March 16, 2005
Aggravated by acronyms
For the longest time, I couldn't put my finger on it, but for some reason, I had been getting more and more aggravated by acronyms. They're really the bane of the industry in which I work. Everything, it seems, needs an acronym or it doesn't truly exist.And the more cutesy the acronyms the better. Anyone can throw a few uppercase letters together. But it takes a real acronym pro to season them with some lowercase letters for that certain je ne sais quois (pun intended).
And yes, I do admit with much chagrin, that even I have been guilty of forming my own acronyms when forced to do so. I am not proud, but I felt I had to come clean. This however, as you well know, will not cause me to take leave of my high horse.
Speaking of said horse, you probably also realize that I'm not one to shy away from a tantrum. I throw them quite well. And I have, at times, thrown my fair share of tantrums about the use of acronyms. But I never really had anything more than personal opinion as my basis. I realized that they were confusing, and that they cluttered writing. But other than that, I didn't have much.
What usually was thrown back in my face was the "but they make sense to the industry" defense. And sure, there are some acronyms that are so widely accepted that they have attained a prominence that belies their humble beginnings. These rare instances do not seem to aggravate me. I am willing to accept them as words, more or less. (Yes, yes. Hypocritical. I get it.) I, for instance, am practically in love with "RSS" and "XML." And I do not turn beet red and clench my teeth when someone says "NASA" or "PC."
But I do for the vast majority of acronyms. The ROIs and the FUDs and the PDAs and the IMs and the IMHOs and the ROTFLMAOs. Or the endless string of VoIP and RFID and WiMAX and WiFi to which I've been subjected, as of late. Who knows? Suffice it to say I'm turning beet red and clenching my teeth on a regular basis these days. No, I haven't tried Sanka. Move on.
I realize there are several factors at work here. One, for instance, is that there is no doubt in my mind that the world of wireless personal digital assistants and instant messaging are partially to blame for this onslaught, as are the personal computers. Because, quite frankly, people do not like to type. Plain and simple. And it is much easier to type a string of letters than a string of words. But, it's a wasted effort to type a string of letters that don't say anything to the majority of people who read it (current post excluded), isn't it?
So, I propose that when it comes down to it, communications -- marketing communications especially -- should work to divest itself from this overabundance of acronyms. And what is my reasoning behind this? Crocodile tears and confusion? No, not anymore. Now, I have something solid. Now, I have a basis for my tantrums, and my resolution to curtail my use of acronyms. And it's one of those reasons that, for once, actually makes sense. Ready? Here it is: Acronyms will kill your search engine optimization efforts.
Think about it. When you have very little knowledge of a subject, how well do you know the acronyms associated with that subject? Not very well, I think. When you're searching for a resolution to a problem, do you often run to your local search engine and throw a bevy of acronyms into the search box or do you type in whole words that describe the concept you're seeking? If you do the latter, you're not alone.
Just for argument's sake, let's take HCM. Now, if you sell HCM software, you should probably have HCM on your Web site a few times. Some people will actually search for the acronym. No argument there. (They'll most likely search for it because some yutz has used it in an article or a piece of collateral, but that, gentle reader, is a discussion for another time.) But you should have a proliferation of "human capital management" and "human resource management" and so on and so forth.
I'm not saying don't use HCM, but I am saying don't just use "human capital management" once and then resort to the acronym the rest of the time. Because it won't help people find you using search engines. And if it won't work for your Web copy, then it probably won't work for your other copy. Because your collateral and public relations and Web copy should maintain a certain consistency... well you get my point.
In short, you should always strive to have solid, clear content that is intelligible by someone who has no experience with your product or the industry in which it plays. And acronyms defeat that clarity. Worse yet, they may be hammering your precious search engine rankings. And no one wants the boss to hear that, do they?
Have I convinced your kind soul to join me in hating the lowly acronym, or have I insulted your finer acronym-forming sensibilities? The only way to let me know is to comment. Well and of course, to return, to see me in my shame.
Aggravated by acronyms
| | Subscribe:
RSS, Bloglines
