What's a word worth?

As a PR executive, how important is it that you understand grammar and spelling?

Jo at Strive PR thinks the issue is over-emphasised and that journalists shouldn't dismiss a press release simply because of a few spelling or grammar errors. Over at Common Sense PR, meanwhile, Eric wonders whether poor grammar necessarily means you're a poor communicator? Yes, it does.

When you don't know the difference between your and you're, or their and there, I judge you. If you use like when you mean such as, I think you're slapdash. The same applies to all those people who don't understand that fewer refers to number and less than to volume.

We offer grammar and writing workshops through the:101 and I am always amazed by how rarely the bright PR executives I meet can tell me the difference between affect and effect, or the active and passive voice. I can't remember ever meeting a PR executive who could tell me why it's bad form to split an infinitive, much less what an infinitive is.

Part of the issue is professionalism. Whether you're a journalist or a PR executive, clients are paying for your skill in providing professional copy. If someone is paying you to write, you should have an impeccable command of the language. They shouldn't need to 'fix' what you've sold them. It's also an issue of pragmatism: every time you use the wrong word, or get the punctuation wrong in a sentence, it makes your copy a little bit harder to understand. You can't be an effective communicator if you can't put together the best possible words, in the best possible order.

Improving your understanding of grammar and spelling needn't be hard work. There's a lot you can do to address the most common mistakes, and quickly improve the quality of your writing. My own recommendations in this field would be:

1. English for Journalists, by Wynford Hicks: an easy read that lists the language rules that are most commonly misunderstood.
2. The Oxford Guide to Writing by Thomas Kane: has been my writing bible for years. A guide to writing clear, compelling English.
3. The Economist Style Guide. If you're ever unsure whether to use Internet or internet, this will provide good advice.
4. The BBC Style Guide. Great for checking on international, political and politically sensitive terminology
5. The AP Style Guide. Used by journalists the world over, and for $25 a year, it's a bargain.

Comments

[Christian]

I agree, it's bad form. But I don't think it's surprising - English Language isn't taught in schools, so unless you've studied another language where these things are made explicit, it's unlikely that you'll know what passive voice is. Or why we should relentlessly strive to avoid split infinitives.

However, I do think that a basic knowledge of "your" and "you're" should be expected.

[Sally Whittle]

Aha, I see what you blatantly did there Christian. Very good.

I agree if you haven't studied grammar or languages you might not know the difference between active and pasive voice - but making the effort to learn will make you a better writer, especially in marketing where using an active voice is so much more powerful.

But there's no excuse (in my view) for being paid to write and making basic errors of spelling, or not understanding the difference between common homonyms etc.

[Kim]

Well, I agree that spelling and punctuation errors in press releases are annoying, because it shows that the writer hasn't taken care.

But I'm afraid I've never seen the problem with split infinitives. In fact, some people would argue that there's no such thing. You can make a good case for saying that the infinitive of the verb "go" is just "go".

BTW, "We should relentlessly strive" isn't a split infinitive.

[David Child]

While I have to admit that the notion of split infinitives does sometimes catch me out I'm proud to say that at Quest I think we have two of the world's biggest grammar sticklers since Lynne Truss stood up and was counted. It's absolutely imperative to know at least the basics of grammar - apostrophes among them - alongside a sound grasp of phrasing, sentence structure and writing clarity to do well in PR. Particularly as journalists are wont to discard the press releases that require most work to turn them into press articles.

One of the most concerning things for me though is that there are a whole generation of young people (I'm 26 but just missed the boat by a few years) that use text- and email-speak as if it were correct English. Certainly some of the students we have taken in on work experience have shown scant regard for complete words and the correct use of 'of' to name but two.

A grammar test - and then writing test - are the first two stages we go through in an interview and several people have fallen at this crucial hurdle.

On a final point, there's a difference between grammar and usage and in my opinion the odd split infinitive falls under the latter...at least that's my excuse!

[Sally Whittle]

David - I absolutely agree with you on the difference between grammar and usage. I've had countless conversations with people on the issue of whether it's okay to start sentences with the word "but" or "and" for certain audiences (I say yes), and I've split infinitives when I think it's the best way to express something. But you need to know the rules before breaking them.

By the way the mind boggles - how do you use "of" incorrectly???

[Chris Edwards]

There's nothing wrong with split infinitives: only the misguided belief that English should follow rules derived from Latin. It's a bit of a shame that recent editions of Fowler's have wound up saying split infinitives are bad because people think there was a rule banning their use.

From my point of view I'm more concerned about the content of a release rather than it's grammar. I'll pick something from a badly worded release that has the germ of a story than 400 words of well-crafted guff. However, bad writing often accompanies bad releases and makes me more suspicious of any figures in it or the claims.

[David Child]

Sally, examples include:

Sally should not of split her infinitive

or

David would not of got this far in life if he hadn't known rudimentary grammar.

It also equally applies to 'off of' - a major bugbear of mine - such as Sally off of the blog.

Hope that clears it up.

David

[Sherrilynne Starkie]

Sally, I am on your side about this, despite what young Jo says on Strive Notes. And it's not just in news releases; it's all business communication. Sometimes I despair at the sloppiness and lack of pride that people so openly display.

I once knew a consultant that made four errors in a one-sentence email to a client. He then asked that she not be allowed near his account. Quite right too.

[Sally Whittle]

@Chris - I agree that bad grammar in itself isn't enough to make me ignore a release. But I make the point to PRs I train that poor grammar and spelling impedes meaning. If you're a professional communicator, that's a problem. And you're absolutely right, if I see a series of spelling mistakes in a release, I'd take any claim contained within it as less credible.

@ David - Good Grief! Seriously? God, that is truly, truly awful. I'm genuinely shocked.

[Carole Scott]

I'm shocked that Jo on Strive wrote what she did and I have just left a post about it. Good grammar, spelling and writing structure are all fundamental to good communications.

On the agency side, emails are my biggest worry. Whilst we can have stringent proof-reading procedures in place for news releases and articles, we can't for emails. Given that most of us pitch stories by email on a daily basis (either after a phone call or because we can't get through), it is a worry.

The three things I notice most are:
1. Apostrophes - how can this be so difficult? National Singles' Day (for Apprentice fans). It is a day that 'belongs' collectively to all singles; therefore, the apostrophe comes after the 's'!

2. Blogging, forums and social networking have changed the way people write. The informality of these media can be good, but it does mean that many people haven't properly learnt to structure their writing in any other way than informally. It also affects accuracy - we all blog/post/reply so quickly, that we don't check as thoroughly.

3. Good, compelling, copy. There do seem to be fewer good writers coming through and it certainly affects who can work on which accounts in our agency.

Right, rant over...on to the pressing DIY that I'm currently avoiding. I had promised myself I'd start at 11 a.m. prompt.

[Kim]

I know I should know better than to get myself drawn into an argument about apostrophes, but there is an organisation called the Publishers Association. Yes, that's right - no apostrophe. Carole, are you going to be the one to tell the publishers they've got it wrong?

On the matter of split infinitives, I quote Kingsley Amis: "Anti-split-infinitive fanatics are beyond reason." He goes onto say that although he thinks that it is "perfectly legitimate" to split an infinitive, people ought to avoid doing so on the grounds that there are lots of nutters around who who will think worse of you for doing so (I paraphrase).

[Eric Eggertson]

My expectations about grammar, spelling, etc. changes depending on the circumstances.

In a news release my expectations are high. In some ads, my expectations are slightly lower, just because so many ads have glaring mistakes. In a blog post, much lower. In a comment to a blog post, very low because the commenter usually can't edit for typos.

[Anne]

Poor grammar and spelling in press releases tends to make me think, rightly or wrongly, that the PR company and/or client didn't care enough about the impression they would be making to bother to get it checked properly. A poorly-written (and, in my mind, bad grammar does = poorly-written) press release is a bit like a nice, shiny new car with scratches down the side.

[Eric Eggertson]

Typos and bad grammar in an annual report, on the other hand, that's a hanging offence. Very old school of me, but the document gets pored over in such excruciating detail that there's no excuse.

[Craig McGill]

The thing that I find most annoying - after poor spelling and grammar (though I forgive the more obscure grammar rules) is when you read a paragraph and find a word that has been put there by a spellcheck and it hasn't been read by a human to be corrected afterwards.

For example: "Press Here: Managing the Media for Free Publicity" by Annie Gurton (a decent read BTW), page 24: "Sarah could give Paul here name..."

[Alan Bright]

"I can't remember ever meeting a PR executive who could tell me why it's bad form to split an infinitive, much less what an infinitive is. "

--------------------------

Um, er, why is it 'bad form'? Don't you mean, 'considered by many to be bad grammar'?

I like the quote at the beginning of The Economist Style Guide: "Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous".

To doggedly stick to avoiding split infinitives might lead to barbarism.

...but I am just a PR executive.

[Sally Whittle]

Alan - I think we're in violent agreement, actually. I can't see the difference between me saying something is "bad form" and you saying it's "considered by many to be bad grammar"

You'll note I didn't say it was wrong to split infinitives, I don't think it's terrible, I was just surprised I've never met a PR exec (I'm not singling out PRs, it's just that these are the people I train) who knew enough about grammar to at least understand WHY grammarians frown upon split infinitives.

However, using um and er in the same sentence is, frankly, barbarous.

[Danny Bradbury]

I don't mind the odd grammatical cock-up as long as the overall style is engaging, and as long as the message is relevant and interesting. I'd rather read a short, pithy press release with an apostrophe or two in the wrong place than a three page monster full of perfectly-worded puff.

Maybe I should be ashamed to say this in public but I had to look the term 'split infinitive' up. I just generally write copy that I think reads well and don't worry too much about knowing specific grammatical terms. I know the basic rules (and enjoy breaking them judiciously). I guess that's probably bad, but my copy doesn't seem to get chopped around very much by subs, so I'm happy.

[elpollo]

Agree that grammar changes according to where I am posting. Wished it could always be top level.