Monday, June 6, 2011
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Williams 12.2
This entry includes a automobile recall notice that has been edited to give action and actors to verbs.
We may have manufactured a defect in your vehicle that involves the possible failure of the frame support plate. This plate connects a portion of the front suspension to the vehicle frame, and if this plate fails, which could easily happen if you brake too hard, you may lose directional control. In addition, your hood's secondary catch system may require adjustment because it may be misaligned. If you leave the primary latch disengaged, the hood may fly up and, if this happens while you are driving, you may not be able to see the road. Either of these, plate failure or hood fly-up, may cause you to crash your vehicle without prior warning.
The company probably wouldn't send out this version because the two things that could cause crashes, braking hard and leaving the primary latch disengaged, occur often and the reader would be highly aware of the danger they face driving the car. Braking hard especially is a problem because it is something that drivers do often. But it is closer to the truth. The car manufacturers did create a defect in the plate and align the hood latch incorrectly. They are responsible and have put the driver at risk. The clarity would also alert the driver to the urgency of the situation and they might be more likely to take the car in to get fixed. Ethically, the car company needs to give the customer every opportunity to avoid crashes possible and using the opaque language they did makes the document harder to reader and the driver less likely to understand it and avoid an accident. The revision is better writing in terms of writing principles and also in present the truth clearly.
We may have manufactured a defect in your vehicle that involves the possible failure of the frame support plate. This plate connects a portion of the front suspension to the vehicle frame, and if this plate fails, which could easily happen if you brake too hard, you may lose directional control. In addition, your hood's secondary catch system may require adjustment because it may be misaligned. If you leave the primary latch disengaged, the hood may fly up and, if this happens while you are driving, you may not be able to see the road. Either of these, plate failure or hood fly-up, may cause you to crash your vehicle without prior warning.
The company probably wouldn't send out this version because the two things that could cause crashes, braking hard and leaving the primary latch disengaged, occur often and the reader would be highly aware of the danger they face driving the car. Braking hard especially is a problem because it is something that drivers do often. But it is closer to the truth. The car manufacturers did create a defect in the plate and align the hood latch incorrectly. They are responsible and have put the driver at risk. The clarity would also alert the driver to the urgency of the situation and they might be more likely to take the car in to get fixed. Ethically, the car company needs to give the customer every opportunity to avoid crashes possible and using the opaque language they did makes the document harder to reader and the driver less likely to understand it and avoid an accident. The revision is better writing in terms of writing principles and also in present the truth clearly.
Williams 12.1
This entry contains a gas rate notice, originally written in opaque language, with you and then we as the subject/agent.
The Illinois Commerce commission has authorized a restructuring of our rates. As a result your service charge will increase effective with service rendered on or after November 12, 1990. You have not had a rate increase from us, Peoples Gas, in six years. You cost us a lot of money, and the Public Utilites Act says we have to charge what it costs us to produce the gas, so we have to charge you closer to what it costs us to provide the service.
The Illinois Commerce commission has authorized a restructuring of our rates, and so we will increase your service charge effective with service rendered on or after November 12, 1990. We have not increased your service charges in six years. We have changed the rates, but we are complying with the Public Utilities Act, which says we have to charge what it costs us to produce the gas. We are changing the rates for every class of customer closer to the cost actually incurred to provide the service.
The first sends the message that in some ways it is the customer's fault that the rates are changing because it costs the gas company money to produce the gas. If it weren't for the customer consuming and demanding the gas, the gas company could just collect the rates without providing the service. But this isn't good writing because the only agency that the customer really has in this situation is passively receiving the services offered by the gas company. They can't be made actors, so this revision is not truthful and puts a burden on the customer that doesn't exist.
The second revision is much closer to the transparent, clear language that would normally be called good writing because it is easy to understand and use the information it contains. Also, it portrays clearly who is making the decisions and who is to blame for the rates changing. So, if the purpose of the document is to inform the customer of the rate change, the reasons behind it and as clearly as possible, this is good writing. But the purpose of the document is much more complicated than that; it needs to inform the customer of the rate change while dissuading the customer from asking any questions about the rate change or giving the impression that the rate changes happen willy-nilly or that they may happen again soon. The document needs to break the news with losing the customers trust and faith in the companies reliability. So the clear language isn't good writing in that sense. If the gas company gives too much information too easily, the customer my think that the decision to raise rates was made with the same brevity.
The Illinois Commerce commission has authorized a restructuring of our rates. As a result your service charge will increase effective with service rendered on or after November 12, 1990. You have not had a rate increase from us, Peoples Gas, in six years. You cost us a lot of money, and the Public Utilites Act says we have to charge what it costs us to produce the gas, so we have to charge you closer to what it costs us to provide the service.
The Illinois Commerce commission has authorized a restructuring of our rates, and so we will increase your service charge effective with service rendered on or after November 12, 1990. We have not increased your service charges in six years. We have changed the rates, but we are complying with the Public Utilities Act, which says we have to charge what it costs us to produce the gas. We are changing the rates for every class of customer closer to the cost actually incurred to provide the service.
The first sends the message that in some ways it is the customer's fault that the rates are changing because it costs the gas company money to produce the gas. If it weren't for the customer consuming and demanding the gas, the gas company could just collect the rates without providing the service. But this isn't good writing because the only agency that the customer really has in this situation is passively receiving the services offered by the gas company. They can't be made actors, so this revision is not truthful and puts a burden on the customer that doesn't exist.
The second revision is much closer to the transparent, clear language that would normally be called good writing because it is easy to understand and use the information it contains. Also, it portrays clearly who is making the decisions and who is to blame for the rates changing. So, if the purpose of the document is to inform the customer of the rate change, the reasons behind it and as clearly as possible, this is good writing. But the purpose of the document is much more complicated than that; it needs to inform the customer of the rate change while dissuading the customer from asking any questions about the rate change or giving the impression that the rate changes happen willy-nilly or that they may happen again soon. The document needs to break the news with losing the customers trust and faith in the companies reliability. So the clear language isn't good writing in that sense. If the gas company gives too much information too easily, the customer my think that the decision to raise rates was made with the same brevity.
Rude 22.2
I am now typing a paragraph that I can make Times New Roman and then Helvetica. I am supposed to compare the two typefaces. I am supposed to ask myself if the typeface is inviting, sophisticated, masculine, elegant. The one thing I hate about Times are the fat little lower case Es. They look bloated because where the crossbar is too thin. With Helvetica, I really like the upper case Rs. They are wide and sturdy. My favorite serifed font is probably Didot or Bodoni. They are clean, slim, and elegant but firm. My favorite san-serif font is probably Helvetica.
I am now typing a paragraph that I can make Times New Roman and then Helvetica. I am supposed to compare the two typefaces. I am supposed to ask myself if the typeface is inviting, sophisticated, masculine, elegant. The one thing I hate about Times are the fat little lower case Es. They look bloated because where the crossbar is too thin. With Helvetica, I really like the upper case Rs. They are wide and sturdy. My favorite serifed font is probably Didot or Bodoni. They are clean, slim, and elegant but firm. My favorite san-serif font is probably Helvetica.
Because Helvetica was not available in my browser, I chose Trebuchet as the sans-serif. Times is very straightforward, no frills, and familiar. It is very readable and serves its purpose without drawing attention to itself. I still hate the chubby little Es. It is also condensed as the paragraph above in times is almost a full line shorter than in Trebuchet.
Trebuchet is fun as it uses the old school lower case A and G while being thick and sturdy but curvaceous. Trebuchet also feels open and airy. I like it, but it is not a font that is taken seriously. You'd never use it on a job resume (unless you were applying to work at a bouncy house factory.)
I am now typing a paragraph that I can make Times New Roman and then Helvetica. I am supposed to compare the two typefaces. I am supposed to ask myself if the typeface is inviting, sophisticated, masculine, elegant. The one thing I hate about Times are the fat little lower case Es. They look bloated because where the crossbar is too thin. With Helvetica, I really like the upper case Rs. They are wide and sturdy. My favorite serifed font is probably Didot or Bodoni. They are clean, slim, and elegant but firm. My favorite san-serif font is probably Helvetica.
Because Helvetica was not available in my browser, I chose Trebuchet as the sans-serif. Times is very straightforward, no frills, and familiar. It is very readable and serves its purpose without drawing attention to itself. I still hate the chubby little Es. It is also condensed as the paragraph above in times is almost a full line shorter than in Trebuchet.
Trebuchet is fun as it uses the old school lower case A and G while being thick and sturdy but curvaceous. Trebuchet also feels open and airy. I like it, but it is not a font that is taken seriously. You'd never use it on a job resume (unless you were applying to work at a bouncy house factory.)
Rude 21.1
These are four situations when the ethics of technical editing need to be addressed. I will discuss the legal and ethical issues involved, speculate how to minimize conflict, and propose options for action.
A. In this situation, the legal issues the company faces are whether they can be held responsible if a person using their program makes an error that is in the instruction manual, but not clearly delineated. The editor wants to mark the warnings with the word "warning" highlighted by a color and in all capital letters, while the boss doesn't want warnings to be highlighted because s/he thought it would make the program seem problematic and deficient. Legally, the company needs to include language that will prevent data loss and other user error. Ethically, the company needs to determine how clear these warnings need to be without making themselves and their product look bad.
My proposition for action would be to determine three different levels of warning based on the direness of the consequences of the error and establishing three different ways to label them. My suggestion was two have a Notice level, a Warning level, and then a Highlighted Warning level.
B. In this situation, cigarette manufacturers are required to print warnings on labels, but sometimes the typography used on the labels can impair readability. The legal aspect of this situation is that the companies are required by law to post the warnings. I am not sure exactly what the law specifies about the labeling, but whatever they are, the cigarette companies need to comply with them. The ethical aspect of this issue comes in when the cigarette company can make decision about particular aspects of the typography. Should they make the warnings as easy to read as possible and be sure that customers can read the labels, or should they merely comply with the law and, if possible, hinder the customer ability or willingness to read the warnings? I believe that many of the questions of the typography used have to do with the designer doing the best they can to meet the requirements of the law while meeting the design requirements of the manufacturers. I think that cigarette companies must meet the requirements of the laws for sure and I think the packaging designers should work with good design principles and use good type. Making something ugly is almost as bad as making something that can harm someone' s health (that's an exaggeration). I don't feel like it's a technical editor's position to make too many decisions about this.
C.In this situation, a technical editor is trying to decide if all the warning about a certain product should be lumped together in the front of the user manual, however, good design principles indicate that usability of the information would increase if it were spread throughout the book in the appropriate places (or even in both places as redundancy can work to decrease user error). The legal and ethical implications are the same for the user manual of the computer program in scenario A. The company needs to "cover" themselves by putting the information in the booklet. But they face the ethical dilemma of how much they repeat the information. The big legal question is, can someone have a case against the company if they are somehow injured by the product and the warning in the user manual was included but not clearly delineated? The ethical question is, how much are we responsible for making the information in this manual easy to use?
Again, according to good design principles, redundancy will improve usability and create consistency and flow in the user manual, so that's what I would do. The designer has a responsibility to be a good designer and anticipate how a user will use the information and thus present it in the best way. The problem comes when a boss doesn't want too many warnings, or the user manual has to be produced on a short budget or the designer faces some other kinds of limitations. Then compromises need to be made.
D. In this last situation a company creating a marketing flier uses shading a scale to make a graph seem steeper than it is. The flyer is not meant to be persuasive. The legal issues are if a potential investor can feel deceived by this information and hold the company responsible for any loss s/he incurred. The ethical issues are if a company must present all it's data in the clearest way possible all the time. A question that needs to be answered is, who is responsible for the interpretation of the data in the graph, the producer or the reader. I believe that both parties are equally to blame when miscommunication occurs. The flyer shouldn't rely entirely on fancy graphs to convey information and readers should read graphs with a critical eye especially when money is involved.
A. In this situation, the legal issues the company faces are whether they can be held responsible if a person using their program makes an error that is in the instruction manual, but not clearly delineated. The editor wants to mark the warnings with the word "warning" highlighted by a color and in all capital letters, while the boss doesn't want warnings to be highlighted because s/he thought it would make the program seem problematic and deficient. Legally, the company needs to include language that will prevent data loss and other user error. Ethically, the company needs to determine how clear these warnings need to be without making themselves and their product look bad.
My proposition for action would be to determine three different levels of warning based on the direness of the consequences of the error and establishing three different ways to label them. My suggestion was two have a Notice level, a Warning level, and then a Highlighted Warning level.
B. In this situation, cigarette manufacturers are required to print warnings on labels, but sometimes the typography used on the labels can impair readability. The legal aspect of this situation is that the companies are required by law to post the warnings. I am not sure exactly what the law specifies about the labeling, but whatever they are, the cigarette companies need to comply with them. The ethical aspect of this issue comes in when the cigarette company can make decision about particular aspects of the typography. Should they make the warnings as easy to read as possible and be sure that customers can read the labels, or should they merely comply with the law and, if possible, hinder the customer ability or willingness to read the warnings? I believe that many of the questions of the typography used have to do with the designer doing the best they can to meet the requirements of the law while meeting the design requirements of the manufacturers. I think that cigarette companies must meet the requirements of the laws for sure and I think the packaging designers should work with good design principles and use good type. Making something ugly is almost as bad as making something that can harm someone' s health (that's an exaggeration). I don't feel like it's a technical editor's position to make too many decisions about this.
C.In this situation, a technical editor is trying to decide if all the warning about a certain product should be lumped together in the front of the user manual, however, good design principles indicate that usability of the information would increase if it were spread throughout the book in the appropriate places (or even in both places as redundancy can work to decrease user error). The legal and ethical implications are the same for the user manual of the computer program in scenario A. The company needs to "cover" themselves by putting the information in the booklet. But they face the ethical dilemma of how much they repeat the information. The big legal question is, can someone have a case against the company if they are somehow injured by the product and the warning in the user manual was included but not clearly delineated? The ethical question is, how much are we responsible for making the information in this manual easy to use?
Again, according to good design principles, redundancy will improve usability and create consistency and flow in the user manual, so that's what I would do. The designer has a responsibility to be a good designer and anticipate how a user will use the information and thus present it in the best way. The problem comes when a boss doesn't want too many warnings, or the user manual has to be produced on a short budget or the designer faces some other kinds of limitations. Then compromises need to be made.
D. In this last situation a company creating a marketing flier uses shading a scale to make a graph seem steeper than it is. The flyer is not meant to be persuasive. The legal issues are if a potential investor can feel deceived by this information and hold the company responsible for any loss s/he incurred. The ethical issues are if a company must present all it's data in the clearest way possible all the time. A question that needs to be answered is, who is responsible for the interpretation of the data in the graph, the producer or the reader. I believe that both parties are equally to blame when miscommunication occurs. The flyer shouldn't rely entirely on fancy graphs to convey information and readers should read graphs with a critical eye especially when money is involved.
Rude 19.1
I'm not entirely sure what the purpose of this document is. It discusses how The Society (a portentous name) uses and gains their funding, and so it seems like they are asking for money or proposing ways to get more money, however, the document never explicitly asks for money or formally makes a proposal. The text's purpose is unclear, but the graphs' purposes are clear. The first pie chart shows where money is spent and is labeled "Expenses." The labeling on the pie chart doesn't is awkward; instead of labeling the pie chart itself, the reader is given a reference number to find in the legend. The chart would be much easier to read if the labels and percentages were given on the chart itself. Also, there is no reason why the legend should not be listed in some kind of order, and greatest to smallest makes the most sense. Because the percentages are given in the table below the chart, the chart doesn't do much good anyway, it could be removed with no loss of information. Also, there is no need to give a total of 100%. It is assumed that all the pieces of a pie chart add up to 100%. The same is true for the second graph. The legend needs to be put in order from greatest to smallest, and the chart needs to be labeled better or gotten rid of. The pie charts have no color. While I believe that black and white pie charts are useless unless there are only three or four slices, I don't think that colorless charts solve that problem. The information is supposed to make sense at first glance, when a reader has to look up a reference number, the graph is not serving it's purpose.
The text is pretty bad at getting to the point. It barely does, and does so at the end of the last paragraph. The text should start with the proposal and purpose of the document instead a common sense description of how committees work. The last paragraph, especially the parts that show the increases in reserves should be moved to the front.
The text is pretty bad at getting to the point. It barely does, and does so at the end of the last paragraph. The text should start with the proposal and purpose of the document instead a common sense description of how committees work. The last paragraph, especially the parts that show the increases in reserves should be moved to the front.
Williams 9.3
These sentences have been edited to add strength to the ending. The directions said to end the sentence with a nominalized adjective, but that seemed silly to me. So I tried instead to end with a concrete noun.
1. If we invest our sweat in these projects, we must avoid appearing to work only because we are only interested in ourselves.
2. The plan for political campaign was concocted by those who were not sensitive to our most critical needs.
3. Throughout history, science has made progress because dedicated scientists have ignored a hostile, uniformed public.
4. Not one tendency in our govermental system has brought about more changes in American daily life than powerful federal government agencies.
5. The day is gone when school systems' board of education have the expectation that local taxpayers will automatically go along with the extravagant decisions of incompetent bureaucrats.
1. If we invest our sweat in these projects, we must avoid appearing to work only because we are only interested in ourselves.
2. The plan for political campaign was concocted by those who were not sensitive to our most critical needs.
3. Throughout history, science has made progress because dedicated scientists have ignored a hostile, uniformed public.
4. Not one tendency in our govermental system has brought about more changes in American daily life than powerful federal government agencies.
5. The day is gone when school systems' board of education have the expectation that local taxpayers will automatically go along with the extravagant decisions of incompetent bureaucrats.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)