More on Web2.0 … or not?
Reading this post on the Scobleizer blog, I reached an interesting post on Why Web 2.0 is more than a buzzword (and came in touch with a very good blog).
The post is not exactly on Web2.0, it’s more about buzzword, jargon and lexicon:
Part of the benefit of being “into” something is having an insider lexicon
Kathy writes:
if you took away our jargon, the conversations would not just be slower, they’d be dumber. [...] The experience wouldn’t be as rich, productive, or engaging. Strip away the specialized words and you strip away part of why being better is better.
I do agree and I think using jargon is dangerous when talking to ‘non experts’ (for examples: customers).
Talking in a way our customer can understand is so important that’s one of the factors that makes the difference between being successful or not.
PierG
Filed under: Communication |
-
Feeds
-
Chat with PieG
-
Map of Visitors
My Status-
Flickr Photos
More Photos
Subscribe
PierG-
I would argue that “Kathy” makes a specious claim. She punctures her own argument by implying that using jargon makes one faster and smarter…but the purpose of communication isn’t to make the sender feel good. The purpose of communication is to convey meaning persuasively.
Simple, shorter, jargon-free is always better. As Churchill said, “short words are best, and old words, when short, are best of all.”
I have found jargon to generally be newer and longer. More fun, maybe… but less effective.
Mark