misled some.” 18 Thus it is that deliberately making a statement you know is false

is

not lying.

Spotting the Doublespeak in Gear Language, or Preserving

Wetlands by Developing Them

Sometimes

doublespeak even

use

politicians

appear to be speaking clearly and

directly.

when

they

For example,

while campaigning for the presidency in 1988, candidate

George Bush

said,

“My

position

on wetlands

ward. All existing wetlands, no matter

how

is

straightfor-

small, should

be

Most people would consider this a pretty clear, unambiguous statement, the kind of language we would like preserved.”

all

politicians

to use.

No

from-the-shoulder plain

doublespeak here. Just

talk.

straight-

But what a difference winning

an election can make.

161

The New Doublespeak In 1990,

when

candidate Bush had

become President

Bush, that pledge came back to haunt him. Oil and mining companies, as well as real estate developers, wanted to open

up a big chunk of wetlands to commercial development, meaning they wanted to use wetlands to make money. What would George Bush do? Would he honor his campaign pledge, or would he go back on it? He did both. Through the use of doublespeak, President

Bush claimed

that

he was

keeping the pledge of candidate Bush, while President Bush

opened up millions of acres of wetlands nies

who hungered

to all those

to use these lands for their profit.

Using a form of doublespeak we might

meaning through

compa-

clarification,”

call

“changing the

which usually leads

to the

Bush changed his quite clear campaign pledge by “clarifying” what he meant when he made it, as if his words needed any clarifying. But instead of “clarifying” his pledge, he was really changing its meaning. First, President Bush said his pledge really meant not that all wetlands would be preserved from development but that there would be no net loss of wetlands. Then, a little later, he “retroactive

definition,”

“clarified” his

President

pledge even further to

mean no

net loss of wet-

lands except where protection or compensatory action

not be practicable,” that of land which all

is

is,

“where there

is

“may

a high proportion

wetlands.” So instead of a policy to preserve

wetlands, as promised in the campaign, there

policy that

means

the

more wetlands

area— like Florida or Alaska— the receive because such protection

there are

less

may

would be a in any given

protection they will

not be “practicable,” a

weasel word that allows anything to happen to any wetlands.

162

The Doublespeak of Government and

Politics

However, even these changes did not appease all the companies who wanted more wetlands opened up for their use. Since “clarification” of the campaign pledge didn’t seem to

be doing the job, redefinition would have

to

be used.

Bush Administration announced that word “wetland.” The original definition 1989 by a committee of scientists and

In August 1991, the

was redefining the had been written in it

technical experts

from the Environmental Protection Agency,

Department of the

the

Interior, the

Department of Agriculture,

and the Corps of Engineers, people who

know something about

wetlands and

are supposed to

who based The 1991

on extensive research findings. which had been urged by the National Wetlands tion

lobbying group composed of

Coalition, a

companies, real estate devel-

is

a bird flying over a

marsh— was

House Council on Competitiveness, politicians that included

as

definition—

mining companies, and corporate farmers, and whose

opers,

logo

oil

their defini-

Vice President

such

written by the

White

a six-member group of

scientists

and

technical experts

Dan Quayle and White House

Chief of

Sununu. Their knowledge of wetlands was limited these lands could be used for commercial and indus-

StaffJohn to

how

The Environmental Defense Fund estimated new definition enforced by the Competitiveness

trial

development.

that

under the

Council 33 million in the cial

United

acres, a third of the total of all

wetlands

protection from

commer-

States,

would

lose

all

development.

With this change in the definition of wetlands, President Bush preserved his campaign pledge, and those who wanted to use the wetlands for profit got their way.

163

Thus, by

“clari-

The New Doublespeak and then redefining the term “wetlands” to exclude large amounts of land that were previously included, President Bush could say that he was not breaking his camfying”

paign pledge— “All existing wetlands, no matter

how

small,

should be preserved”— while he was carrying out a policy

was

that

directly contrary to the clear

time he

at the

made

meaning of his pledge

19

it .

President Clinton and the Doublespeak of Investment

So too did candidate

when he became

doublespeak

using words such as tribute,”

Clinton discover the usefulness of

Bill

and

“invest .”

20

“fairness,”

The

amount of money

“special

which

the federal

defined as the addi-

is

government ought

spending. In other words, an “investment deficit” deficit

Now

we should be

investment

you

get that?

deficit

We

need

is

to increase the deficit,

“investment deficit”

deficit

a

frightening

budget

is

it

to

to

be

more

deficit.

reduce

deficit.

deficit so

Did

we

most people never

doesn’t

exit.

a classic example of dou-

word- “investment” -is couword— “deficit”— to justify larger

blespeak wherein a reassuring

with

budget

a deficit

even knew existed, probably because

pled

The way

to increase the

can reduce the investment

The term

yet

is

taking on because of the existing

follow this doublespeak carefully.

this

“con-

interests,”

Clinton Administration invented

the term “investment deficit,” tional

President Clinton, and started

spending by government

21 .

164

The Doublespeak of Government and

Politics

President Clinton seems quite fond of the

ment” For him

there

is

very

word “investspending and a whole lot

little

of investing as he uses “investment” as a substitute for the

word “spending” for “an billion

.

in his rhetoric

on economic

policy, calling

immediate package of jobs investments of over $30 .” and additional “investments in education, tech-

.

nology, environmental cleanup and converting from a defense to a

domestic economy” 22

Once Again a Tax Isn’t a Tax

In the doublespeak of President Clinton, a proposed tax on

an additional 35 percent of Social Security benefits isn’t a tax. Since such a tax would mean that less money would be paid out in Social Security benefits, the proposed tax became a

spending

cut.

So too with the proposal

which the Medicare tax called a

spending

cut.

is

levied.

uncap the sum on

This tax increase was also

In addition, the

proposed by President Clinton

to

will

be

new

health care plan

at least partly

by a “wage-based premium.” In other words, a

When an

When dawn

is

Invasion Isn’t an Invasion, and

War

an invasion not an invasion?

vertical insertion,” as the

tax.

Isn’t

financed

23

War

When

it’s

a “pre-

Reagan Administration

165

called

The New Doublespeak the U.S. invasion of Grenada.

Just Cause, as the

Or when

it’s

Bush Administration

called

Operation

called the U.S. inva-

sion of Panama.

Doublespeak allowed President Bush dreaded

to avoid using the

word. President Bush didn’t order an invasion

“I”

of Panama, nor did he start a war without benefit of following Article

Section 8 of the Constitution. According to

I,

President Bush: “Fellow citizens, last night military forces to Panama.”

protect

to

the

lives

Or he

ordered U.S.

I

armed

“directed our

of American

in

citizens

forces

Panama,”

“deployed forces” to Panama, “directed United States forces to execute

.

.

.

pre-planned missions in Panama,” sent troops

down

to

cratic

processes

Panama, conducted in

“efforts to

Panama” or

support the demo“the

democratic

Panama

Canal,” cre-

restore

process,” assured “the integrity of the

ated “an environment safe for American citizens,” but cer-

Panama and on December 21

tainly didn’t invade

start a war.

press conference

President

When

Bush

at a

said the

word he quickly corrected himself: “You could say, ‘How come you didn’t tell me that you were going down to invade “I”

the—send in those troops

down

into

Panama?”’ In the

official

language of the government there was no invasion and there

was no war.

nonwar Panamanian soldiers weren’t killed; they were “neutralized.” Panamanian soldiers didn’t fight; they engaged in “armed terroristic activity.” And while Fang Lizhi, the Chinese dissident wanted by the Chinese government, In the

may be

given asylum in the U.S. embassy in Beijing, General

Noriega “holed up” in the Vatican mission in Panama. 24

166

The Doublespeak of Government and Politics

Buying Access

to the Political Process, or Politicians for Sale

Both the Democratic and Republican reforming the

way

political

parties say they are for

campaigns are financed, but both

parties continue to accept large contributions

groups,

interest

corporations,

and

wealthy

from

special

individuals.

Although federal law prohibits contributions of more than $20,000 to a

political

party or $1,000 to a presidential cam-

paign from any individual, both parties use a loophole in the law: Wealthy contributors are asked to give $100,000 or

more

to state political parties for generic “party building”

exercises,

money

that quickly finds

its

way

into the general

election campaign.

Right after his acceptance speech in which he railed against “the stranglehold special interests have tions,”

Bill

on our

elec-

Clinton went to a $1,000- to $5,000-a-plate

fundraising dinner, an event that raised over $4 million.

During the 1992 Democratic convention there were parties,

cocktail

brunches, and dinners for those contributing $100,000

more apiece. Fundraising events at the convention were hosted by such groups as the Distilled Spirits Council and or

the

Smokeless

Tobacco

Council.

AT&T, Time-Warner, Arco and

Corporations

other

oil

such

as

companies, cable

and communications companies, and Wall Street bankers and investment firms also held special, big-money fundraising events during the convention. By the end ofJuly television

1992, lawyers and lobbyists constituted the single largest

group finance,

of contributors, real

estate,

with

almost

and insurance

167

$2.6

interests

million,

with

contributing

The New Doublespeak $1.35 million.

By Labor Day

tributions of over

$60

the Democratic Party

million.

While

the Clinton

had con-

campaign

did not accept any contributions from political action committees

(PACs), the Democratic National Committee did

accept contributions from PACs, and

it

used the

By June

support of the Clinton campaign.

30,

money

in

1992, the

Democratic Party had raised $14.6 million from huge donations

from wealthy contributors.

Bush proposed

In a 1989 speech, President

reform the financing of

elections.

However,

several steps to

in the following

he

years the president did not propose a reform

bill.

In

vetoed the only campaign finance reform

bill

passed by

Congress.

In

1988,

some 249

$100,000 apiece to help

gave

individuals

fact,

at

least

Bush, and those numbers will

elect

be exceeded in the 1992 campaign. As of June 30, 1992, the Republican Party had raised $34.7 million in huge donations

from wealthy contributors. At one fundraising dinner, the Republican Party even put out a detailed the biggest givers to the event. include: for $20,000 a will sit at

your

table

with President Bush

member

A

of the

list

of benefits for

sample of the benefits

House of Representatives

and you can attend a private reception at the

not only get a Cabinet

White House;

official at

your

for

table

$40,000 you

and the private

you also get to attend a reception with Senator Robert Dole and a breakfast with senators and members of the House of Representatives; for $92,000 or more you get all the benefits lesser donors get, plus you reception with President Bush,

have your picture taken with President Bush; and the contributors can

sit

at the

head

168

largest

table with President Bush.

Th e Doublespeak of Government and Politics

The

dinner raised a record $9 million. Said White House spokesperson A/Iarlin Fitzwater of the dinner, “We don’t

buying influence, but it’s buying access to the system. Both political parties engage in doublespeak when they claim they are for campaign finance reform but fail to do 25 anything about such reform. believe

it s

.

.

.

And

people continue to buy “access to the system.” The Democratic National Committee recently published a brochure listing the various forms of access you can buy and

how much

each access

Hurry and accessorize now. For $100,000 a year you can become a “Managing Trustee” of the Democratic Party, which means you get two meals will cost.

with President Clinton, two meals with Vice President Gore, the opportunity to go on two “issues retreats,” “private,

impromptu meetings” with administration officials when they visit your hometown, an upgrade to “Honored Guest Status” at the 1996 Chicago convention,

personal

staff

Committee

member from

to assist

the

and your very own Democratic National

you with your “personal

requests.” Plus

more. You can travel with Democratic Party leaders they go on a foreign trade mission, and you’ll get daily

there’s

when

faxes filled with inside information.

league?

How

about $1,000, which

Is

$100,000 out of your

will get

you a reception

at

which you can meet Hillary Rodham Clinton, Tipper Gore, or a few top women administration officials. So what do the ordinary people, the people

who

can’t afford to

buy

access,

Dodd, one of the people who designed this brochure, “Hopefully, good gov” ernment, as Huey Long would say 2h get out of this? Said Senator Christopher

169

The New Doublespeak But good government

is

not the same as “access to the sys-

who defend this system of buying influence feebly maintain. Ron Mazzoli, a former member of Congress, observed, “People who contribute get the ear of the member [of Congress] and the ear of the staff. They tem,” as those

have the access— and access clout.

That’s

how

this

is it.

Access

thing works .”

the Office of

major proposal workers,

it

to

power. Access

is

27

When an Improved Working Environment

When

is

Is

Bad

for

You

Management and Budget blocked

a

improve the working environment for

defended

its

by saying

action

the proposed regulations could

make

that carrying out

workers’ health worse.

How

could an improved working environment for workers

harm

their health?

Here

is

the reasoning used

by James

B.

MacRaeJr., acting administrator of the Office of Information

and Regulatory

Affairs.

Better-off workers tend to use their higher leisure,

more

nutritious food,

care, as well as

drinking

less

wages

for

more

and more preventive health

extending their longevity by smoking and

than poorer workers. But because of intense

competition, companies cannot raise their prices to pay for the cost of the

cut wages

new

and

regulations.

jobs.

So companies would have

to

Thus, workers would have reduced

incomes, thus affecting their health. Therefore, rather than

170

The Doublespeak of Government and

Politics

allow the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to establish lower permissible exposure limits for more than 1,000 toxic substances used in industry and agriculture, Mr. MacRae ruled workers will be better off exposed to these toxic substances than

Mx.

MacRae didn

t

if

they weren’t exposed. 28

Of

course,

how companies were going to be wages to workers now that they don’t

explain

forced to pay better

have those new burdensome regulations

We Increased

to

contend with.

the Competition hy Decreasing

It

When is a decrease in competition an increase in competition? When the Federal Communications Commission says what you can do with a verbal map? Just draw any map you want and say that it represents the territory.) The it is.

FCC

(See

adopted

tion to

own

new

thirty

regulations that allow a single corpora-

AM

and

thirty

FM

stations, a substantial

from the previous limit of twelve and twelve. Moreover, the new rules allow one corporation to dominate up to 25 percent of a single large market, and there is no increase

limit

on how much of a smaller market one corporation may

control.

The new

rules also permit joint ventures

competing corporations, allowing them

to share

among

programs

and thus control

large segments of selected markets.

FCC

action supports

said that

petition

and

its

diversity in

its

aim of increasing com-

programming “by recognizing

171

The that

The New Doublespeak the existence of a vibrant marketplace

is

necessary to maxi-

29 mize those goals .”

The Free Market

The

U.S.

at

Work

Commerce Department

ruled that

Mazda and

Toyota minivans are being “dumped” in the United

How

do you dump a minivan? According

used by the a

company

below

its

its

production costs plus a reasonable

at a loss,

This ruling is

Because

profit.

Commerce Department.

raises

some

interesting questions. For example, sell their

a price that includes an unreasonable profit?

(and how) what a reasonable profit

company

company have wants, even

at a price

they had to raise the price for them according

there a similar law for companies that

gal for a

when

guilty of selling their mini-

determined by the

to a schedule

occurs

goods in the United States

Mazda and Toyota were found vans

to the definition

Commerce Department, dumping sells

States.

to sell

a right to

if it

means

its

is?

products at

Who

Why should

decides

it

be

ille-

products at a loss? Doesn’t a

sell

losing

its

products at any price

money?

Why

apply only to foreign companies? Shouldn’t

from the ravages of companies

in the

does

we be

United

this

it

law

protected

States selling

And, of course, what about the law of supply and demand, a law that government agencies seem to enforce selectively? Winston Smith would find this ruling

their

goods

at a loss?

172

The Doublespeak of Government and

familiar, since

it

sounds

as if

Ministry of Plenty in Oceania

How to

it

30

Dispose of Nuclear Waste and Make a Uranium Plant Disappear

nuclear waste that to

were promulgated by the

.

Worried about the problem of

where

Politics

put

all

is

how

with

to deal

all

the

produced each year? Worried about

that deadly stuff? Well,

worry no more. The

Nuclear Regulatory Commission has taken a giant step in solving the nuclear waste problem by simply redefining what is

nuclear waste, a definition that makes one-third of the

nuclear waste simply disappear.

The

NRC

proposed a new

classification of radioactive

waste materials called “Below Regulatory Concern” (BRC),

which means

that radioactive wastes so designated could

disposed of any labeling,

way

the

no warning, no

dumped

could be

owner deemed appropriate with no notification. Materials labeled

in public

dumps, burned

trash incinerators, or recycled into

products.

The

policy

is

be

BRC

in municipal

consumer and

industrial

designed to reduce the huge volume

of radioactive waste and to save the nuclear industry millions of dollars.

As much

as one-third of

what

is

now

consid-

ered low-level radioactive waste from nuclear power plants

would

fall

under

this

new

classification

Just redefine your problem and

away through

the

31 .

Got a problem?

make most

of

it

simply go

magic of words, the magic of doublespeak.

173

The New Doublespeak When

you don’t want

to upset the neighbors, just put

a sign that says you’re not in the business you’re

in.

years the uranium processing plant in Fernald, Ohio, identified

by a

sign

large

Production Center.”

calling

it

a

the

it

at

its

its

uranium

the people of Fernald discover

many

people

Chow. Only when program to clean up the

or Cat

cattle feed

Department of Energy began

massive pollution

was

even had a red and white checker-

It

made

For

“Feed Materials

board pattern on the water towers, misleading into thinking

up

sites

across the nation did

what was

in their backyard.

Only then did the folks at DOE acknowledge that for years they had permitted the emission of radiation in quantities known to be harmful to public health, and that groundwater up to a mile from the plant had been contaminated by 13 mill ion tons of nuclear pits.

32

Another reminder

waste stored in leaky underground that the

word, or the

sign,

is

not the

thing.

What’s

in a

Name?

Just because a group that doesn’t

mean

endangered sea industry’s

main

calls itself

Word

Is

Not the Thing

the Sea Lion Defense Fund,

really interested in the welfare of the

it’s

lions.

or The

In

legal

fact, this

group

is

the Alaska fishing

and lobbying organization

any government attempt

that fights

to limit the harvests of pollock,

one

of the sea lion’s favorite foods. Other groups have similarly

benign names

to

mask

their true purposes.

174

The Doublespeak of Government and Politics

The Maine Conservation tion for wetlands

and

Rights Institute opposes protec-

forests,

m

while the Friends of the River

Massachusetts fought the designation of the Farmington River as a federally designated wild and scenic river. The goal of the National Wetlands Coalition, which of real estate and oil and gas companies, is to

lands protection laws so for

commercial

largest timber restrictions

a

companies

on

more wetlands can be opened up

The

development.

Protection Association,

composed weaken wetis

trade

Washington

Forest

group composed of the

in the state of

Washington,

fights

cutting forests, while the Citizens for the

Sensible Control of Acid Rain lobbies against any

bill to

con-

Pfizer,

and

trol acid rain.

Anheuser-Busch, Ciba-Geigy,

Dow

Chemical,

Kraft General Foods teamed up to support the American

Council of Science and Health, a group devoted to refuting charges of cancer risks from chemicals and food additives.

What do you

Endangered

Coalition wants to do? Protect endangered species?

Reform Not on

your horned owl. This group, composed of

compa-

nies

think

the

and other corporations, wants

endangered species

law.

And

the

Species

utility

weaken the present Clean Air Working Group to

composed of representatives of the oil, steel, aluminum, paper, and automobile industries who fight strengthening the is

Clean Air Act.

When

350 timber and logging companies wanted

proposed federal laws

to protect ancient forests, they

to fight

formed

American Forest Resource Alliance. Meanwhile, all those mining companies and corporate ranchers formed the People the

175

The New Doublespeak for the West! to fight

any attempt

to

reform the 1872 Mining

Law, which allows private companies and individuals

to pur-

chase public lands for fees as low as $2.50 an acre, even the land

is

loaded with millions of dollars of minerals.

Finally,

the

there’s

Medicines, which tion,”

and has

as

Coalition

Access

for

purpose the defeat of a measure to help

purchases,

large

to

“an ad hoc volunteer organiza-

calls itself

its

Equal

for

lower Medicaid costs by forcing drug companies to offer counts

if

group was founded and

is

among

other reforms.

dis-

This

funded by the prescription drug

industry.

So the next time you read a statement or a study issued by

some

“grassroots organization” or

know

a

membership of the group, where

it

group, you might want to

it’s

really after.

more about the money, and what

bit

little

gets

“public interest”

its

33

Free Speech lor

Me

of

When

some

students,

hut Not for Ihee, or The

New Doublespeak

Freedom on College Campuses

faculty,

and administrators

at

Stanford

University were debating a ban on “harassment by tion,”

Canetta

Ivy, a student

who

serves

on

vilifica-

the three-mem-

ber Council of Presidents that heads the student govern-

ment,

what

said,

up something that tells students what they can do and what they can’t.

“You have

the limits are,

to set

176

The Doublespeak of Government and

We we

Politics

many restrictions on freedom of speech as What we are proposing is not completely in line

don’t put as should.

with the First Amendment. I’m not sure it should be. We at Stanford are trying to set a standard different from what society at large

is

trying to accomplish .” 34

This has to be one of the great doublespeak definitions of free speech since Nineteen Eighty -Four. I for one hope that Ms.

about freedom of speech never take hold in our society because I sure don’t want to live under her idea of free speech. By the way, who’s going to decide what restrictions should be placed on free speech? Ivy’s ideas

We

can get an idea of Ms. Ivy’s notion of free speech by looking at some recent incidents at two universities that are

supposed

to

be

among the how we define are

among

best, I

the best in the nation.

would sure

like to take

And

if

these

another look

at

“best” in relation to these universities.

The Doublespeak of Drown University

While drunk

late

one

shouted obscenities,

night, a student at racist

remarks,

Brown

University

and antihomosexual

remarks. According to witnesses, he did not threaten anyone, he did not urge any actions against anyone, and he did

not direct his remarks at any particular student.

however, reveal for

all

the world his ignorance

and

He

did,

bigotry.

After a hearing before the university’s Undergraduate

177

The New Doublespeak was found

Disciplinary Council, the student

guilty of the

subjecting of “another person, group or class of persons, to

threatening or demeaning actions

inappropriate,

abusive,

based on race,

religion, gender, handicap, ethnicity, national

origin

For

orientation”

sexual

or

this

offense,

he was

expelled from the university.

Vartan Gregorian, the president of the university, maintained that

Brown

University

is

firmly committed to free

speech and that he did nothing to limit anyone’s freedom of In upholding the decision to expel the student,

speech.

Gregorian maintained that the student was not expelled for

what he

said but for

what he

did.

According

to President

Gregorian, “the university’s code of conduct does not prohibit speech;

prohibits actions

it

,

and these include behavior

that ‘shows flagrant disrespect for the well-being of others or is

unreasonably disruptive of the university community.’”

He went on

to point out that the “rules

do not proscribe

words, epithets or slanders; they proscribe behavior.

The

point at which speech becomes behavior and the degree to

which

that behavior

being of others ing actions ...

.

is

.

shows flagrant disrespect

subjects

.

someone

for the well-

to abusive or

demean-

determined by a hearing to consider the

cumstances of each

case.”

Thus

it is

cir-

that speech ceases to

be

speech and becomes action; words are no longer words but behavior.

What prompted

did the

student

his expulsion?

homosexual remarks.

He

do

,

what were the

He made hit

actions

that

racist, anti-Semitic, anti-

no one, threatened no one; he

did not urge anyone to take action or

178

harm anyone

else,

nor

Th e Doublespeak of Government and Politics

did he paint racist

He

only shouted. Hateful speech, to be sure, but only speech. For his words he was expelled

from the Yet

graffiti.

university.

President

Gregorian

insists

that

the

was

student

expelled for his actions-his behavior, not his words. His

words, according to Gregorian, were actions that constituted harassment. But Gregorian does not explain how these

words can constitute harassment since the student never singled out any particular student or students for repeated

which

intimidation,

There

is

in

for his

the

Saddam,” “Gay Jesse

the definition of harassment.

a simple test to determine whether the student

was punished student

is

Helms

is

words or

What

his actions.

if

the

same circumstances had shouted is

same “Kill

good,” “Heterosexuals are living a

a racist,”

“Newt Gingrich

is

lie,”

an imperialist

warmonger,” and “Republicans are fascist pigs”? Would he have been expelled for these remarks? If not, then it follows that the student his

was expelled

for the distasteful content of

speech and not for any supposed actions.

President Gregorian and

Brown

University maintain that

they have an unyielding commitment to free speech, yet they retain for themselves the right to take action against speech that

they in their

own judgment believe

and unstated boundary of “disruption.” In short, to

has crossed some undefined

“disrespect,” “appropriateness,” or

by reserving the

be actions whenever they

like,

they reserve the right to pun-

ish speech that they find offensive. free

speech,

a definition that

right to declare speech

is

This

is

their definition

doublespeak.

Oceania and Nineteen Eighty-Four Brown University ,

179

Welcome style

35 .

of to

The New Doublespeak The Doublespeak

On

of the University of Pennsylvania

April 15, 1993, almost

Pennsylvanian

,

the student

all

the 14,200 copies of the Daily

newspaper

at

the University of

Pennsylvania, were taken by groups of African-American students and thrown into trash cans.

A

group

calling itself

Working Committee of Concerned Black and Latino Students issued a statement saying that the newspapers had been taken as a protest against “the blatant and covert racism at the university” and claiming that their action was a “legal protest” The Concerned Students said that their action was not a suppression of free speech because “not only are the papers free, but there exists no explicit restriction on the numbers of papers that any given student may remove” Moreover, the group declared that “we are not the

opposed

to free

speech or the diversification of opinions.

However, we were peacefully

politically protesting

satisfaction with the newspaper.

protected by the First

.

.

.

Our

our

dis-

political protest

is

Amendment, which upholds conduct

intended to be purely speech.” Thus, destroying newspapers

because you don’t

like

what’s printed in them becomes free

speech.

In response to the destruction of the newspapers, Sheldon

Hackney, president of the university, said that what hap-

pened was a seeming

conflict

between “two important uni-

versity values, diversity

and open expression.” So much

freedom of speech

University of Pennsylvania.

at the

After investigating the incident,

180

the university’s

for

Public

The Doublespeak of Government and

Safety Task Force said that the realized that taking

all

Politics

campus

police should have

the newspapers

and trashing them

was not “an indicator of criminal behavior” but a form of student protest. Instead of treating the situation as a criminal matter— the destruction of the newspapers— the campus police

should have notified administrators, tacted

fused

who would

have con-

“Open Expression Monitors” (who are not to be conwith Orwell’s Thought Police). These “monitors”

would then have “witnessed” the university’s

the actions to

“Open Expression

make

sure that

Guidelines” (which are

not to be confused with procedures from the Ministry of Truth) were being followed.

The

panel also criticized the security director of the uni-

versity’s

students

Museum of Archeology because he pursued two who had taken two large plastic bags of newspapers

from the building. According to the panel, once the students were outside the building he should not have pursued them, which is an interesting definition of the duties of a person charged with the security of so Professor

mended

Howard

that

many valuable works

Arnold, a faculty judicial

no action be taken against

had been charged with

“confiscating”

officer,

of art.

recom-

the students the

who

newspapers.

“Mistakes by students must be seen more as opportunities for

education

than

as

occasions

for

punishment,”

said

Professor Arnold in explaining his decision. Interim presi-

dent Claire Fagin and interim provost Marvin Lazerson said they accepted the recommendation of Professor Arnold and they would try to ease the frictions over racial

and

free speech.

181

sensibilities

The New Doublespeak Many means

people have long held the notion that free speech

the right to speak

on

controversial topics without fear

of being arrested, attacked, or shut up. If people didn’t like

what you

they could always argue with you, exercising

said,

their right of free speech.

supposed

to

At

least that’s the

work, according to

Now

way

the system

Thomas Jefferson and

is

a few

means the right to shut other people up because you don’t like what they have to say. To claim that destroying newspapers because you don’t like what’s printed in them is exercising your right others.

comes the idea

of free speech

doublethink. This principle seems to have

is

been forgotten

that free speech

at the

where Orwell’s novel

University of Pennsylvania, a place Nineteen Eighty -Four should

reading, especially during “sensitivity training.”

The Government’s Doublespeak

of

be required

36

War

Hiram Johnson was wrong when in 1917 he observed that in war the first casualty is truth. In war the Senator

first

casualty

truth. It

is

language.

was the Vietnam

was the Korean

And

with the language goes the

“conflict,”

not the Vietnam War.

“police action,” not the

the “pacification” of

Korean War.

It

It

was

Gaul by Julius Caesar, not the brutal

and bloody subjugation of Gaul. “Where they make a desert,

they

call

Calgacus of the

it

peace,”

Roman

observed the British chieftain

conquest of Britain.

language.

182

War

corrupts

The Doublespeak of Government and

The doublespeak

Politics

of war consists, as Orwell wrote of

all

such language, “of euphemism, question-begging, and sheer 37 cloudy vagueness. It is, fundamentally, the language of insincerity,

where there

and declared aims.

It is

is

a gap between the speaker’s real

language as an instrument for con-

and preventing thought, not for expressing or extending thought. Such language silences dialogue and blocks communication. During the Vietnam “conflict” we learned that mercenarcealing

paid by the U.S. government were “civilian irregular defense soldiers,” refugees fleeing the war were “ambient ies

noncombatant personnel,” and enemy troops who survived bombing attacks were “interdictional nonsuccumbers .” In Vietnam, American war planes conducted “limited duration protective reaction strikes” during “effective

which they achieved an delivery of ordnance.” So it went too in the Persian

Gulf.

Just as officially there was no war in Korea or Vietnam, so

was no war

officially there

in the Persian Gulf. After

Congress didn’t declare war, the “use of force,” a Article

I,

power

it

declared an authorization of

clearly delegated to

Section 8 of the Constitution, which

ently reads: “Congress shall have the

use of force.” So

now we have

all,

power

Congress in

now

appar-

to authorize the

not war but Operation Desert

Storm, or “exercising the military option,”

or,

according to

President Bush, an “armed situation.”

During

this

“armed

situation” massive

bombing

attacks

became “efforts.” Thousands of war planes didn’t drop tons of bombs; “weapons systems” or “force packages” “visited a

183

The New Doublespeak bombs on and

didn’t drop their tons of

These “weapons systems”

site”

and human beings, they “hit” “hard” During their “visits,” these “weapons sys-

buildings

“soft targets.”

tems”

“degraded,”

“eliminated,” tated,” or

“neutralized,”

“cleansed,”

“impacted,”

“sanitized,”

and the

who were

soldiers

nor did they blow up bridges, roads,

and the people who happened

If the

to

be

there.

A

when more enemy

were destroyed than expected.

“weapons systems” didn’t achieve

(blow up their targets) during their attack), as

uring out

Women,

first

“effective results”

if

everything was

completely destroyed),

will “revisit the site”

(bomb

children, or other civilians killed or

ing these

“visits,”

and any schools,

“collateral

damage,” which

produced by the

effects

the

again).

wounded

dur-

museums, were blown up

the undesired

is

it

(fig-

hospitals,

houses, or other “nonmilitary” targets that

casualties

(bombing

“visit”

determined by a “damage assessment study”

“weapons systems”

were

in them,

and other

factories,

“healthy day of bombing” was achieved “assets”

“decapi-

“took out” targets, they didn’t blow up planes,

tanks, trucks, airfields,

buildings

“suppressed,”

“attrited,”

damage or

from “incontinent ord-

nance” or “accidental delivery of ordnance equipment,”

meaning the bombs and rockets

that miss their targets.

To function as it should and as we expect it to, language must be an accurate reflection of that which it represents. The doublespeak of war is an instance of thought corrupting language, and language corrupting thought. Such language is needed only

if,

as

George Orwell wrote, “one wants

things without calling

up mental

184

pictures of

to

them .” 38

name Thus

The Doublespeak of Government and

Politics

the phrase “traumatic amputation” produces tures of soldiers with “light” or pilots

arms or

legs

blown

no mental

The

off.

pic-

terms

“moderate” losses invoke no mental pictures of

burned beyond recognition

their planes, of

hundreds of

in the twisted

soldiers lying

wreckage of

dead on a

battle-

or screaming in pain in field hospitals. Killing the enemy becomes the innocuous “servicing the target,” which field,

invokes no mental picture of shooting, stabbing, or blowing another human being to small, bloody pieces. Clean-sounding phrases such as “effective delivery of ordnance,” “precision bombing,” and “surgical air strikes” invoke no mental pictures of thousands of tons of

bombs

falling

on

electric

power

plants,

tories,

with women, children, and old people huddling in the

communication

centers, railroad lines,

homes and neighborhoods. The new doublespeak of war flowed smoothly

and

fac-

ruins of their

as military

spokespersons coolly discussed “assets” (everything from

male and female

soldiers to aircraft carriers

and

satellites),

the “suppression of assets” (bombing everything from soldiers to

sewage

enemy radar and and

plants),

radio,

missiles, shooting

enemy

“airborne sanitation” (jamming

and blowing up

down enemy

antiaircraft

guns

airplanes), “disruption”

(bombing), “operations” (bombing), “area denial weapons” (cluster

bombs, previously

called

antipersonnel

“damage” (death and destruction, or the

results of

“attrition” (destruction, or the results of

bombing).

The massive bombing campaign one

attack) directed against the

185

bombing),

(which included massed

bombs in Republican Guard units

bombing by B-52s dropping thousands of just

bombs),

tons of

The New Doublespeak of the Iraqi army was

General

Norman

“the delivery

American

Schwarzkopf,

who

based

methods and volume

on them.”

put

considered highly successful by

Returning from

pilot said

that

his

assessment on

we’ve been able

bombing

a

he had “sanitized the

an

attack,

A

area.”

to

Marine

general told reporters, “We’re prosecuting any target that’s

out there.”

we

And an

artillery captain said, “I prefer

are killing other people.

Even with all “armed effort” was subject

the target.”

When

ship.

language

is

I

we

prefer to say

not to say

are servicing

doublespeak, news of the

this

to “security review,” not censor-

what becomes of

so corrupted,

truth?

The

use of technical, impersonal, bureaucratic, euphemistic

language to describe war separates the act of killing from the idea of killing;

supposed

to symbolize.

up designed lies

separates the

it

to hide

by keeping us

numb war.

Such language

an unpleasant

is

With such language we

With

human

suffering that

is

is

which

it

is

a linguistic cover-

language that

from the

detachment from the horror that to the

that

reality. It is

as far as possible

tends to represent. logical

word from

reality

it

pre-

create a psycho-

war and become

the inevitable result of

war we are not responsible for And war becomes a “viable” solu-

the doublespeak of

the results of our actions. tion for our problems.

War

portrayed only through government-approved lan-

guage creates a

false verbal

map

is

that

governments

the reality

itself,

map. The

greatest threat to this

or a picture of that

strictly control

186

what

Thus it is of war they

reality.

pictures

The Doublespeak of Government and Politics

allow their citizens

to

When

see.

U.S.

military

censors

refused to release videotapes showing Iraqi soldiers being sliced in half by helicopter cannon fire, a spokesman for the

Pentagon defended the censorship quite logically: “If we let people see that kind of thing, there would never again be any war.” 39 If anything is a testament to the power of verbal maps,

this

how

Just

by

comment must be

this bit

powerful

this

it.

verbal

A

of information.

map

when

All

confirmed

three- to eleven-year-old

interviewed referred to “people dying”

they talked about war in general. However,

when

they

about the Gulf War, only 21 percent mentioned

talked death.

who were

is

study by Purdue University

found that more than two-thirds of children

has been

40

governments use doublespeak

lence.

The

U.S. government

is

no

to hide their acts of vio-

different

from any

other.

As we have seen with

the language of war, a government

wants to create a verbal

map

erable;

one that

for the

war

that

will lead those

to accept the

war

is

favorable, or at least

who must

fight, die,

tol-

and pay

as rational, acceptable, reason-

able.

Unfortunately,

we

too often accept the

instead of creating our

government’s

ernment

map

own maps, map

offered us

or at least subjecting the

to rigorous testing.

offers a verbal

map

But sometimes a gov-

so outrageous that

no one can

Such was the case of the Chinese government’s explanation of what happened in Tiananmen Square on accept

June

4,

it.

1989.

187

The New Doublespeak No One Died

[Rjeality

nowhere

Not

else.

and

Party,

which

be truth

Tiananmen Square

not external. Reality exists in the

is

takes,

to

in

in

is

is

in the individual

mind, which can make mis-

any case soon perishes; only collective

truth. It

is

and

human mind, and

in the

mind of

the

immortal. Whatever the Party holds

impossible to see reality except by looking

through the eyes of the Party.

-George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

Thousands of troops did not

Tiananmen Square on June

4,

Square.

No

No

1989.

bayoneted, or crushed by tanks.

the

attack

No

students

in

students were shot,

one died

one died in Tiananmen Square.

in

No

Tiananmen one died

in

Tiananmen Square.

What rifice

really

happened was a triumph of

by the brave troops who

as they

restraint

and

sac-

approached the square

were viciously attacked by savage gangs of counterrevolutionary rioters armed, financed, and directed by “overseas

reactionary political forces.” Despite

due the

rioters, the troops

General Li Zhiyun

said,

pened

their attempts to sub-

were forced

“The

use violence to enter the

all

city.”

fact

is,

to

the

fire,

army was

But even then

“it

for as

forced to

never hap-

that soldiers fired directly at the people.” Indeed, as

the general so clearly pointed out, “There as

open

bloodshed on Tiananmen Square.

It

was no such thing is

not from any

instance from the soldiers directing their guns at the people.

This incident never happened within the area of

188

Beijing.”

The Doublespeak of Government and Politics

Yes,

it is

force

true, the general also said, “If

we couldn t have

happened.

we

didn’t use military

cleared the Square,’’ but then

it

never

No

one died in Tiananmen Square. The testimony of your own eyes cannot and should not

be believed. The extensive videotaped scenes of the violence and death in Tiananmen Square simply misled you from the

Yuan Mu, the spokesperson for the government, made so clear, “The development of modern techtruth. After

all,

as

nology can allow people

to turn out

distort the truth of the matter.”

No

even a longer film

to

one died in Tiananmen

Square.

Nor can you

Xiao Bin who

as

rumor-mongering eyewitnesses such claimed, “Tanks and armored personnel

believe

carriers rolled over students,

the soldiers shot at

them and

squashing them into jam, and hit

them with

clubs.

When

stu-

dents fainted, the troops killed them. After they died, the troops fired one nets.” lies

But those

more

bullet into them.

who know

They

better reported this spreader of

to the authorities. After the police

Xiao

Bin, he confessed his

anything.

I

tionary.

No

lies

on

one died

also admitted in

was not

harm

never saw

to the Party

he was a counterrevolu-

Tiananmen Square.

So too did Comrade Chou admit his shirt

had “talked” with

television. “I

apologize for bringing great

and the country.” He

also used bayo-

his error.

The blood on

that of people killed during the army’s

was wrong,” Chou

“The Party and the government have said nobody was killed, and I made a mistake. I was influenced by bad elements and counterrevolutionaries. The blood on my shirt was surely that of attack

on

the square. “I

189

said.

The New Doublespeak a martyred soldier.”

No

one died in Tiananmen Square.

Better to believe the four

were

on

We

had a

were

It is

“We

view of the square and

clear

saw what happened. The army did not anyone.

testified,

corner of the Great Hall of the People

at the northeast

the fourth floor.

young men who

kill

anyone or hurt

common people No one died in

not true that any students or in

killed

Tiananmen

Square.”

Tiananmen Square. To guide you in correct thinking and truly understand what really happened, the necessary guidance:

to ensure that

you

the party provides

“Without the Communist

Party,

would be no new China.” “Love the Party, love the socialist motherland.” As the loyal party member said, “What they really want is for you to say, ‘We love Deng, we love the party and we love socialism.’ And we all say it of there

course.”

No

one died

in

Tiananmen Square

Almost unconsciously he traced with table:

2 + 2

the struggle

He

loved

= 5.

...

was

it

was finished

.

41 .

his finger in the dust

all right, everything

He had won

was

Big Brother.

Nineteen Eighty-Four

one died

in

Tiananmen Square.

190

all right,

the victory over himself.

-George Orwell,

No

on the

How to

Words

Fight Doublespeak

are indispensable but also can be fatal-the

only begetters of all

civilization, all science, all con-

sistency of high purpose,

angelic goodness,

all

and

same time of all superstimadness and stupidity, all

the only begetters at the tions,

all

collective

worse-than-bestial diabolism,

all

cal succession of crimes in the

Nation, Party,

Dogma. Never

the dismal histori-

name

of God, King,

before, thanks to the

techniques of mass communication, have so listeners

mercy of so few misused words— those

been so completely

speakers.

hideously

Never

have

efficient tools

many

of

at the

all

the tyrants, war-

mongers, persecutors, and heresy-hunters— been so widely and disastrously influential as they are

191

The New Doublespeak today. Generals, clergymen, advertisers, rulers of totalitarian states— all

and the

have good reason

for disliking the idea of universal education in the

To

rational use of language.

the military, clerical,

propagandist, and authoritarian

mind such

train-

ing seems (and rightly seems) profoundly subversive

1 .

Despite in this

the examples of doublespeak

all

book,

haven’t

I

made

I

have discussed

a dent in the five

my

file

drawers

And

bulging with doublespeak that

I

add more examples every

Once you become aware of

how much can easily

doublespeak

feel

day.

our

fills

office.

is

use doublespeak, and

it is

you must overcome

you hope

if

doublespeak.

If

It is this

the great ally of those

this feeling

to

I

and our world, you

lives

overwhelmed and, worse, powerless.

feeling of powerlessness that

fight against

have in

who

of powerlessness that

make any

you want

progress in the

to fight doublespeak,

you must begin with some understanding of

the importance

of the problem.

Appreciating the Problem

you must appreciate just how powerful language is, how words have the power to pre-persuade us, how words and labels come to define and create our world for us, how First,

words influence and

direct

our thoughts and

192

feelings,

and

How

how words

to

Fight Doublespeak

thus influence our behavior. You must under-

stand what reification

is,

how

the abstracting process works,

and why you must be aware processes

work

at

we

in the language

every day of our

lives.

all

times of

how

these

and hear and use you must be aware of and take

And

see

seriously the consequences of language misuse, the conse-

quences of doublespeak.

You must

realize that the

misuse of language can and does

have serious consequences for you personally, and for

all

of

us as a society and a nation. Indeed, the misuse of language

can have serious consequences for us

have on,

no matter what

to get along,

and language

along.

is

the primary

as a species.

part of the planet

means we have

Language misuse, the corruption of public

can have consequences that reach

far

We we

all

live

for getting

discourse,

beyond anything we

imagine.

Language

serious business.

is

how

language and

it

is

used.

We

As

I

must pay

said in the

attention to first

chapter,

I’m not concerned with “proper” or “correct” English, whatever that might be.

The

issue isn’t

whether we should use

“between” or “among” in a particular instance, or whether “like” or “as”

correct.

is

The

issue

is

whether our public

dis-

course— the language we use every day to conduct our eco-

and

communicate

nomic,

political,

clearly,

whether our public discourse does indeed help us

create a verbal politically,

and

social affairs— serves to

world in which we can function economically, socially,

whether our public discourse helps

us grow and prosper personally and as a nation and a culture, or

whether our public discourse has become not just an

193

The New Doublespeak impediment

to

our functioning effectively as a society but

means of the disintegration of that society. Second, you must appreciate that doublespeak affects you personally You may easily identify the doublespeak of politithe

government

cians, advertisers,

and

all

speak

officials,

business executives,

the others, but simply being aware of the double-

not enough. You must realize that

is

doublespeak

all

you personally— affects your health, your well-being, your family, your neighborhood, your town, your entire life. As long as you excuse doublespeak by saying that it doesn’t affects

affect

you, you can’t even begin to attack the problem.

Third, you need a sense of humor. Using laughter to confront those

who

such language

and

all

those

use doublespeak reveals just

how

absurd

Politicians, judges, bureaucrats, executives,

is.

who

use doublespeak want to be taken

seri-

They want to be treated as if their words have meaning when in fact they don’t. So if we were to laugh at their doublespeak we might reveal that the emperor has no ously.

words have no meaning.

And

in laughing

teach others to laugh, and to pay

more

attention to

clothes, that their

we might

doublespeak and

its

consequences.

How

do you think Alan Greenspan would react if reporters and members of Congress were to laugh the next time he said something like the following, which his

remarks

at a congressional

interest rates to

While

may

part of

hearing on the need to lower

speed economic recovery:

you previously that we have, probably do have, enough mone-

I’ve indicated to

well

is

194

How

to

Fight Doublespeak

tary stimulus in the system to create that, I’m not

we

sure that

and

revisit this issue,

were

all

not need some insurance or to

will

looking

all I

can say to you

same

at the

set

is

that

of data, the same

economy, the same sense of confidence which pervades it. We’re all making our judgments with

how

respect to

nomic

that

is

evolving with respect to eco-

and where the

activity

ferent actions are.

And

risks of various dif-

there will be differences

inevitably 2 .

Clearly Mr. Greenspan keeps using such language because

we appear

him

to take

and don’t challenge something, as

if

he

seriously

when we

his language.

is

making

We

sense,

listen respectfully

act as if

when

and

and

use,

to

respectfully to such language

is

saying

in fact just

everyone agrees he doesn’t make any sense quietly

he

is

at

all.

To

about listen

encourage

to

its

encourage further pollution of the semantic envi-

ronment.

No,

it’s

time to stop

with the contempt tries to

his

nonsense and

deserves.

The

treat

such language

next time Mr. Greenspan

pass off his nonsense as words of thoughtful

we should offer

it

this

laugh, thank

him

for his

him another job, perhaps

as a

wisdom

comic routine, and then standup comic, because

language should evoke wild laughter in his audience,

much

as Professor Irwin Corey’s language

Fourth,

since

doublespeak

affects

once

you

did.

personally,

you

must appreciate the seriousness of the problem emotionally, not just intellectually. That is, doublespeak should evoke a

195

The New Doublespeak who

kind of righteous anger in you. Those are trying to

get

expense, and that those

who

away with something, usually at your should provoke some kind of anger. Also,

use doublespeak are polluting our semantic envi-

ronment, contributing

at the

very

least to a decline in public

language and public discourse. Since

human

on language, those who use doublespeak very foundation of our

Anger

is

use doublespeak

society,

the least they can expect

You can

society depends

are striking at the

our culture, our nation.

from

us.

You are not powerless. You should never be a passive consumer of language, especially doublespeak. You may feel frustrated when you encounter doublefight back.

speak because you don’t

know how

you might think

can’t fight

that

you

to fight back. In fact,

back because you don’t

own

a newspaper, a radio or television station, or

other

means

And

so, like

for getting

speak and

move

the world

and

I

to

your anti-doublespeak message

you simply note

others,

on, believing that doublespeak

there’s

believe that

of the tidal

many

too

it is

nothing you can do about this feeling

our growing cynicism about

the double-

is

the

way

of

it.

that engulfs us that has led politics, politicians,

political process itself. “After a while,

common

out.

of powerlessness in the face

wave of doublespeak

and fed up you

some

just turn off,” said

you

and the

get so disgusted

one former

voter.

“The

person just doesn’t have a voice,” said another 3 For .

a political system that voters, these

comments

You don’t need

is

based on the participation of the

are ominous.

to believe in public opinion polls to realize

that a lot of people

no longer

see themselves as part of the

196

How

body ple

Fight Doublespeak

to

politic in this country. Just

look

at the

number of peo-

who

don’t bother to vote in either local or national elections. People will vote when they believe that their vote has

meaning, that

it is

connected to their

lives.

But when candi-

dates for office use doublespeak to say one thing so they can do the opposite once in office, people consider voting a

meaningless activity that changes nothing, especially in their lives. Growing cynicism about politics and politicians, and

growing numbers of nonvoters is one result of the dominance of doublespeak in our public language.

The message

of

this

book, however,

is

not just that dou-

blespeak pervades our public language and

harm book

doing serious

important message of

this

you can fight back. Since doublespeak will be a while, you need to learn to recognize its influ-

that

is

around

An

our public discourse.

to

is

for

ence in your

life.

Indeed,

mine, as citizens in a discourse to do

all

I

think

political

we can

it is

your

stopped. In

1981

and

system that depends on public

to identify, call attention to,

eliminate doublespeak in public discourse.

Here’s an example of

responsibility,

And we

and

can do

it.

how one

use of doublespeak was

the

Reagan Administration

officials

in

started to talk about “revenue enhancement.”

Of

course,

they were talking about a tax increase, but they didn’t want

term “tax

to use the

increase.”

So they talked about “revenue

enhancement.” You know, increasing government revenues

by raising peared

taxes.

when

But the term “revenue enhancement” disap-

the press started to write such things as, “rev-

enue enhancement, the administration’s term increase

.

.

.”

That’s

all.

for

a

tax

Just an explanation of what the term

197

The New Doublespeak The

meant.

stopped

quickly

officials

using

“revenue

enhancement.”

But

strengthening.”

So once again the press pointed out the

meaning of

then

they

started

use

to

and refused

“receipts strengthening”

“receipts

to fall into

the trap of using the doublespeak uncritically.

we

Unfortunately, fight against

can’t rely

on

the

news media

doublespeak. Every once in a while a reporter

or columnist or commentator will highlight larly

in the

some

particu-

outrageous example of doublespeak, but generally the

news media seem unconcerned about the use of doublespeak. In

using

it

fact,

they help spread doublespeak by uncritically

and other

in their stories as they quote politicians

users of doublespeak.

The

fight against

individuals. as the

We

can’t look to others or to organizations such

news media.

us, that the fight

position to

“I’m just

doublespeak begins with each of us as

We

can’t say that the fight

should be waged by people

is

too big for

who

are in a

do something. You should never use the excuse, a common person, what can I do?” Just keep

reminding yourself,

if

you don’t do

it,

who

else will?

And

then begin.

Our

feelings of helplessness in the face of

come from

a misunderstanding of

how

doublespeak

language works. Too

many

people see themselves as passive participants in the

act of

communication. They simply

messages sent to them. speeches,

read

act as receivers of the

They watch

television,

newspapers and magazines,

absorb the messages. For them, there

is

listen

to

and simply

a sender of the mes-

sage and a receiver of the message. These are the people

198

How

who

say,

“But

that’s

You must be an

to

what he

an

said.”

As

if

saying makes

it

active not a passive user of language.

are not a receptacle into

are

Fight Doublespeak

which the words

are poured,

so.

Y)u

Y)u

active, critically functioning participant in the act of

communication, in the semantic environment.

you are not part of the semantic environment, communication does not take place, at least not for you. Language should never be an uncontrolled flood of words flowing into your head. You need to assert control over the language directed at you. Ernest skill

Hemingway was once asked

to

name

If

the essential

for survival in the twentieth century. People

need

to

become first-rate crap detectors, he replied 4 Becoming a crap detector isn’t all that hard, but it does require you to change some of your language habits. The first thing you have to do is stop looking for the meaning of .

any message

in the

words of the message. You need to look the whole context in which the message

meaning in occurs. To figure out what’s really being said, you need to ask who is saying what to whom, under what conditions and for the

circumstances, with what intent, and with what results. You

need in

to

be aware of and examine the semantic environment

which any language occurs.

situation, the semantic

It is

within the context of the

environment, that

we must

evaluate

language.

To whom are they talking? What’s the context (conditions and circumstances) of their talking? What’s their purpose in talking, that is, what are they trying

Who’s

talking?

to achieve?

What

are the results of their talking, that

happens or doesn’t happen

as a result of

199

is,

what they say?

what

The New Doublespeak As soon

you ask

as

these questions

you have done some-

You have placed yourself outside the context or semantic environment in which the message occurs. Now you are an observer of the message and its con-

thing very important:

text

and

the

full

less

of a participant.

Now you

can begin to examine

context and find the meaning of the language.

Sometimes we can

easily see the context of a

evaluate the message. Other times, however,

message and

we

can’t

even

see the context of the message.

Not too long ago, while the war in Bosnia was raging, numerous diplomats were trying to get the warring parties to negotiate an

end

to the war.

At the height of

all

matic efforts newspapers reported the following Sefir Halilovic,

way

commander of

to negotiate

is

comment by

the Bosnian army:

“The only

to fight.”"

This remark was greeted with loud

cries

of derision from

commentators and those members of the general

political

public

these diplo-

who

bothered to comment, usually in

letters to the

on one of the ubiquitous radio talk shows. I don’t know how the remark was treated in Bosnia, but I suspect Bosnian patriots and members of the Bosnian army found the remark quite reasonable. They were in a war, and what editor or

way to end the war than to win it? Wasn’t fighting the way to convince the enemy of your point of view? So

better

best

fighting

is

negotiating, in a way, at least

from the Bosnian

point of view.

The

response to Halilovic’s remark depended, of course,

on whether you understood the context or semantic environment of the general’s remark. Outside the general’s semantic

200

How

to

Fight Doublespeak

environment we might see this remark as doublespeak, guage that in this instance is at war with

language that

itself,

contradicts

itself.

are not the

might

say.

same

A

the general

s

Even

in Bosnia, negotiating

thing,

remark suggests

going to negotiate; he

s

and

no matter what General

careful analysis of the semantic that

he

going to

allows the general to claim he

is

is

lan-

fighting

Halilovic

environment of

saying that he’s not

fight.

This doublespeak

negotiating even as he con-

waging war. With every battle he fights he is negotiatThus, war becomes peace, or at least the negotiations

tinues ing.

for peace.

Well, for will

we

what

re

it is.

not fooled by that doublespeak.

But

let’s

take another

be in a context closer

When

We

can see

comment, only

this

it

one

to us.

Alexander Haig was secretary of

state

he

testified

before a congressional committee on the proposed massive military

How

buildup that President Reagan was conducting. would such a massive increase in troops and weapons

achievement of arms control? asked some members of the committee. Won’t such a massive military affect the

buildup lead to a proliferation of arms around the world,

making arms control even more difficult, if not impossible? Not at all, replied Secretary Haig, because a continued weapons buildup by the United States “is absolutely essential thus

to

our hopes for meaningful arms reduction .” 6

Few the

if

any commentators or pundits bothered

contradiction

in

Haig’s

remark.

to point out

Unlike

General

Halilovic’s remark, Haig’s passed almost unnoticed.

No

one

questioned the reasoning behind the remark. After

all,

this

201

The New Doublespeak was the U.S. secretary of official

“our” guy, speaking in his

state,

We

capacity before a congressional committee.

tend

any remarks made in that context. But Secretary Haig’s remark is doublespeak just as General

to accept uncritically

remark was. Indeed, they are almost the same: Fighting equals negotiating; building more weapons leads to a reduction in weapons. When I commented on Secretary Haig’s remark in my

Halilovic’s

own

small

edited at that time,

I

received a

number

of

letters in

which

I

called to task for daring to question Haig’s remarks.

was After

all,

more than one

strong defense

one

which

I

,

in the Quarterly Review of Doublespeak

way

if

else at bay.

to

have

moment’s

My

pointed out,

we need

a

we’re going to keep the Russians and any-

The

trol the proliferation

have

letter writer

lots

was obvious: If you want to conof the weapons of war in the world, you logic

and

lots

of weapons ready to go at a

notice.

point in calling attention to Haig’s remark

should pay attention to without thought or

it.

We

is

that

we

shouldn’t simply accept

comment and go on

it

to other matters.

That remark carried with it important consequences, and it was based on important assumptions. It’s those consequences and assumptions that we should examine because they are an essential part of the context, the semantic envi-

ronment, in which Haig

made

the remark.

more and more weapons would ensure a reduction in military weapons in the world as a whole. No one asked what would happen if every

No

one asked

how

building

202

How

to

Fight Doublespeak

nation believed that having lots and lots of weapons was the way to have fewer weapons in the world.

No

one asked

what would happen if the entire planet was a giant armed camp, with every nation armed to the teeth and ready for war at a moment’s notice. Standing outside Halilovic

the

context

of Haig’s

remark,

and

remark, makes us observers not just of the remark itself but more importantly of the whole context s

in

which the remark was made. By becoming observers of the remark and its context we become less interested in the

words and more context, in

how

interested in the situation, in the

words

in

words work, what the words do and do not do, what the words should do but don’t. The more questions

we

the

ask about language, the better

words do and do not say, selves from being misled. In the

we understand what the better we can prevent ourshort, the more we strive to

and analyze the semantic environment and to strive a symbol reaction to words, the more we will avoid a sig-

identify for

nal reaction.

Fighting Back

What One Person Gan Do So what can just one person do? Plenty. Here is a cific things that you can do to fight doublespeak.

203

list

of spe-

The New Doublespeak you find doublespeak in a memo, letter, announcement, or some other printed form, highlight the doublespeak. In the margins make a comment or two on the dou1.

If

blespeak, pointing out

why

doublespeak into

simple language that you consider

free of

clear,

Then

doublespeak.

comments and

revision

on a

bulletin

the

the writer of the doublespeak. to

know

tant to change. For

inventive.

board or in a similar

power of humor. Laugh

at

and don’t attack or humiliate

the doublespeak not the writer,

who seem

doublespeak. Rewrite the

post the doublespeak and your

And remember

public place.

it’s

Of

course, there are those

nothing but doublespeak and are reluc-

them you

will

have

But remember, your goal

is

to

be a

little

to eliminate the

more dou-

blespeak, not engage in personal attacks.

2.

Whenever you encounter doublespeak

in a

newspaper

or magazine, write a letter to the editor pointing out the doublespeak. Explain why you think the language you are objecting to

is

doublespeak, and suggest a revision that you

consider free of doublespeak and written in clear language.

Keep your comments faults

3.

of those

who

brief, to the point,

and

free of all the

use doublespeak.

Start collecting

examples of doublespeak on one topic

or issue, such as the economy, unemployment, foreign aid, or any subject that interests you. When you have a good

an op-ed essay on doublespeak using your examples and send the essay to your local newspaper, or to a number of local newspapers. Again,

collection of examples, write

204

How

remember

that

to

Fight Doublespeak

humor and

reason go far in revealing double-

speak.

If

4.

you spot any doublespeak

in the publications of

any

professional or other organization to which you belong, write a lettei to the editor pointing out the doublespeak. Rewrite the doublespeak into clear, simple language that you

consider free of doublespeak and suggest that this is the kind of language in which you think the publication should be written.

You might

also ask that the editorial staff

do

they

all

can to keep doublespeak out of the publication.

With

and fax machines you can build networks of people who want to fight doublespeak. You don’t have to 5.

fight alone

e-mail

because

who

find others

speak.

You can

now you

will join

collect

trade ideas for fighting cessful

You can

list

and other public

e-mail address, as

television stations, radio

all

and fax machines

to

send mes-

use doublespeak. Just about every

cian, business executive,

When

You can

of the biggest doublespeak offenders.

who

number and an

in the fight against double-

strategies for fighting back.

also use e-mail

sages to those

zines.

you

and trade examples of doublespeak, back, and exchange stories about suc-

and unsuccessful

also build a

can reach out electronically to

and

figure has a fax

do newspapers, radio and

television programs,

and maga-

they use doublespeak, send a message!

your fellow doublespeak

politi-

fighters to

messages to the offenders. Just think,

if

And

get

send e-mail and fax politicians

knew

that

using doublespeak would result in a flood of protesting,

205

The New Doublespeak chiding, admonishing, scolding faxes

they just might be a

little

more

and e-mail messages,

careful with their language.

You can start your own local newsletter fighting doublespeak. You don’t have to be fancy. Just a page or two of examples of doublespeak with some comments and observations, and you’re in business. You can ask others to join you 6.

and contribute examples and comments. Distribute your newsletter wherever the local

you can

locally,

newspaper and radio and

and be sure

to mail

it

to

television stations.

What Society Can Do The

you can take on your own. But there are other things that we can do to fight back that require the cooperation of larger numbers six things I

have

listed

above are

all

actions that

of people. If you are given the chance, you might want to

support these

one

to start

activities.

one of these

Or you might even want projects.

Here

is

to

a suggested

be the list

of

such actions.

1.

We

can ask our schools to take seriously Aldous

Huxley’s suggestion as outlined in the quote ning of

this chapter.

We

at the begin-

can write to our school boards and

school administrators urging that they include as part of the

curriculum the study of the rational use of language.

should explain that by

this

we do

206

not

mean

We

the study of

How

spelling, punctuation,

we want dents

to

Fight Doublespeak

and grammar.

We

should explain that

the schools to take a serious interest in teaching stu-

how

language works in the world and in their lives. Such study of language should begin in the first grade and continue in every grade until students graduate from high school. A/foreover, this study of language should be a major subject receiving major emphasis throughout the

curriculum

and

all

the grades.

We

can and should establish a center for the study of the misuse of public language, a center similar to the 2.

Institute for

Propaganda Analysis, which was established

1937 and flourished center

until 1950.

would conduct

7

Like the

institute,

our

in

new

studies of the misuse of public lan-

guage, publish a newsletter, conduct public panels, sponsor speakers, publish books, and in general conduct a vigorous

campaign

to

study and analyze the misuse of public

lan-

guage, and to provide materials for people to deal with doublespeak.

3. all

According

to Chase's

Annual

Events, the official

holidays and commemorations, June

designated National Simple Speak Day.

1

has been

We

guide to officially

should give that

day more prominence and conduct a variety of activities, such as public ceremonies honoring those who have contributed to the fight against doublespeak,

and those who

have avoided using doublespeak, especially those

in profes-

sions such as law or economics that are filled with double-

speak.

We

could also ask politicians, business leaders, and

207

The New Doublespeak leaders in the fields of law, education, finance,

and other

areas noted for the pervasive use of doublespeak to declare

publicly their

guage, and to

4.

Some

commitment to avoid doublespeak in their lanwork to eliminate it in their area of expertise.

advertising

on

television carries a required dis-

claimer such as “Dramatization,” meaning that what appears

be a documentary or

to

factual presentation

tional creation with actors pretending to

such as doctors, nurses, or police

be

officers.

that television stations start labeling other

and

similar warnings

composed of

“talking

tators, pundits,

on

is

really a

fic-

“real” people

We

should ask

programs with

disclosures. For example,

any program

heads”— a group of reporters, commen-

or anyone

who makes

a living

by just

talking

television— should carry the label “These people don’t

know what

they’re talking about.” This label should

be on

the television screen during the entire program. Moreover,

persons calling themselves “commentators” could speak only if

on the television screen the time they were speaking: “They make their living talk-

the following label appeared

entire

ing about anything they are asked to talk about.

ably don’t

know any more about

These remarks

this subject

many words might

Nightline

,

Of

and do

course, that

block out the speakers’ faces on the

which would be an additional

Whenever any such as

fact.”

prob-

than you do.

are simply their personal opinions

not represent any kind of reality or

vision screen,

They

tele-

benefit.

on any news program Ted Koppel or someone would have to “experts” appear

explain what specifically qualified

208

these

persons

to

talk

How

to

Fight Doublespeak

about the subject under discussion. Moreover, all “experts” and commentators” would be limited to one

television

appearance a month so that others would have a chance give their unsubstantiated opinions as fact

on

to

television pro-

grams. Finally, before they could offer their unsubstantiated opinions,

“experts” and “commentators”

all

reveal the sources

and amount of

would have to income for the past

their

year.

We

should encourage magazines and newspapers to run a regular feature in which they prominently display the 5.

most egregious instances of doublespeak. Perhaps they could put the examples in a box labeled “The Dumbest Statements

They might

of the Day.”

the statements are

also include a brief analysis of

worthy of such

why

notice.

Knowledge Is Power Michael

Kinsley

recently

observed,

Americans are scandalously ignorant. believe

they

that

ignorance.

.

.

.

have

“It’s

that they

It’s

democratic

a

not just

right

that

seem to

to

their

People are forming and expressing passionate

views ... on the basis of no information not only produces doublespeak, but

it

at all.”

8

Ignorance

encourages others to

use doublespeak because ignorance usually produces lan-

guage that

we

don’t

is

at variance

know what

with

has been

reality. left

209

Without knowledge,

unsaid, or

what has been

The New Doublespeak The following example of Alexander deny his own remarks is nothing less than

altered through words.

Haig’s attempt to

an attempt

to rewrite the historical record.

In 1993, the United Nations issued a report that docu-

mented widespread human

abuses by the military

rights

Reagan Administration to the American public

forces of El Salvador, abuses that the

knew about but did not fully reveal or Congress. The report also noted congressional testimony by then-Secretary of three

State

Haig on the rape and murder of

American nuns and a

lay

worker by Salvadoran troops

in 1981. In his testimony, Secretary

women

Haig suggested

might have run a roadblock and were

that the

killed in

an

“exchange of fire.” In a letter to the editor of the

United

Nations

claimed, “Not

report

on

this

New

York Times

a

“contains

,

Haig

serious

said the

or any subsequent occasion did

or imply that in

my judgment

an exchange of

fire.”

Haig on March

18, 1981, before a congressional

Here

state

I

there

had been a roadblock or

are the

words of then-Secretary committee.

In addition to being part of the Congressional Record this

testi-

,

mony

would like to suggest to you investigations would lead one to believe

on videotape.

is

some of

the

run a roadblock or

doing

so,

and

this

may have been

may have

who

inflicted the casualties

could have been

at a

fire,

tried

and

sought to cover

it

per-

up,

very low level of both compe-

tence and motivation in the context of the issue

Haig’s

that

perceived to have been

and there had been an exchange of

haps those

that

“I

perhaps the vehicle the nuns were riding in to

He

error.”

itself.”

9

attempt to rewrite history would have passed

210

How

to

Fight Doublespeak

unchallenged, but there were those who remembered his original remarks, who knew what his original words

had

been, and

who knew

that his letter

was an attempt

to erase

those words. His doublespeak was identified only because there were those who knew the historical record.

A

column by William

Safire illustrates a

of doublespeak, a form that pervades

more

much

subtle

form

of what passes

commentary in many publications. In his column, Mr. Safire was defending the CIA. True, concedes Mr. for political

the

Safire,

CIA

did not foresee the collapse of the Soviet

Union. But, wrote Mr. stopping the spread of

CIA did great work in Communism in Central and South Safire, the

America, even though

two generations of liberals have been infuriated by our support of anti- Communist regimes in .

.

.

Central and South America.

1954

that

defeat of

From

coup

the

threw out Arbenz in Guatemala leftists

in El Salvador

in

to the

and Nicaragua

in

the late ’80s, C.I.A. agents carried out their assign-

ment of helping

Communism

in

stop

the

spread

our neighborhood. Thanks partly

to those C.I.A. covert operations,

messily,

of Castro’s

we won— often

sometimes undemocratically, on occasion

war was being waged, and the alternative outcome— Soviet-Cuban hegemony up to our Mexican border— would have been far worse for democracy and human rights. Good ends do not justify evil means, but such scandalously. But real

.

211

.

.

The New Doublespeak dirty tricks that

some moral

would save thousands of lives gain 10

coloration. ...

One of Mr. S afire’s claimed areas of expertise is language. He enjoys the title of the “Language Maven,” and writes a weekly column

for the

New

in his opinion, use language incorrectly. Yet as this illustrates,

who,

York Times castigating those

one can use language “correctly” and

example still

con-

tribute to the corruption of language.

There

is

so

much doublespeak

my

will restrict

in these

few words that

I

observations to just the high points. Mr.

S afire says that “two generations of liberals have been infuriated by our support of anti- Communist regimes,” but he

never mentions

why

those

whom

he labels

“liberals”

might

have been infuriated by the support of such regimes, and

what he means by “our” support. simply being

anti- Communist

Is

Mr. Safire saying that

(whatever that means)

is suffi-

warrant the support of the U.S. government?

cient to

If so,

then by that standard the U.S. government should have supported

Hitler’s

Communist objects

as

government,

any government could

what other

anti- Communist,

criteria

If

Mr.

anti-

Safire

criteria

America

that

to

we

then

the

And what

is

to ask

by is

the result of applying

governments of Central and South

did support?

Mr. Safire has no problem with the freely

we have

does he judge whether a government

worthy of our support?

legal,

be.

as

and says we shouldn’t have supported Hitler simply

because he was

these

which was about

elected

government

212

in

CIA

overthrowing a

Guatemala

in

1954

How

Fight Doublespeak

to

because that government was, in his view, part of the spread of Fidel Castro s Communism. How this overthrow of the

government of Guatemala stopped the spread of Cuban Communism Mx. Safire doesn’t explain an explanation would be most interesting because Fidel Castro did not elected

j

come

to

power

in

Cuba

until 1959.

Since the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Guatemala, the country has been ruled by a series

of military dictatorships that have killed more than 100,000 people in forty years, according to numerous human rights reports.

But for Mr.

Safire, that’s just the price to

be paid for

Communism, a price that includes 100,000 dead men, women, and children. Of course, he doesn’t mention who paid that price, and whether they were asked if they fighting

wanted

to

pay

11

it.

Missing also from Mr.

Safire’s

defense of the

discussion of Psychological Operations

manual

the

recruited,

CIA produced

for the

CIA

Guerrilla

in

Nicaraguan

armed, trained, and equipped

is

Warfare

any a

guerrillas they

to fight the govern-

ment of Nicaragua. This manual contains detailed instructions on assassination, sabotage, kidnapping, and blackmail. Included also are instructions on

how

criminals to carry out “selective jobs,”

to hire professional

how

to arrange the

how to agimen equipped

death of a rebel supporter to create a “martyr,” tate

“the masses in a demonstration,” with

with “knives, razors, chains, clubs, bludgeons” joining a peaceful demonstration and marching “slightly behind the

innocent and gullible participants.”

Mr.

Safire

excuses

all

actions

213

in

the

name

of “anti-

The New Doublespeak Communism,” even though he concedes against

Communism was won

the

that

“war”

sometimes undemo-

“messily,

on occasion scandalously” Yet Mr. Safire neglects date on which Congress declared war, since if this was

cratically,

the

“real war,” as

he claims, the Constitution does require a dec-

laration of war

by Congress.

By using such words

as “messily,” “undemocratically,”

and

“scandalously,” Mr. Safire avoids having to deal with the reality of soldiers killing

thousands of men, women, and

children in Nicaragua, El Salvador,

who were

often trained

Safire intend

and Guatemala,

soldiers

and equipped by the CIA. Did Mr.

such words to describe the December 1981

massacre of 733 men, women, and children in the village of

Mozote

El

men

first,

in El Salvador?

women

were spared

as

(“The massacre was thorough:

next, children

long as

it

and babies

last.

Young

girls

took to rape them. Bullets did most

of the work, knives and bayonets some; several children

were hanged. Buildings were the soldiers

nism.”

13 )

left to

set afire

over the corpses, and

continue saving El Salvador from

Did he intend such words

commu-

murder of

to describe the

Archbishop Oscar Romero of El Salvador, or the murder of the six Jesuit priests, their housekeeper,

and her

old daughter in El Salvador, or the

murder of

sixteen-year-

the three

American nuns and a

lay

that Secretary of State

Alexander Haig explained away with

his

own doublespeak

cited

worker

in El Salvador, a

murder

above? 14

In Mr. Safire’s doublespeak, killing tens of thousands of

men, women, and

American

civilians,

children,

including priests,

and overthrowing

214

legal

nuns,

and

governments

How

to

Fight Doublespeak

some “tricks,” “dirty tricks” admittedly, but still just “tricks ” With his doublespeak he avoids the slaughter of so many while at the same time he concedes, “Good ends do becomes

just

not justify

evil

thousands of appearing to

means, Mr.

means, but such dirty

lives

some moral

gain

it

to

coloration ” Thus, while

of the end justifying the

reject the principle

Safire uses

would save

tricks that

We

defend the actions of the CIA.

might ask what the color of that “moral coloration” might be. Red, perhaps, for the blood of tricks”

Mr.

those killed by the “dirty

all

Safire finds so necessary

and so innocuous.

As George Orwell wrote, “In our and writing

Thus

time, political speech

are largely the defence of the indefensible.

political

murder

.

.

language has to consist largely of euphemisms,

question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness.

language ...

.

is

designed to

respectable,

and

make

to give

lies

sound

.

.

Political

.

truthful

an appearance of

and

solidity to

pure wind .” 15 In The Divine Comedy Dante presented for his fellow

citi-

,

zens an illumination of the

human and

believed were the basis of the moral

Dante,

“the

chronicler

is

the

life

most

political truths

of their country. For

centrally

moral agent of his time— a shaper of the moral tion

and an exemplar

Dante attempted

for future generations .”

to provide in his

he

responsible

life 16

of

To

civiliza-

this

end

work an understanding of

would rouse others to action. In his own way, he was doing what contemporary journalists such as William Safire and others attempt to do: “provide a picture of reality on which citizens can act, in the words of the political scene that

Walter Lippmann

17 .

215

The New Doublespeak But such chroniclers as users of language bear a heavy In Dante’s Hell, the worst sinners are the

responsibility.

who and those who

deceive,

and useful

crete

misuse language to mislead and

those

fraudulent,

the intellect .”

18

reality

use language not to render a con-

but to frustrate “the virtuous use of

For Dante, the irresponsible use of language

leads to the depths of Hell, for such language strikes at the

very core of an ordered,

just,

and virtuous

guage promotes the deterioration of the political structure

upon which

While Dante recognized guage

all

We

act as if

language

attack ads

19

all

we have

moral, and

at the

lost sight

moral of

this

tangential, malleable, fungible,

language has become for us

Radio and

.

and pundits,

spin doctors

is

at times. Political

a form of entertainment

lan-

that the irresponsible use of lan-

not harmless but an act that strikes

is

even irrelevant

television talk shows,

tabloid journalism

and

political

contribute to the destruction of any sense of

the role of language in the

language in the moral I

social,

such

of us depend.

foundations of an ordered society, truth.

society;

life

life

of the nation, of the role of

of our nation.

have presented here but a small chronicle of the irrespon-

sible

use of language that threatens the

social, political,

moral structure of our nation. Were Dante sure he

would

defense of the

much CIA and

find

to write its

alive today, I

about in William

role in so

much

and

am

Safire’s

bloodshed;

Alexander Haig’s apologia for the murder of four

women

in

El Salvador; President’s Bush’s rationale for dealing with the leaders

of

China

Tiananmen Square;

after

the

massacre

the massive sale of

216

of

students

weapons

in

to just

How

to

Fight Doublespeak

about any nation that wants to buy them while maintaining

we are controlling the spread Panama that isn’t an invasion;

that

of weapons; the invasion

war against Iraq that wasn’t a war; the repression of speech on university campuses that isn’t censorship; and the thousands of dead who of

the

are the price of our definition of government.

The struggle against doublespeak will be won only when we refuse to let those who use doublespeak escape unchallenged.

We

won’t win the

over a long time and after

And

fight in

many

one big

battle,

but only

small skirmishes. But

we

you have any suggestions for ways to fight doublespeak, send them to me and I will add them to the list. We won’t win today, or tomorrow, or even the day have to

after

fight.

if

tomorrow. But we

will

win.

217

Mleblespeak Quiz

1.

penile insertive behavior

A. failed

2.

rough-and-tumble neigh-

B. stolen

borhood

C.

3.

being walked

4.

thermal

soil

goods

liar

D. zoo

remediation

E. plastic trash

bag

unit F.

5.

victim of habitually

G. bankruptcy

detrimental lifestyle 6.

customer

H. temporary workers

capital cost

reduction 7.

I.

wildlife conservation

program with some manent facilities 8.

J.

per-

multidimensional gam-

lie

kickbacks

K.

dump

L.

an alcoholic

ment complex

N. death

air curtain incinerator

O. a

10.

thermal therapy

11

mental activity

.

a

M. junkyard

ing with an entertain-

9.

congressional pork barrel

P.

kit

lie

washing machine

Ck acid rain

at the

margins

R. cut off someone’s head

219

The New Doublespeak behavior

_12. dysfunctional _13. sufferer

disorder

from

S.

T. a

fictitious

syndrome

V. slaughter of large

lem sub-optimal

_16.

temporarily displaced

W. Coca Cola vending machine

inventory

X. retirement community for

immediate consumption

the elderly

channel

Y. test scores

chicken

go

AA.

_20. uninstalled

BB. dead enemy

.

laundry system

_22. just-in-time

down

Z. bribe

_19. positive restructuring

_2 1

number

of people

_15.

_18. fresh

lie

U. sexual intercourse

_14. political credibility prob-

_17.

frozen chicken

a

lie

soldiers

CC. death

employees

DD.

_23. negative gain in test

fire

workers

EE. farmers’ market

scores

FF. tax _24. purification _25. _26.

GG.

vinyl

HH.

slum or ghetto

synthetic glass

unique

retail

biosphere II.

27

insanity

wet deposition

.

_28.

reality

JJ. lost

augmentation

KK. _29.

luggage

fired

normal gratitude LL. poison gas

_30.

exceed the odor thresh-

MM. criminal activity

old _3 1

.

NN. open

congressional project of

burning trash

OO. down payment

national significance 32.

pit for

males with female features

220

PP. incinerator

Doublespeak Quiz

33. meaningful

downturn

QQ. bag of ice

in

aggregate output

RR.

34. after-sales services

munity

TT. com-

for the chrono-

38. logically gifted 37.

decommissioned aggressor

head resource development

park inhalation hazard

.41.

substantive negative out-

come 42. reutilization marketing

yard 43. release of resources 44. immediate

permanent

incapacitation 45. passenger facility charge .46.

misconnect rate

47.

terminological inexacti-

tude 48. single use .49.

mislead

50. waste

UU.

fired

W.

a casino

XX.

quantum

.40.

recession

WW. women soldiers

surgical isolation of the

_39.

plastic

SS. stink

35. vegetarian leather 36. senior congregate

cubes

management bag

221

disposable

The New Doublespeak Answers

to the

Doublespeak Quiz

U

26.

EE

2.

HH

27.

3.

KK or UU

a

28.

I,

29.

Z

30.

ss

F

1

.

o, T, or

5.

PP L

6.

OO

31.

7.

D

32.

WW

33.

TT

4.

8. 9.

W NN

12.

oa MM

13.

G

14.

I,

15.

16.

10.

11.

34. J 35.

ii

36.

GG X

37.

BB

39.

R K

A

40.

LL

B

41.

N,

38.

O,

T or AA

CC

17.

W

42.

M

18.

S

43.

DD

44.

N,

20.

G KK or UU

45.

FF

21.

P

46.

22.

H

U

47.

I,

23.

Y

48.

XX

24.

V

49.

I,

25.

RR

50.

E

19.

AA

222

CC

O, T, or

O, T, or

AA AA

Notes

Preface

1.

George Orwell,

“Politics

Collected Essays Journalism ,

and

Orwell and Ian George,

vol. 2

Jovanovich, 1968), 2.

and the English Language,”

in The

of George Orwell ed. Sonia

Letters

(New

York: Harcourt Brace

p. 137.

Ibid., p. 139.

Chapter

The Power and Problems of Language

I

A

1.

Philadelphia Inquirer 27 July 1993, p.

2.

Philadelphia Inquirer, 15

3.

The

4.

Mew New

York Times, 9 April 1992; Saence, 17 April 1992, p. 313.

U.S.

News

5.

6.

,

Progressive,

August 1993,

York Times,

&

October 1992,

May

14

Werner Heisenberg,

Physics

p.

A3.

p. 10.

1993; The

World Report, 24

7.

May

Progressive,

August 1993;

1993.

and Philosophy (New York: Harper,

1958), p. 58.

31 July 1989,

p. 41.

7.

Time,

8.

Alfred Korzybski, Science

and Sanity

(Lakeville,

Conn.: International

Non- Aristotelian Library Publishing Company,

223

1958), p. 409.

Notes

9.

Bohm

David

and David

York: Bantam, 1987), p. 10.

La

trahison des images

Peat, Science, Order, and Creativity 8.

(Ceci nest

1928-29. Los Angeles County 11.

(New

pas une

pipe).

Museum

Rene Magritte,

of Art.

Here’s an example of an ordinance that

lists all

the possible

used containers that junk dealers cannot use a second time. This

is

a real ordinance from a town in Wisconsin:

Use of

132.06 dealers.

The

receptacle

by other than owner;

as to

junk

using by any person or persons or corporation

other than the

owner or owners

their agent, of

any such

thereof, of his, her,

its

or

can, tub, firkin, box, bottle, cask,

barrel, keg, carton, tank, fountain, vessel or container, for

the sale therein of

any substance, commodity or product,

other than that originally therein contained, or the buying, selling, tle,

or trafficking in any such can, tub, firkin, box, bot-

cask, barrel, keg, carton, tank, fountain, vessel or con-

tainer, or the fact that

tubs,

firkins,

any junk dealer or dealers

in cans,

boxes, bottles, casks, barrels, kegs, cartons,

tanks, fountains, vessels or containers, shall

her possession any such can, tub,

firkin,

have

in his or

box, bottle, cask,

barrel, keg, carton, tank, fountain, vessel, or container, so

marked or stamped and a been

and

filed it

and published

hereby

description of

as

provided in

which s.

shall

have

132.04, shall be,

declared to be, prima facie evidence that

is,

such using, buying, selling or trafficking in or possession of is

unlawful within the meaning of

In other words,

if

ss.

132. 04 to 132.08.

junk dealers reuse containers they

will

be

fined. 12.

New

13.

Liberal Opinion Week 3

14.

Michael Kramer, “The Great Chicken Fraud.” Time 24 July

York Times 14 ,

October 1995, ,

p. 15.

September 1990,

p. 14. ,

9.9,4

Notes

1995, p. 34; 15.

New

York Times, 18

Michael Gazzaniga,

Nature’s

October 1995,

Human

Brain.”

Science

Gazzaniga, “Organization

S.

245

September

(1

947-952; Mind Matters (Boston: Houghton The

Social Brain

(New

Gazzaniga, The

17.

Gazzaniga, Nature’s Mind, p. 136.

18.

Leon

Festinger,

Calif.:

Stanford University Press, 1957).

20.

1989):

Mifflin, 1988);

and

York: Basic Books, 1985).

16.

19.

C4.

Mind (New York: Basic Books,

1992), p. 118. See also Michael

of the

p.

Social Brain, p. 5.

A

Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Palo Alto,

Seymour Hersh, My Lai 4: A Report on the Massacre and Its Aftermath (New York: Random House, 1970). Quoted in Neil Postman, Crazy Talk, Stupid Talk (New York: Dell, 1976), p. 78.

21.

David

Whipple,

Association

of

Former

Philadelphia Inquirer, 7

22.

New

York Times, 1

August 1991, July 1991,

p.

CIA

former

Intelligence

September 1991,

June 1991,

p.

and

agent

1;

5

head

Officers,

of

the

quoted

in

p. 6-A.

June 1991,

p. 10; Philadelphia Inquirer,

p.

A3; 11

5 June 1991, p. 3-A; 8

3-A; 30July 1991, p. 5-A; 12 August 1991, p. 9-A;

Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents, vol. 27, no.

22

(3

June 1991): 684. Chapter l

1.

Edward

Sapir,

Language and the Interpretation

“The

Status

of Reality

of Linguistics

Language 5 (1929): 207-214, reprinted in

Edward

Sapir,

ed.

David

G.

Edward Science

Sapir,

a

Science,”

Selected Writings

Mandelbaum

University of California Press, 1949), 2.

as

(Berkeley:

p. 162.

“Conceptual Categories in Primitive Languages

74 (1931): 578.

225

of

”

Notes

3.

Benjamin Lee Whorf, “Science and

Linguistics,” Language,

Thought and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee ed. p.

John

B. Carroll (Cambridge, Mass.:

MIT

Whorf,

Press, 1956),

212.

212-213.

4.

Ibid., pp.

5.

Walter Lippmann,

Public Opinion

(New

York: Harcourt Brace,

1922), p. 81. 6.

Werner Heisenberg,

and Philosophy (New York: Harper,

Physics

1958), p. 58. 7.

Albert H. Hastorf and Hadley Cantril,

Case Study,” Journal of Abnormal and

“They Saw a Game:

Social Psychology

A

49 (1954):

133. 8.

DeCamp

Richard E. Nisbett and Timothy

Halo

Evidence

Effect:

Unconscious

for

Judgments,” Journal of Personality and

Wilson, “The of

Alteration

Social Psychology

35 (1977):

256. 9.

Chicago Tribune 19 February 1992, section 3, p. 3. ,

10.

Heisenberg,

11.

New

12.

Quoted

Physics

and Philosophy,

November

York Times 1 ,

262.

1993, p. A18.

Postman, Crazy

in Neil

p.

Talk,

Stupid Talk

(New

York:

Dell, 1976), p. 33. 13.

New

York Times

9 September 1990, p. 30; Chicago Tribune

,

September 1990; 14.

George Orwell,

EXTRA!

,

19

Update February 1995, p. 3. ,

Nineteen Eighty-Four

(New York: New American

Library, 1949), p. 48.

Abstracting Our

Chapter 3

1

.

2.

Philadelphia Inquirer 2 5 J anuary ,

Way

into

Doublespeak

1996,p.A17.

Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents

May

1991): 629.

226

,

vol. 27, no.

21 (27

Notes

3.

New 28

York Times,

May

28

May

1991, pp. 1-A,

1991, pp. Al, A8; Philadelphia

7-

A.

4.

Orwell, Nineteen Eighty -Four, pp. 31-32.

5.

Robert

Hoffman

R.

and

Richard

of Judgments

Bidirectionality

Inquirer,

P.

Honeck,

Synonymy.”

of

“The

Journal

of

Psycholinguists Research 5 (1976): 182. 6.

Taking the Stand: The Testimony of Lt. Col Oliver L. North

(New

York: Pocket Books, 1987). 7.

New

York Times, 27

December 1992; The

Progressive,

February

1993, pp. 8-9. 8.

23 February 1993,

Village Voice,

The Doublespeak of Law

Chapter k

1.

Philadelphia Inquirer,

May

9

28 April-5 May, 1995,

Paper,

p. 8.

1995, p. A19; Philadelphia p. 12.

2.

New

3.

Philadelphia Inquirer, 27 July 1994, p.

4.

494 U.S. 259

5.

94

6.

Geduldig

7.

113

8.

Burdick

9.

Ibid.

York Times,

S.

S.

v.

(1974);

A18.

429 U.S. 125

A9.

(1976).

Aiello.

Ct. 716 (1993). v.

Takushi,

112

S.

Ct.

2059

10.

481 U.S. 739 (1987).

11.

Chapman

12.

Ill

13.

111S. Ct. 2545 (1991).

14.

212 Cal. App. 3d 289 (1989).

15.

111S. Ct. 2382(1991).

16.

New

S.

p.

(1990).

2485

Ct.

15July 1993,

v.

(1992).

Calfomia, U.S. 18 (1967).

Ct. 1246 (1991).

York Times,

12June 1989,

p.

227

A18.

City

.

Notes

17.

1.

513 U.S.

Business

_

(1995); 115 S.Ct.

The Doublespeak of Busness and Economics

Week

May

9

,

p.

February 1996, All the

1994, p. 61; Philadelphia Inquirer

Gl; 4 February 1996,

examples of doublespeak for

Doublespeak 1;

April 1992, p.

1;

p.

3.

Business Week 7

November

4

Philadelphia Inquirer 7 J anuary 1 9 9 6

1994, p.

,

5.

Ibid., p.

6.

A

USA

Today

workers

,

7

listed in

the Quarterly Review of

April 1993, p. l;July 1993, p.

p. 1.

.

El;

April 1991, p. 1; October

1;

October 1993, ,

firing

come from

October 1990,

,

p.

28

,

p. 11 A.

the following paragraphs

1991, p.

(1995).

Chapter 5

March 1995, 2.

_

1;

6.

p

,

.

D1

D5.

self-fulfilling

prophecy

is

the tendency for the definition of a

situation to cause behavior that

makes

come true. In other words, a prediction comes true because we have made the prediction. For example, research has shown that students

who who

are

randomly labeled “smarter”

Philadelphia Inquirer

,

p.

9

,

May

16

9.

Ibid., p.

10.

Ibid.

11.

New

they are beautiful.

7

Al; 9 January 1996, p. D3; Wall Al; 5July 1995, p. Al.

8.

if

Street Journal,

1990, pp. Al, A8, A9.

A8.

York Times

,

and women who

December 1992, p. 100; March 1992, p. Dl; 29 March 1992,

See, for example, Business Week

p.

act smarter; sane people

are labeled “insane” start to act insane;

are labeled “beautiful” start to act as 7.

the definition

October

11, 1995, p.

228

Dl.

4

May

1995,

Notes

12.

New

13.

Charley

York Times

Chronicle 14.

,

October

17,

1995, p. A24.

“Understanding Free Trade.”

Reese,

Conservative

10 July 1992, p. 28.

May

Philadelphia Inquirer 9 ,

1995, p. Cl. Executive pay will con-

tinue to increase to even greater heights, according to Business

The

Week “Executive Pay: ,

p. 56;

15.

“.

“CEO Pay: Ready for Take Off.”

the real weekly

.

Party Ain’t Over

bebw the

level

income of a worker

Yet.”

26 April 1993,

24 April 1995,

p. 88.

1990 was 19.1 percent

in

reached in 1973!’ Wallace C. Peterson, “The Silent

Depression.” Challenge July/August 1991, p. 30; See also ,

Wage

Squeeze.” Business Week

“The

17 July 1995, p. 54; Jane Bryant

,

Quinn, “A Paycheck Revolt in ’96?” Newsweek 19 February 1996, ,

p.

52; “Recovery?

Not

January 1995, section

Taken a Beating.” 16.

Your Paycheck.” New

in

4,

p.

6;

Times

,

8

“Y)ur Standard of Living Has

October 1992,

Philadelphia Inquirer, 10

Robert Eisner, “Our

York

NAIRU

p.

The American

Limit.”

Dl. Prospect

Spring 1995: 58. 1995: 11.

1 7.

The American

18.

Daniel J. Mitchell of the Heritage Foundation, quoted in The American

Prospect Fall ,

Prospect, Fall

1995: 11.

19.

New

20.

Basic Books, 1995, p. 25.

21.

Philadelphia Inquirer, 5

22.

Fortune, 15 January 1996, p. 27.

23.

Philadelphia Inquirer,

24.

The Economist, 30 September 1995,

York Times,

25 October 1995,

27.

Dl.

September 1993,

22 October 1995,

24 July 1995, p. 52. 26. Los Angeles Times, 8 January 1993, 25.

p.

p.

p.

Dl.

El.

p. 96.

Time,

“Sugarscape Model Shows Wall Street Journal, 21

p.

Hows

November

229

A21. in

Textbook Economics.”

1994, p. Bl.

,

,

,

,

Notes

28.

Leonard

March

Silk,

“The Denial of

the Obvious.”

A Mathematician Reads the Newspaper

30.

Newsweek

p. 19.

,

,

Advertising Age, 13

November

25 June 1990, Ibid.

33.

Philadelphia Inquirer, 6

March

January 1990,

Advertising Age, 18

November

Newsweek, 30

10

1989,

York Times

Liberal Opinion Week

1993,

pp.

February 1991, pp.

March

8

1,

48.

New

1993, pp. 88-89;

Al, A20;

August 1993,

p. 1-E; 17

York Times,

1993,

p.

September 1993, pp. Al, B8; 4 October 1993, section

4

D7; 30 4, p. 1.

September/October, 1993, pp. 17-18.

35.

Extra!,

36.

Ibid., p. 5.

37.

Extra!,

January/ February 1991,

November 38.

,

p. 14.

32.

34.

May

New

3, 92;

Dl;

Times

York

Inquirer 19

1989, pp.

17 February 1990; 8 January 1991, p.

Cl;

New

18 September 1989, p. 53;

September 1989, pp. 1, 26; Philadelphia p. 4-A; 26 May 1989, pp. 1-A, 12-A.

p.

York Times 9

1990, p. D2.

29.

31.

New

1990,

Cinefantastique,

p.

3-A;

February

p. 12; Philadelphia Inquirer,

Village Voice,

1991,

December 1990, section December 1990, section E,

12;

p. p.

4,

4 December 1991,

5;

New

York

Philadelphia

10

p. 8.

Times,

2

Inquirer,

2

p. 1-E.

39.

Ibid.

40.

Ibid.

41.

Investment Vision, January/ February 1990, p. 6 [a publication of

Fidelity Investments].

Chapter 6

1.

U.S.

News

The Doublespeak

World Report, 9

of

Government and

Politics

December 1991,

Republic 10 February 1992, p.

7.

230

pp. 32-34;

New

Notes

2.

Michael Specter, “After Debate, the Masters of Floor.”

3.

Ibid.

4.

John

New

York Times, 18

Walcott, “Land of

Parade.” U.S. News 5.

1990,

Hype and

February 1990,

section

p.

Wall

Street

29

3;

p. 3.

8.

New

9.

Los Angeles Times, 6 April 1990, p.

14.

6-C; Chicago Tribune,

A16.

International Herald Tribune,

13.

p.

6.

Business Week, 9 July 1990, p. 25; International Herald Tribune,

p.

1,

7.

12.

Glory: Spin Doctors on

1

June 1990,

11.

A16.

Journal,

December 1990,

10.

p.

Take the

World Report, 10 February 1992, p.

Philadelphia Inquirer, 12

4 January

6.

&

February 1992,

‘Spin’

York Times

,

28 June 1990,

20 July 1990,

p.

p. 4.

A10.

A3 4.

New York Times, 20 March 1990, p. Al; Philadelphia Inquirer, 20 March 1990, p. 5-A; 22 July 1990, p. 1-G. New York Times, 22 January 1990, p. B7 New York Times, 25 December 1989, p. 30. New York Times, 22 May 1992, p. A7; Time, 8 June 1992, p. 37 New York Times Magazine, 3 January 1993, pp. 12-17, 28, 31-35.

15.

Philadelphia Inquirer, Times, 1

30 November 1989,

December 1989,

p.

p.

19 -A;

New

A9.

16.

Opinion Week, 2 July 1990, p. 7; Time, 16 July 1990, p. 88.

17.

Beacon Journal (Akron, Ohio), 11 February 1990, p. A10; York

Times,

19

December 1990,

1989, p. All; Philadelphia

and Washington 18.

19.

1,

pp.

Inquirer,

New Al, A9; 20 December

16 February 1990, p. 8-A;

20 December 1989, pp. Al, A18. 20 December 1989, p. All; Washington

Post,

New York Times, December 1989, p. A18. New York Times, 8 February pp.

York

Post,

20

1990, pp. Al, B8; 3 August 1991,

25; 9 August 1991, p. A27; 10 August 1991, p. 7; 25

231

Notes

August 1993, ,

New

21.

Elizabeth

York Times 16 ,

February 1993, Morning

Arnold,

and Budget,

Progressive,

March

New

24.

Newsweek,

York Times, 1

A14.

National

Public

Radio,

7

director of the Office of Management

of Presidential Documents, vol. 29, no.

February 1993): 217; and

vol. 29, no. 8 (22

22 February 1993;

January 1990,

1989, pp. A16, A18, A19; 25.

Philadelphia

MacNeil-Lekrer NewsHour, 18 February 1993.

Compilation

23.

p.

Edition,

January 1993; Leon Panetta,

Weekly

18;

p. 12.

20.

22.

p.

25 August 1993, pp. Al, A10; The

Inquirer

1992,

Al; 28 August 1993,

p.

p. 14; 1

Time,

New

7

(17

February 1993): 285.

24

May

York Times,

January 1990,

1993, p. 30.

22 December

p. 1.

Common Cause Magazine, April/May/June 1992, pp. 8-27; Fall 1992, pp. 27-29; New York Times, 24 April 1992, p. A20; 27 July 1992,

p.

A10; 9 August 1992,

24 April 1992, p.

A4;

p.

Village Voice,

p. 30; Philadelphia Inquirer,

A13; 19 July 1992, 21 July 1992,

p.

p. 9; 1

C3; 5 August 1992,

September 1992,

26.

New

27.

“The Best Congress Money Can Buy.”

p. 9.

York Times, 9 July 1995, section 4, p. 15.

September 1995,

p.

Wall Street Journal, 1

A15.

28.

New

29.

Business Week, 2 9 June 1992, pp. 58, 62; Philadelphia Inquirer, 11

York Times, 16

March

1992, p. A13.

April 1992, p. C14; 18 April 1992, p. A9.

May

30.

New

31.

Philadelphia Inquirer,

York Times,

20

17

1992, p. Dl.

September 1990, pp. 1-D, 10-D; St

Louis Journalism Review, June 1990.

32.

12 -A;

New

York

National Wildlife, October/ November, 1992, p. 30;

New

York

Philadelphia Inquirer, Times,

33.

19 February 1989, p.

19 October 1988, p. A20.

Times, 7

July 1993, pp. Al, A12;

p. 8; Philadelphia Inquirer,

Village

21 April 1989,

232

p.

Voice,

23-A.

27 July 1993,

Notes

New New

34. 35.

p.

25 April 1989, p. A20. York Times 12 February 1991, p. A17; 20 February 1991, B9; 21 February 1991, p. A20; 16 March 1991, p. 22; York Times

,

March 1991, p. 23-A; Village 22-3; 26 March 1991, pp. 22-3;

Philadelphia Inquirer

March

1991, pp.

,

19

Voice

,

19

2 April

1991, pp. 22-3. 36.

August 1993, p. Al; Philadelphia Inquirer 16 April 1993, pp. Al, A20; 13 May 1993, pp. Al, A12-A13; 29 July 1993, p. Bl; 15 September 1993, p. B9; The Progressive August 1993, pp. 12-13; Village Voice 4 May 1993, pp. 18-19; Boston Globe

,

1

,

,

Wall Street Journal, 37.

Orwell, “Politics

38.

Ibid.

26 July 1993, p. A10. and the English Language,”

p. 136.

Newsweek 30 September 1991, p. 17. 40. Newsweek 9 December 1991, p. 6. 39.

,

,

41.

New

York Times 12 June 1989, pp. ,

Al, A9; 20June 1989,

p.

A14;

Philadelphia Inquirer, 10 June 1989, pp. 1-A, 10-A; 16 June 1989,

pp. 1-A, 4-A;

30June 1989,

Chapter 1

1.

Aldous

Huxley,

p. 10-A; Time,

26June 1989,

p. 32.

How to Fiqlit Doublespeak

on

“Education

the

Nonverbal

Level.”

Da£dalus Spring 1962.

3.

New New

4.

I

2.

C-l.

York Times,

20 April 1992,

York Times,

27 August 1994, pp.

p.

1, 9.

have cleaned up Hemingway’s comment

readers. Actually, this essential gift ...

is

is

what Hemingway

said:

my

“The most

a built-in, shock-proof, shit detector.” Paris

Review, Spring 1958.

November

5.

New

6.

Philadelphia Inquirer, 12

York Times, 2

for benefit of

May

1995.

1982, p. 1-A.

233

Notes

7.

For a history of the Institute for Propaganda Analysis, see J.

Michael Sproule, “Propaganda Studies in American Social

The

Science:

Rise and Fall of the Critical Paradigm.” Quarterly

Journal of Speech 73 (1987): 60-78.

produced by the

While most of the materials

institute are unavailable,

Art of Propaganda

book The

Fine

from the International

available

still

is

its

Society for General Semantics. 8.

The Neiu Yorker 6 February 1995,

9.

New

,

York Times

,

p. 5.

21 March 1993, pp.

1,

10;

31 March 1993; 12

April 1993; p. A16; 16 July 1993, p. A3; Spokesman-Review

(Spokane, Washington), 16 July 1993, p. A7. 10. New York Times 6 April 1995, p. A31. ,

11.

For a brief account, with documentation, of these and other actions

by the CIA, see Mark Zepezaur, The

(Tucson, Ariz.: 12.

Odonian Neier

(New

,

Raymond (New

(New

Joanne

York: Vintage, 1985).

The Economist 18 June 1994, Massacre at El Mozote

14.

Press, 1994).

Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare, with Essays by

Omang and Aryeh 13.

CIA’s Greatest Hits

p. 99.

See also

Mark Danner.

The

York: Vintage, 1993).

Bonner, Weakness and Deceit: U.S.

Policy

and El Salvador

York: Times Books, 1984).

15.

Orwell, “Politics and the English Language,”

16.

Stephen Smith, “Dante on Writing, Truth, and the Power

December 1995, p. Stephen Smith, “Dante on Writing,” p. 10.

That Counsels.”

Boston Book Review,

17.

Quoted

18.

Ibid.

19.

Neil Postman analyzes

what

in

this

p. 137.

change

is

doing

cratic process in his

Discourse in the

how political

language has changed and

to us as a nation

book, Amusing

Age of Show

Business

234

10.

and

to the

demo-

Ourselves to Death: Public

(New York:

Viking, 1985).

Allan,

Keith,

and Kate Burridge. Euphemism and Dysphemism:

Language Used as Shield and Weapon. Oxford, 1991. Anderson, Walter Truett. Reality Isn’t What It Used to Be: Politics,

Ready-to-Wear Religon, Global Myths, Primitive

Wonders of the Postmodern World. Harper

Row, 1990. America: What Went Wrong

Donald L., and James B. Steele. Andrews and McMeel, 1992. Barlett, Donald L., and James B. Steele. America: Who Taxes? Simon and Schuster, 1994. in

W.

Lance. The Governing

American

Bennett,

W.

Elections. St.

Lance. The

and Other

8c

Barlett,

Bennett,

Chic,

Theatrical

Really Pays the

Media, Money, and Marketing

Crisis:

Martin’s, 1992.

Politics

2nd

of Elusion,

ed.

Bolinger, Dwight. Language: The Loaded Weapon.

Boorstin, Daniel J. The Image: Vintage, 1961.

A

Guide

Bosmajian, Haig. The Language of America, 1983.

to

Longman, 1988. Longman, 1980.

Pseudo-Events in America.

Oppression.

University Press of

Bourland, D. David, and Paul Dennithorne Johnston, eds. To Be Not:

An

or

E-Prime Anthology. International Society for General

Semantics, 1991.

Cohen, Jeff, and Norman Solomon. the

News, Beyond

the Pundits.

Adventures

Common

235

in

Medialand: Behind

Courage, 1993.

Selected Bibliography

Cohen,

and Norman Solomon. Through

Jeff,

Common Courage,

Glass.

Combs, James

Media Looking

the

1995.

and Dan Nimmo. The New Propaganda: The

E.,

Dictatorship ofPalaver in Contemporary

Crespi, Irving. Public Opinion,

Polls,

Longman, 1993.

Politics.

and Democracy. Westview, 1989.

Crossen, Cynthia. Tainted Tuth: The Manipulation of Fact

Simon and

Schuster, 1994.

Croteau, David, and William Hoynes. By

Media Limit Political Debate. Ellul, Jacques. Propaganda:

Engel,

S.

America.

in

Common

The Formation

Invitation Only:

How

the

Courage, 1994.

fMen’s

Morris. The Language Tap, or How

Attitudes.

of Words. Prentice-Hall, 1984. Geraldine E. Critical Thinking

to

Vintage, 1973.

Defend YoursefAgainst

the Tyranny

For sb erg,

Image

an

in

World.

University Press of America, 1993. Fox,

Roy

ed.

F.,

Images

in

Language, Media, and Mind. National

Council of Teachers of English, 1994. Gazzinaga, Michael

S. Nature’s

Mind. Basic Books, 1992.

Goldberg, Steven. When Wish Replaces Thought: Why So Much of What You Believe

Prometheus, 1992.

Is False.

and Alan R. Hayakawa. Language in Thought and Action 5th ed. Harcourt Brace, 1991. Herman, Edward S. Beyond Hypocrisy: Decoding the News in an Age of

Hayakawa,

S.

I.,

,

Propaganda. South End, 1992.

Herman, Edward Politics,

and

Huff, Darrell.

the

Triumph of

S.

Market: Essays on Economics,

Media. South End, 1995.

How

Jacobson, Michael

to

Lie With

F.,

Kathleen

Interplay of Influence:

Statistics.

Penguin, 1954.

and Laurie Ann Mazur. Marketing Madness:

Survival Guidefor a Consumer

Jamieson,

the

Hall,

Society.

A

Westview, 1995.

and Karlyn Kohrs

News, Advertising,

Politics,

and

Campbell. the

The

Mass Media

,

3rd ed. Wadsworth, 1992.

Johannesen, Richard L.

Ethics

in

Waveland, 1996.

236

Human

Communication

,

4th ed.

Selected Bibliography

Johnson, Wendell. People in Quandaries. Harper 8c Row, 1946. Kahane, Howard. Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Uses of Reason Everyday Life 6th ed. Wadsworth, 1992. Lakoff, Robin Tolmach. Talking Power : Phe Politics in

,

of Language. Basic

Books, 1990. Lee, Alfred

McClung, and Elizabeth McClung

Lee. Phe Fine Art of Propaganda. International Society for General Semantics, 1972. Lee, Martin A., and Norman Solomon. Unreliable Sources: A Guide to Detecting Bias in

Manheim,

Jarol

News Media. Carol, 1990. B.

All

of

Communication and American

Deliberate

People

All

the

Panes:

Strategic

Sharpe, 1991.

Politics.

McCloskey, Donald N. Phe Wisconsin Press, 1985. Mitroff, Ian

the

Rhetoric of Economics.

University of

and Warren Bennis. Phe Unreality Industry: Phe Manufacturing of Falsehood and What It Is Doing to Our I.,

Birch Lane, 1989.

Lives.

Moore, David W.

Phe Super

Manipulate Public Opinion

in

How

Pollsters:

America.

Phey Measure and

Four Walls Eight Windows,

1992.

Naureckas, Jim, and Janine Jackson, eds. Phe FAIR Reader: An Extra! Review of Press and Politics in the 90s. Westview, 1996. Nelson, Joyce.

Sultans

Common Courage,

of Sleaze: Public Relations and the Media.

1989.

Nimmo, Dan, and James Coombs. Longman, 1990. Nimmo, Dan, and James

Mediated

Political Realities

,

2nd

ed.

E.

Combs. Phe

Political Pundits.

Praeger,

1992. Parenti, Michael. Inventing Reality: Phe St.

Politics

ofNews Media.

2nd

ed.

Martin’s, 1993.

Parry, Robert. Fooling America:

and Manufacture Paulos,

John

How

the Conventional

Allen.

A

Washington Insiders Twist the Pruth

Wisdom.

Morrow, 1992.

Mathematician Reads the Newspaper.

Books, 1995.

237

Basic

Selected Bibliography

Poerksen, Uwe.

Plastic Words.

Pennsylvania State University Press,

1995.

Postman, Neil. Amusing

Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the

Age of

Show Business. Viking, 1985. Postman, Neil. Crazy Talk, Stupid Talk. Dell, 1976. Postman, Neil, and Steve Powers. How to Watch TV News. Penguin, 1992. P.

Moran.

Deteriorating

Semantic

Postman, Neil, Charles Weingartner, and Terence Language

in

A

America:

Report

on

the

Environment. Pegasus, 1969.

Rank, Hugh. The Pep Talk: How to Analyze Political Language. Counter-Propaganda Press, 1984. Rothwell, J. Dan. Telling It Like It Isn’t: Language Misuse and

What We Can Do About It. Prentice-Hall, 1982. Savage, Robert L., and Dan Nimmo, eds. Politics in Familiar Contexts: Malpractice/

Projecting Politics

Through Popular Media. Ablex, 1990.

Sawin, Gregory, ed. Thinking and Living Critical

Skills:

General Semantics for

International Society for General Semantics,

Thinking.

1995. Soley,

Lawrence. The News Shapers: The

Sources

Who

Explain the News.

Praeger, 1992.

Stauber, John, Lies,

Damn

and Sheldon Rampton. Lies,

and

Public

the

Toxic Sludge Ls

Relations

Good for

Industry.

You:

Common

Courage, 1995. Watzlawick,

Paul.

How

Real

Is

Real f

Confusion,

Disirformation,

Communication. Vintage, 1977.

Wheeler, Michael.

Lies,

Damn

Lies,

and

Public Opinion in America. Dell, 1976.

238

Statistics:

The Manipulation of

Index

abortion, 109-113

Bush, George, 2-3, 21-24, 76-78,

acid rain, 56, 175 advertising, 52,

82-83, 111-112, 151-152,

143-144

154-155, 158-164, 166,

Agassi, Andre, 153 Arizona

arms

v.

168-169, 183, 216

Fulminante, 102

business, 79, 81, 115-123, 132-149,

control, 2, 21-24, 158, 160,

171-173

201-203, 216-217

doublespeak

in,

115-123

Arnold, Howard, 181

AT&T,

119, 167

Calgacus, 182

Babi Yar massacre, 21

campaign financing, 167-170 Candid Camera, 51-52

Baker, James, 22, 23-24, 158, 160-161

Castro, Fidel, 211, 213

Ballistic Missile

Defense

Organization

(BMDO),

censorship, 176-182, 186-187, 217

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA),

3

“Below Regulatory Concern” (BRC), Blackmun, Harry, 2

158,211-215,216 Cheney, Richard, 22-24 chickens, frozen, 14-16

Blobel, Paul, 21

children’s television programs,

173

Bohm, David, 8-9 bombing campaigns, 47-48,

21, 144-146,

140-142 China, People’s Republic

73,

185-186

72, 75-79,

of,

159-161, 216

Bosnia, 200-202, 203

“clarification,”

bribes, 4, 11, 81, 83, 92

“clean,” 134-135, 137, 142

Brown

University, 177-179

Clinton,

budget

deficit,

Burdick

v.

129, 130, 154, 156, 164

Takushi, 99

Bill,

69-70,

162-164

164-165, 167-168, 169

cognitive dissonance, 19-21, 152

Coleman

239

v.

Thompson, 104

Index

Communism,

20, 99,

211-215

Eighth Amendment, 100

confessions, 102

“elimination of positions,” 116, 117

consensual encounters, 105-107

El Salvador, 157-158, 210-211, 214,

216

Constitution, U.S., 93-95, 97, 98, 100, 102, 103, 106, 107, 177, 180, 183

corporations, 97-98, 120-123, 149

“enhanced underwriter acknowledgements,” 143-144 environment,

44-45, 56, 134-138,

161-164, 173-176

“correctsized,” 117

Cuba, 75-78

Environmental Protection Agency,

Cummings, Bruce,

145, 146

56, 163

Exxon Valdez Daily Pennsylvanian, 180-182

Dante

4,

Alighieri,

oil spill,

134-135, 137,

142

215-216

defense attorneys, 92-93, 104-105 definitions, 87, 88-98,

104-105,

Fagin, Claire, 181 Faludi, Susan,

121-122

109-113, 142, 156-158,

Fang

162-164, 173

Federal Communications

Fields, Michael,

doublespeak:

Fifth

fighting against,

191-217

interpretation and, 16-18, 27-56,

141-142

power

of,

166

First

quiz on, 219-222

144

Amendment, Amendment,

98, 102

177, 180

Fitzwater, Marlin, 154, 169 Florida

192-197, 209-217

Commission

(FCC), 141, 171-172

Democratic National Committee, 168, 169

Lizhi,

v. Bostick,

106

Fourth Amendment, 93-95, 98

freedom of speech, 176-182, 217

redefinition in, 157-158, 173

204-205 tolerance for, 4-5

rewritten,

“downsizing,” 118, 120-121, 127,

138-140

Gaffney, Frank, 3

Gazzaniga, Michael, 16, 17, 18-19 Geduldig

v. Aiello,

General Electric Company

Drolet, Robert, 2-3

v. Gilbert,

95-96 General Motors, 97, 116, 117, 127 Gingrich, Newt, 54, 55, 154-155,

duckspeak, 55, 56 Eagleburger, Lawrence, 160

economics, x-xi, 62, 81, 123-149,

194-195

157, 179

Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von, 45

“good

faith,”

abstractions

in,

123-128, 133

GOPAC,

maps

in,

128-132

Gore, Al, 169

verbal

95-96

240

103-104, 105

54-55

Index

government, 152-174, 182-190 democratic, 24-25 doublespeak

in,

Japan, 32, 124-125, 146-149 Jefferson,

152-174,

Johnson, Hiram, 182 judgments, 66-67, 69, 89, 195

182-190, 197-198 totalitarian,

verbal

101

maps

of,

74-79

Kinsley, Michael, 209

92

“gratuities,”

Thomas, 182

Greenspan, Alan,

Koppel, Ted, 208 x,

194-195

Korea: The Unknown War, 144-146

Gregorian, Vartan, 178, 179

Korean War,

Grenada

Korzybski, Alfred, 8

invasion, 165-166

Guatemala, 211, 212-213 Gulf War, 158, 183-187, 217

labels,

47, 144-146, 182, 183

8-14, 17, 28, 43,44-50,

54-55, 59-60, 74

Hackney, Sheldon, 180

Lane, Dick “Night Train,” 101, 105 language:

Haig, Alexander, 201-203, 210-211,

214,216

abstract, 57-83,

Halilovic, Sefir, 200-202,

203

123-128, 133,

137

38-39

Halliday,Jon, 145

ambiguity

Harris Bank, 119

classification in,

Harrison, Otto, 134

corruption

in,

29-32, 95-96

Hartman, Barry, 44-45, 46 health benefits, 95-96

either-or terms in,

Heisenberg, Werner,

fuzziness in, 8-14, 88

Hemingway,

7,

193

32, 42

Ernest, 199, 233 n

156-157, 193-194

118-119

relativity

responsible use

impulses, 16-18

of, xi,

12-13, 27-30,

107-109 interpreter, 16-18

see also

intent,

Language:

doublespeak; words

A Key Mechanism

54-55

“investment,” 164-165

Last Emperor, The, 146-147

82-83

176-177

206-209

worldview in, 28-30, 34-35, 45-49, 70-75

129-130

Ivy, Canetta,

impact

109, 113, 193-194,

inferences, 63-66, 67, 68, 69, 74, 89

affair,

of, xi-xii,

215-217 social

Iran-Contra

27-56 and, 30, 32-34

reality and, 6-9,

humor, 194-195, 204-205 Humphrey, Hubert H., Ill, 136 Huxley, Aldous, 206

inflation,

30-31

public, ix-xii, 3, 6, 24-25,

Heraclitus of Ephesus, 57 hospitals,

156-157,

of, ix, xi, 25,

law, x,

241

10-11,85-113

of Control,

Index

law

mistakes, 101-105

{cont)

definitions in, 87, 88-98, 104-105,

109-113 doublespeak as

in,

85-113

Mobil Oil, 136-138, 142 money, 36-37, 42 My Lai massacre, 20

semantic environment, 81, 82-83, 88, 91, 92, 96-97,

Naish,J. Carrol, 148

109-113

National Semiconductor, 117

layoffs,

National Simple Speak Day, 207

88-90

lawsuits,

National Wetlands Coalition, 163,

115-123

175

Lazerson, Marvin, 181

Nineteen Eighty-Four (Orwell), ix, x,

Levy, Mike, 137 Liebeck, lies, 4,

Stella,

88-90

16, 79, 146,

172-173, 177, 179,

181, 182, 183, 184, 188, 190

11

Lippmann, Walter, 30, 215 Li Zhiyun, 188-189

Nitze, Paul, 146

Lucas, Robert E., Jr., 123-124, 127

Nussbaum,

MacArthur, Douglas, 146

O’Hearn, Roz, 119

McDonald’s hot coffee case, 88-90 McNulty, Jim, 119 MacRae, James B.,Jr., 170, 171

Orwell, George, ix-x, 16, 55, 79, 146,

North, Oliver, 81, 111 Paul, 134

149, 172-173, 177, 179, 181, 182, 183, 184, 188, 190, 215

Magritte, Rene, 9

Mao Tse-tung,

Panama

16

invasion, 166, 217

maps, verbal, 63, 69-79, 125-132, 158, 186-187

Papadakos, Nicholas, 92

marketing, 137-138, 151-152, 153

passwords, 50-51

Marshall, John, 97-98

patriotism, 81,

Mathematician Reads the Newspaper,

facility

Matsushita Electric Industrial

82-83

Paulos, John, 130

147, 148

Peat, David,

8-9

Pennsylvania, University

Mattel, 7-8

“people,” 93-95

Mazzoli, Ron, 170

People

MCA,

Perdue, Frank, 14

147, 148

Mennen Speed

Stick,

charge,” 155-157

Pavlov, Ivan, 49

(Paulos), 130

Company,

A

“passenger

139

v.

Lopez,

of,

180-182

106

“person,” 96-98, 112

Mexico, 93, 94-95 Middle East, 21-24

photodegradable, 136-138, 142

Milken, Michael, 83

politics, 109,

police,

9.49.

101-107

151-190

Index

167-170

access in,

cynicism about, 196-197

Rehnquist, William, 93, 94, 95, 100, 108

doublespeak

reification,

in, ix, xi,

1-3, 13-14,

54-55, 151-190, 196-198

maps

verbal ‘’Politics

and

in,

religion, 81, 110,

74-79, 129, 158

the English

Language”

“restructuring,” 118, 121

“revenue enhancement,” 13-14, 61,

pornography, 107-108

197-198

pregnancy, 65-66, 95-96

campaign

112

reports, 63, 66, 67, 71, 74

(Orwell), ix-x

presidential

41-45, 48, 50-52, 193

Rockefeller, David, 149

151-152

preventive detention, 100-101

Rockwell International Corporation, 44-45

Priority Mail,

Rosen, Sumner, 123-124, 131

prisons, 97,

Procter

8c

(1992),

1

100-101

Rowland

Gamble, 116, 139

v.

Calfomia Men’s Colony, 97

Rusk, Dean, 146

“production cessation,” 116

product packaging, 138-140

Safire,

prosecutors, 92-93, 105

“sales credits,” 4, 11,

Psychological Operations in Guerrilla

Sale

Warfare,

v.

William, 211-215, 216

83

Haitian Centers, 2

Sapir-Whorf theory, 27-30

213

Public Broadcasting System (PBS),

Scalia,

143-146

Antonin, 108

Schwarzkopf, Norman, 186 Scowcroft, Brent, 160

Quarterly

Scud

Review ofDoublespeak, 202

missiles,

2-3

search warrants, 93-95, 103-104, 106 radioactive waste, 44-45, 173-174

Sears, 118

radio stations, 171-172, 196

self-fulfilling

rationalizations,

16-20

self-incrimination, 98, 102

Reagan, Ronald, 165-166, 197-198,

semantic environments, 80-83, 88,

201,210

91, 92, 96-97, 109-113,

199-203

reality:

sewage,

abstractions vs., 57-58, 75, 123,

interpretation of, 16-18,

4, 42,

62

Shapiro, Esther, 139

128, 133

27-56

language and, 6-9, 27-56 social,

prophecies, 121, 228 n

27-30

signal reactions, 49-56, signs,

35-36, 37, 38

Skinner, Samuel, 155

“reengineering,” 120-123

52-53 smoking, 19-20

“regulatory” procedures, 100-101

Social Security, 165

“receipts proposals,” 154

slogans,

243

203

:

Index

Sony, 147-148

United States

v.

Verdugo-Urquidez,

spin doctors, 153, 216

United States

v.

X-Citement Video,

Stanford University, 117, 176-177 Star

Wars program,

statistics,

Stilwell,

93-95

107-108

3

“user fees,” 154, 155

130-132

Richard, 145

vehicles, 10, 60, 61

stock market, 120-122, 126 “sufficient connection,”

Vidal, Gore, 50-51

94

Vietnam War,

Sununu,John, 163

Supreme Court,

18, 20, 47, 182,

183

viewpoint, 46-47, 72, 78, 129, 138

U.S., x, 2,

93-109

Volkswagen, 139

symbols, 35, 36-42, 45-46, 50, 125, 133, 135

voting rights, 98-99, 197

Walker, William, 157-158 Tanii, Akio, 147

tanning, tariffs,

war, 47-48, 73, 165-166, 182-187,

39-40

200-202

import, 7-8

Warner, John, 16

tax increases, 13-14, 61-62,

welfare, 11,

154-155, 165, 197-198 Teeter, Bob, 151

“wet deposition,” 56

television, 58,

wetlands, 161-164, 175

WGBH, 145-146 WGNO, 141

70-71, 126, 140-146,

208-209

196, 198,

terms, 34-35 terrorists, 38,

White House Council on 43-44, 46-48, 73

Tiananmen Square massacre,

78,

Competitiveness, 163

Whorf, Benjamin Lee,

159-161, 187, 188-190,216 “to be,”

42-43

actions vs., 17-18, 152, 153,

158-161, 178-179

warrants, 103-104

meanings

“transportation,” 60, 61, 62

92-93, 100-101, 102

Truman, Harry

S.,

of,

new, 40-41

146

things vs., 41-45, 48, 50-52,

Tutweiler, Margaret D., 158

WQEX,

unemployment

129-130 “uninstalled,” 116-117

Xiao Bin, 189

United States

Yuan Mu, 189

rate,

Salerno,

100

12-13, 87, 88-98,

104-105, 109-113, 133, 142, 156-158, 162-164, 173

trash bags, 136-138, 142

v.

28-30

words

trade deficit, 124-125, 133

trials,

27,

Wizard of Ox, The, 41, 49

Tourte, Francois, 10

traffic

34

244

144

59-62

1

newdoublespeakwhOOlutz kwhOOlutz

(continued from front flap)

our children to detect doublespeak, as well as equip

them with the means

He

reveals

language,

how we how we

movement

we

to

to counter

can become can

demand

start

clear

effects in their lives.

its

critical

consumers of

a language-consumers’

communication, and

can hold responsible those

who

how

use irresponsible

language.

William Lutz

was

the

head of the Committee on Public Doublespeak

for fifteen years,

and

editor

the

of

Review

Quarterly

of

Doublespeak for fourteen years.

He

is

pro-

Camden, and a member of the Pennsylvania Bar. His previous books include Doublespeak: From Revenue Enhancement to

fessor of English at Rutgers University,

Terminal Living and

American numerous

The Cambridge Thesaurus of

Professor Lutz has appeared

English.

television

and radio programs

on

to publicize

the dangers of doublespeak, including Today

,

Larry

King Live the CBS Evening News the MacNeil Lehrer NewsHour and National Public Radio’s Morning ,

,

;

Edition.

He

lives in

Haddonfield,

New Jersey,

with his

wife, the novelist Denise Gess.

Jacket design

©

1996 by

Author photograph

©

One

Plus

One

Studio

1994 by Jerry Bauer

HarperCollins Publishers http://www.harpercollms.com

“An

irrefutable indictment of those

language to care to

distort the truth.

...

who

subvert

should be read by

It

know when, how, why, and by whom

all

who

they

are being bamboozled.”

— New York Times Book Review “Bill

Lutz

is

the 1990 George Orwell.”

—Larry King “Lutz

may become

the Ralph Nader of public talk as he

warns about what may be unsafe

at

any

read.”

—Kirkus Reviews “One of the most informative, amusing and frightening books we’ve read in years.”

—Parade

y

'

;

i

1996

3

1996

"9

i991

i

F£p ~ 5 199? 'ra 4 1

m

V »

M

H

2 vvy vhA 5

29

0