Research paper

Earlier this week, I finished my fifth class for my master's degree. While I received an A in the class, my final assignment was left out. Apparently, my professor got confused on when final grades were due and didn't have time to grade the final (which was originally worth 20% of the grade), so she dropped it from her scoring rubric.

Cool.

Well, since I took the time to write a 2200+ word research paper and now it has no audience, I've decided to share it here. Don't feel obligated to read it, but if you, I'd love to know what you think.

Hate Speech vs. Censorship: The Power of Language on Social Media and the Dangers of Both Hate Speech and Censorship

Free speech is often held as the most vital liberty protected by the Bill of Rights. Yet, is it possible to maintain the freedom of speech while still limiting it? Specifically, how can free speech be protected while still preventing hate speech, especially on social media? The crux of this dilemma is that taking action to curb hate speech is a form of censorship, which inherently hinders free speech. However, with the rise of social media platforms being used as a new outlet for individuals and groups to use hateful language—and new hate groups forming and made possible via social media platforms—there is growing concern about the dangers of allowing hate speech to exist unrestrained. Ultimately, the question becomes: is controlling hate speech on social media worth the price of censorship? This paper will explore this issue by defining hate speech, providing a brief history of hate speech in the US, establishing the existence of hate speech online and on social media, defining free speech as it exists in the US, supplying evidence of the power of hate speech, and establishing the view of censorship by the US Supreme Court. The goal of this paper is to weigh the dangers of hate speech against the dangers of censorship, offer an opinion about which is more perilous, and provide potential options of how to best address these concerns.

Identifying the Issue

There is no official, legal term for what constitutes hate speech in the US; however, according to the UN, "the term hate speech is understood as any kind of communication in speech, writing or behaviour [sic], that attacks or uses pejorative or discriminatory language with reference to a person or a group on the basis of who they are, in other words, based on their religion, ethnicity, nationality, race, colour [sic], descent, gender or other identity factor." To put it another way, hate speech is biased and insidious language used to attack a person or groups of person based on one or more thing that make up that person’s identity. In this way, hate speech is different from disagreeing with a person's opinion, viewpoint, or ideology. Hate speech is used not to attack philosophies, but people themselves.

History of hate speech in the US

No history of hate speech in the US would be complete nor honest without first discussing the nation’s history of race-based slavery. The American colonies and later the fledgling US were established with race-based slavery. While slavery and indentured servitude had been used around the world for centuries, the version of slavery in America was different in that it was lifelong and based on parentage. Even in the early colonies, children born to slaves were free. With the modification to make only one racial group enslaved, many whites in the South, whether slaveowners or not, viewed black persons merely as property and not as people. Language evolved to convey this derogatory view "and no word conveyed the depth of this internalized oppression more than [the N word]." While hateful, derogatory labels have existed well before the New World was discovered by Europeans and have been used to describe other groups beyond those of African heritage, the fact is that US slavery being race-based made a huge impact on how a specific racial group was seen and treated.

After slavery ended, hate groups, the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) in particular, were established not only to speak against (and harass and physically attack) the freedoms newly freed blacks enjoyed, but also against black persons themselves. Additionally, the KKK was vocally and physically violent against Catholic and Jewish persons, as well as other groups. The KKK is simply one example of a hate group that arose to attack—verbal, physically, or both—individuals based on one or more "identity factor."

This paper is not suggesting that only black persons have been persecuted based on identity factors in the US. Sadly, there are many groups that have had hate speech hurled and acts of violence committed against them—Jews, Mormons, Latinx, Japanese Americans, Native Americans, Irish, LGBT, and so on—more than can be mentioned here. The example of black persecution laid out above is meant merely to be a single instance of a group well-known to encounter hate speech and other hateful acts.

Hate speech online and on social media

In the second chapter of her book Hate Crimes in Cyberspace, Danielle Keats Citron explores what it is about the Internet that seems to promote hate speech. "Some of the Internet's key features—anonymity, mobilization of groups, and group polarization—make it more likely that people will act destructively." Citron offered two examples of hate speech directed towards Sports Illustrated writer Jeff Pearlman. In both cases, Pearlman tracked down his attackers and confronted them about their vitriolic comments. Each individual was shocked by the confrontation and admitted their embarrassment, suggesting that "the internet got the best of [them]."

Since the introduction of social media platforms, groups have been able to form based on shared interests or identity factors. While this has been wonderful for niche and marginalized groups, it has also proven to be a fertile breeding ground for hate groups. Prior to his attack of a Pittsburgh synagogue and killing eleven, accused attacker Robert Bowers used the defunct social media platform Gab to share his anti-Semitic views. Prior to Gab’s infrastructure collapsing, the platform had been a favorite meeting place of white supremacists. Had Gab not enabled these hate groups to gather, could the Pittsburgh shooting have been avoided?

Definition of free speech

The first amendment of the US Constitution states that "Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…". This amendment serves as the basis for free speech laws throughout the country, though it should be noted that private (or even publicly traded) companies are not prevented from enacting their own limits of speech. Also, the First Amendment does not provide any protection towards citizens who exercise their freedom of speech and suffer consequences from doing so, e.g., getting fired for making insensitive remarks. For the past seven decades, when the US Supreme Court is asked to rule on a case where the freedom of speech is a factor, the judicial body has shown that it is very likely to come down in favor of the First Amendment. This is significant as it illustrates the high level of importance assigned to free speech by the US federal government.

Three components that make this an ethical problem

Polarization

One reason hate speech is so alarming is because it is such a powerful tool. Hate groups are able to provoke violent actions in their members—nearly all recent mass shootings have been motivated by hatred. This type of radicalization makes hate groups dangerous, and not just towards the objects of their hate. "'It wasn't any one group—I hated everyone,' [former white supremacist Frank] Meeink remembers."

Dehumanization of victims

Referring to the men’s rights movement Reddit group r/Redpill, writer J. F. Sargent breaks down how they view the object of their hatred: women. "Women are commodities to be acquired and subjugated. They are conquests—things that determine your worth as a human." Viewing objects of hate as subhuman is common for hate groups.

Censorship

Despite his many, many flaws, President Trump signed an executive order to prevent online censorship, which should be commended. However, less than two months later, Trump issued another executive order effectively banning the social media platform TikTok, a move many see as a form of censorship. As stated previously, the US Supreme Court holds free speech in high regard. The US was founded by a group who felt their voices were not being heard ("no taxation without representation"), so silencing any individual's or group's voice should be taken very seriously.

Management of the Issue

Clearly there is a problem with hate speech on social media, but how can it be addressed? Following are some recommendations.

Let platforms govern themselves

Platforms have already started policing hate speech, though some better than others. Famously, Facebook announced last year that it had created a managing board to judge whether flagged content could remain up or would need to be taken down. The system is not perfect, but the company is taking steps to control hate speech, as well as misinformation. Other platforms have also put in place their own guidelines, with Reddit's as a standout for how much freedom is allowed. However, this approach leaves the decision of what to allow and how to act in the hands of the platforms. What if the restrictions are too tight, not allowing users to share information freely? Conversely, what if the restrictions are too loose, permitting violent breeding grounds as was seen with Gab?

Follow Europe's lead

In 2008, the European Union passed legislation which stated "that hate speech would be sanctioned and punitive measures could be taken against individuals or groups engaged in hate speech." Laws like this create incentive to not engage in hateful speech. However, it also makes speaking one’s mind a potentially criminal offense. Add to that the fact that a similar law in the US would likely require a constitutional amendment, what is the likelihood of a law of this nature being passed in the increasingly polarized and tribalist congress?

Expand Defamation Laws

If we cannot trust social media platforms to police themselves and we cannot expect a criminal law to be created, perhaps the best route is to apply defamation law. Defamation is "a false statement presented as a fact that causes injury or damage to the character of the person it is about." By allowing defamation to encompass hate speech—including hate speech online and on social media—those who are the subject of hate speech would have a legal path through which to seek damages from their attacker, while those who wish to continue to engage in hate speech are free to do so without fear of being prosecuted by the state. The burden of proof would rest on the plaintiff, which would require a standard definition of hate speech. Additionally, social media platforms would no longer be held responsible for what their users say—similar to how email services are not sued for allowing an unsavory letter to be delivered.

Foreseeing Oversights

Even though the proposed expansion of defamation law seems like the best fit considering US laws, such a law’s introduction will likely bring with it new challenges.

Different Laws in Each State

Since defamation laws differ from state to state, each state would need to pass their own version. That does mean that some states will likely have stricter laws than others, which can make it challenging when both parties live in different states.

Legal loopholes

When drafting the new laws, legislators—whether through overzealousness, malicious negligence, or merely unseen omissions—may use wording that is either too ambiguous or too narrow-sighted. If this happens, it may allow for some crafty attorney in the future to have the suit dismissed, despite their client actually being responsible.

Frivolous Suits

The US has been accused of being a "sue happy" nation, so what is stopping an annoyed and/or money hungry individual from accusing an innocent person of defamation and bringing suit against them?

Responses and Application

Different Laws in Each State: Use Divorce Law as the Guide

One solution could be for the expanded defamation laws to work similar to divorce laws, i.e., the plaintiff decides in which state they want to file their suit, the state in which they live or the state in which the defendant lives. Another issue is when different states adopt different definitions of hate speech, but that can be addressed by using the definition in the state wherein the plaintiff files suit.

Legal Loopholes: Close Them over Time

Legal loopholes are almost certainly going to arise and the way to address them will be the same way legal loopholes are addressed now: to close the loopholes as they are discovered. Legislators will need to be careful with their wording as they draft the new laws and they, and concerned citizens, will need to watch closely for when unclear wording is abused. When this happens, it is time campaign for changes to the law.

Frivolous Suits: Innocent until Proven Guilty

Since the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, the defendant is innocent until proven otherwise. There are people who use current laws to bring forth frivolous defamation suits, but these are mostly thrown out. The difference with the current law and this proposed law is that, with regard to hate speech, no proof of suffering will be required, simply proof that the defendant engaged in hate speech directed at the plaintiff or a group with which the plaintiff identifies.

As this paper has explicitly detailed, hate speech is a powerful weapon that in some cases has resulted in the loss of human lives. With social media, that hatred is shared much faster and farther than ever before. Clearly something must be done, while still protecting free speech. By expanding defamation law, the ability to combat hate speech is given directly to those who are its target, giving power to those who were before merely victims.

Back to School

Near the end of last year, I was thinking about the future, including my current job, where Leah and I live, and our desire for children. As I was contemplating where I want us to be as a family, I realized that my current job at my current salary would not be enough to meet our goals. Rather than look for a job at a new company, I felt prompted to look into graduate school. After talking with Leah about my plan -- of which she's very supportive -- I started making plans.

First, I spoke with my boss, Magda, about my decision to attend school. She was instantly very supportive and provided some important guidance: I told her that I planned to get an MBA since that's the degree that most managers have, and she recommend that I pursue something more relevant to my career. As she explained, if someone is qualified to be a manager, not having an MBA won't hold them back.

Second, I looked at what nearby universities had to offer in the field of communications. I decided that I wanted to choose a program that was entirely online so that my studies would be more flexible around my schedule, but I still wanted to have the option to walk when I graduated -- I never walked at OSU when I finished my Bachelor’s degree, but with something as significant as a master’s degree, I wanted to still have the option. Plus, I remember when my dad walked when he finished his master’s and I like the idea of doing the same for my future children.

After researching different schools and the degrees they offer, I decided to attend Loyola University Maryland (located in downtown Baltimore) and pursue an MA in Emerging Media. While the program description is somewhat vague, the basic gist is that the degree delves into different forms of so-called "new media" like social media with a strong emphasis in writing. With my career as a technical writer, the writing emphasis is a good fit, and since I'm working in marketing, a better understanding of new forms of media will be very beneficial.

After deciding on the degree program the weekend before Thanksgiving, I had to scramble to complete the necessary requirements for the application by the December 1 deadline. I wrote the essay (with help from academic advisor, my dad, and my coworker Chelsea), collected two letters of recommendation (from the head of PR at Danfoss and a professor I had at OSU who, after my father, is probably the biggest influence on my writing), and filled out multiple forms. A week later, I received an email notifying me that I was accepted into the program.

Class starts a week from today and I'm excited, but also nervous. I haven't attended school while working fulltime before, plus Leah and I are hoping to get pregnant soon, so with my already hectic life, I'm taking on even more. Even so, I'm confident that this is the right choice for me, for Leah, and for the rest of our family when they join us. Wish me luck!

QSG

At work this year, I was tasked with updating the main catalog used in North America, the Quick Select Guide or QSG. Since I was in the role of project manager for this document, I decided to not just simply update the code numbers and add a few new products, but to overhaul its entire design. I wanted to make the catalog easier to use while also making it look more like the catalogs the corporate office in Denmark makes for Europe. That meant that we had to start from scratch and rebuild it from the ground up. And it was most definitely "we" because my skills in InDesign, the program the catalog was created in, are lacking. So I enlisted the help of a freelancer, Holly, whom my department uses on a regular basis.

I had been emailing Holly and collecting all of the necessary data and files when, in the second week of February, I was provided with the last pieces we needed so that we could begin. I was then told that we needed the new catalog to be printed in March. That may not seem like a big deal, but for a sixty page document, this was basically no time. I worked through the last preparations I had and sent everything off to Holly. For two weeks, we worked at a feverish pace. I regularly stayed about ninety minutes late and often worked through my lunch break. At the end of two weeks, we were done! I almost couldn't believe it, but we finished with enough time so that two segment managers could have a week to review it before the end of the month. My boss, Magda, told me that she noticed my hard work and how much she appreciated my efforts. I sent off the QSG for review, walked out the office door, and started laughing just from the relief of having finished a stressful project.

Or so I thought.

I came back in the following Monday to see emails that the reviewers weren't going to even attempt to get to the QSG for at least a week. Wonderful... I did eventually get the feedback I needed from one of the two segment managers, but the other one was not giving the QSG priority. I suspect that he was annoyed that I was making so many changes to it since he had been the one to originally design it. To be fair, his catalog had worked for several years, but again, being fair, he's not a technical writer and he doesn't have a background in document design. Just because it had worked, doesn't mean we couldn't do it better.

After some meetings, several edits, and lots of cajoling from me, we finally placed our print order last Friday. Only two months after we originally planned.

One thing that I think is cool is that my initials are on the catalog. In Danfoss, whenever a new document is released, it has a literature number, a publication date, and the initials of the main author (mostly so we know who to blame if an error is found). As a technical writer, I've gotten used to being invisible and letting my writing stand for itself, but I still like the fact that I'm getting credit for this document.

Even though the catalog has been approved, there's been a delay in posting it on the Danfoss website. Once it's up, I'll share a link to it. It's not a fun read, but as far as catalogs go, it's a pretty one.

Audience Participation

Now that I'm on Facebook, I share smaller things more regularly.  That ability to post constantly makes it tough to know what works best for Facebook and what works best for this blog.  In the case of Independence Day, I went into more detail on this blog than on Facebook, but I still posted about the exact same things in both places.

Additionally, I've been struggling with thinking up content to post here.  For most of the last three years, I've written out the post for the next day the night before so it can go live in the morning.  But for the past several weeks, I've barely gotten each day's entry out before midnight and I completely missed Wednesday's post this week.

So, rather abandon this blog -- because it is important to me -- I am asking you, dear reader, to leave comments to help give me some ideas about how I can do better with my posts.  Offer suggestions, tell me what you like about the blog, tell me what posts made a big impact on you.  Should I only talk about my daily life or should I try to include more essays?  What do you come to this blog for and how can I do better at meeting your expectations?  Now, this will only work if a lot of you participate.  I know that not everyone who has access to this blog reads my posts regularly, but for those of you who visit at least once every couple of weeks, please leave me some kind of feedback.

I look forward to reading your comments and, hopefully, improving my role as a blogger.

Unofficial Third Calling

I found out from my bishop yesterday that the Ward Employment Specialists in my ward have appreciated the help I've provided in editing resumes enough that they have asked multiple times for me to be called as a welfare missionary.  In fact, just yesterday, the bishop had to tell them "no" twice.

The way he explained it to me is that I'm already fulfilling that need because I have the skills and I offered to help; I don't need a third calling to continue to do what I'm already doing.  Plus, by it being something for which I volunteer and not an official calling, I have a bit more flexibility on when I work on the resumes.  That's not to say that I put them off, just that I don't have to feel guilty for not getting to them right away.

Even so, I'm acting like I have another calling, even if it isn't on the records.

Vacation's Vaction

Hello, faithful reader: I have returned!  I didn't mean to worry anyone with my absence; I was simply exhausted from my Thanksgiving trip -- during which time I also did not write.  Basically, I took a vacation, then I needed a little vacation to recover from said vacation.  I still had to go into work, of course, but pretty much nothing else happened.

However, with my much needed rest (and much enjoyed vacation) complete, I'm back to updating regularly.  There may be a few hiccups as I get back in the swing of things, but I don't anticipate missing any more posts.

Block

I've really been wracking my brain to come up with something to write about for today's post.  There are a few events that I've considered writing about, but the timing's not right for them yet, so they're off the table.  I've also thought about writing an essay about something that's happening in the world at large, but nothing's capturing my attention.  Instead, here I am, writing about not having anything to write about.  That's probably meta*, but not on purpose.

*I was planning on linking to the definition of this word in the way that I mean it, but because it's slang, none of the online dictionaries it's listing in are very appropriate. Instead, I'll just define it: "a term, especially in art, used to characterize something that is characteristically self-referential."

The Big Meeting

So as you probably already know, the purpose of my trip to Denmark was work related.  I've been writing a document to help standardize all of the company's installation guides since the beginning of the year and this trip was my chance to present it to the rest of the Technical Communications (or TechCom) team.  Speaking of the team, let me introduce them:

Back row (L-R): Me, Brian, Dan (who is mostly hidden), and Steen.

Middle row (L-R): Henning, Joanna, Berit, and Marianne.

Front row (L-R): Irene, Ritt, Angela, and Mia.

Brian is from the UK and lives in Stratford-upon-Avon, the birthplace of William Shakespeare.  Dan (which is not short for anything) and Steen are in an organization that builds and sails viking replica ships.  I didn't learn much about Henning, but he offered more helpful feedback than anyone else.  Joanna is from Poland and lives there with her German husband.  Berit has traveled all over the world and loves to talk about her experiences.  Marianne smokes electronic cigarettes (she and I didn't interact a lot, but she seemed nice enough).  Irene likes Danish-style licorice candy, which she claims is stronger than any other kind of licorice -- based on what she shared with the group, she may be right.  Ritt likes to go for runs on the beach with her husband when the weather permits.  Angela is from Italy and had the poorest English skills of anyone in the group, but she was the only one to point out to me that a dessert we were eating contained alcohol, which I really appreciated.  Mia, the manager that coordinated the meeting, told me that when she and her family visited the US a couple of years ago, they enjoyed the National Parks and "all the nature" more than anything else.

In addition to different personalities, everyone has different roles within the company --  I believe I'm the only one with a background in writing.  So when we went over the Installation Guide Standard, there were a lot of opinions about what to keep, what to remove, and what to change.  In fact, I was genuinely surprised the first time everyone agreed with what I had written and had no comments to make.  The document that I presented is only twenty pages long, but it took us over four hours to finish reviewing it.  One thing I can say for this team is that they're thorough.  I took meticulous notes and I'm in the process of editing the Standard to send out for everyone's approval.  Ultimately, most of the Standard survived without any change: I'd estimate that only about a third of the text will be changed from the first draft.

This was my first important meeting with people that do the same kind of work for Danfoss as I do and I think it went well.  While we took a long time to review what I had written, the impression I had was that everyone respected what I had done and was taking it seriously.  I felt intimidated when I found out that I was going to Denmark, but it all worked out as well and I'm really glad I got to go.

Back from Denmark

... and boy are my arms tired!  (Pause for involuntary eye-rolling.)

I spent all of last week either traveling to or staying in Denmark.  And "all of last week" is no exaggeration: my journey began at 6 AM on Monday and didn't end until around midnight the following Saturday.  I had a great time, though I'm happy to be back home.

Since there's so much to write about, I'll just use this post as an introduction -- the rest of the week will focus on a different aspect of my travels, with a bonus post on Thursday because there's just so much for me to write about.  I'm still jet-lagged from the trip, so please excuse the brevity in this post as I just need to go to bed.  Even so, I look forward to detailing the ins and outs of my trip.  Please join me.

Tuesdays with Media: Not in My House

Another new story on my other blog.  I know that clicking a link sometimes is too much, so it can also be viewed below.

Not in My House

Scene 1

INT. Kitchen

A husband and wife are finishing up their dinner preparations. What they are making is unimportant. The wife (MOM) places something on the table (like a bowl of salad or a roast).

MOM: You should tell Michael that dinner’s ready.

The husband (DAD) nods and walks out of the kitchen.

INT. Hallway, viewed from inside a bedroom, the door not quite closed

DAD is about to knock on the door, but pauses and looks in. Without saying a word, DAD’s eyes go big and he backs away with a look of horror on his face, bumping softly into the bathroom door behind him, pushing it open. DAD walks back to the kitchen.

INT. Kitchen

MOM: What’s going on? Where’s Michael?

DAD: [to himself] I just can’t believe it. You try to raise your kids right, but it all just falls apart on you.

MOM: What are you talking about?

DAD: [to MOM] I caught Michael using Coke.

MOM: [loud, but not quite a shout] Are you serious?! [quickly looks back towards the bedroom and changes to speaking in a loud whisper] Did you take it away?!

DAD: Why bother? I’m sure he’ll just get more.

MOM: Do you know where he got it?

DAD: No, but I’d guess that friend of his, Johnny, is involved. I never liked that kid.

MOM: Is that what Michael said?

DAD: No, once I saw what he was doing, I left. [ashamed] I just can’t look at him right now.

MOM: Hang on. Let’s find out what’s going on. I just can’t believe he’s using coke! [walks out of kitchen]

INT. Hallway.

We see MOM walking down the hall. This time, MIKE’s bedroom door is completely open, but the bathroom door across the hall is closed. The sound of a toilet flushing is heard. The door opens and MIKE, a teenager, comes out, a strong look of worry and fear is on his face.

MOM: Michael! What is this I hear about you using coke!?

MIKE: I just wanted to try it, that’s all!

MOM: Just TRY it?! You don’t just try something like that.

MIKE: Mom, it’s really not that big a deal. Most of my friends have it all the time.

MOM: And that makes it okay? Your friends don’t know what’s best for you, your father and I do.

MIKE: Okay, I’m sorry.

MOM: Sorry doesn’t cut it. Where’s the rest of it.

MIKE: I got scared, so I flushed it down the toilet. It’s gone.

MOM: [sighs] Where did you even get it?

MIKE: On the way home from school, there’s a corner store.

MOM: And they sell drugs there?!

MIKE: What?! No, I bought a Coke!

MOM: You don’t think that counts as drugs?

[DAD walks into the hall.]

DAD: You should know better, son. In this house, we drink Pepsi! [very dramatically, he opens a can of Pepsi and takes a sip] Ahh!

MOM: [not believing the ridiculousness of the situation] You caught him with Coca-cola?

DAD: Yeah, I did. You know that ever since I took the Pepsi Challenge all those years ago that this has been a Pepsi house.

MOM: [rolls eyes] I can’t believe this [throws hands in the air and walks away].

MIKE: Dad, there are other colas out there.

DAD: Not as far as I’m concerned!

MIKE: Stop telling me how to live my life! [walks into bedroom and slams door behind him]

A black screen appears with white letters:

Everyone has the right to choose for themselves. Talk to your kids about which cola is right for them.

END

Tuesdays with Media: Neighbors

Is it cheating for me to just provide a link to a new story without providing an analysis?  Or would it be cheating in a different way if I analyze something that I also wrote?

While I figure this out, enjoy this (very) short story.

At Least One Native is Restless

Yesterday at work, I received an email requesting my help proof-reading some instructions.  As I've mentioned before, this isn't an unusual request, so I thought little of it when I opened the attached document.  What I found was different from what I usually work on.  For one, the document was written by someone in my office who is, presumably, a native English-speaker.  For two, the document was much longer than those that I normally help out with: nearly thirty pages as opposed to three to five.  Still, this is a standard part of my job, so I dove right in.

The documents that I normally proof have been reviewed at least once already.  I usually just catch some awkward phrasing that slipped through or fix punctuation errors.  This time, it was pretty clear that whoever worked on the document before me hadn't even read through it once.  There were three sentences that just ended in the middle (something like "To set the temperature access the. To set the time ...").  Three!  One or even two would be surprising enough but three makes it seem like he was trying to slip in mistakes.  Remember how it was really long?  Well that wasn't that big a deal because the last half of it wasn't written: it was just a bunch of headings and sub-headings, but no body text.

I tried really hard to be as polite as possible with the questions I asked ("This sentence appears to end in the middle. Was that intentional?"), but I had to correct so many errors and ask a lot of clarifying questions that I wonder if the original author will be offended.  If he takes offence, I'll be honest and point out that I had to ask so many questions because the instructions he wrote were so unclear.  Maybe it'll be fine and he'll recognize that I'm just doing my job.

Who would have guessed that proofing a (presumed) native English-speaker's work would be so much more annoying than a non-native one's?  Maybe the stuff from Danish writers is more fun because I can look for patterns to learn about some of the difference between the languages.  Whatever the reason for the difference in enjoyment, I was very pleased to discover that the page count was inflated.

Missing The

One fun thing about my job is that I get random proofreading assignments that were written by non-native English-speakers.  Yes, I am aware of how incredibly nerdy I am for describing "proofreading" as "fun."

I don't speak Danish, but I'm guessing that articles aren't used a lot, particularly definite articles.  If I'm proofing something written by a Dane (which is most of the time when it wasn't written by someone in my office), there are more dropped the's than ... I don't know where I was going with that comparison, but you get the idea -- the's get no love.

Also, Danish appears to have some syntax similarities to Spanish with overly complex (for English) sentences that have "of" in an awkward place.  Instead of saying "make sure the bolts are secure," they'll use something like "ensure the security of [the] bolts."  Not grammatically wrong, just awkward.

I don't get these sorts of assignments very often, but I enjoy the break from routine when they come.

The Great Word Judge

Despite the fact that I was hired to as an expert in the written word, I keep getting surprised when people at my company come to me for my expert opinion.  For example, I received an email last week from a high-level manager in Denmark asking if the company should use the word "part" or "component" when referring to the products we make.  Being me, I couldn't just give her a quick answer, so explained the advantages and disadvantages in either choice, though I agreed that one word should be picked as the standard.  All in all, I wrote over 500 words on the topic.

I never shared my opinion, though I preferred "parts" for several reasons, one of which was that it's a more common word.  Perhaps my opinion came through, because earlier this week, a company-wide email was sent out telling everyone to use the word "parts" from now on.  My name was never cited as a reason for the decision, but I don't need credit to feel a swelling of pride.

I'm not sure why it feels a little weird to be seen as an expert in my field (maybe because the people at my last couple of jobs didn't really respect me?), but it mostly feels great and I hope it keeps happening.

Too Cold to Write

I know this is a cop-out, but the high lately has barely been in the double-digits.  I'll try to post something tomorrow, but I'm not promising anything.

I am Become Death, the Destroyer of Punctuation

On Friday, I asked my boss if the company had a standard on serial commas or sentence spacing.  She wasn't aware of such standards, but she encouraged me to check in the marketing style guide.  To no one's surprise, there was no mention of punctuation or spacing at all.  When I told her this, she asked me to make a decision that the company would go by, at least in North America.

While this may seem like an inconsequential decision to make, I felt really overwhelmed.  I felt strongly that one person should not be able to make that decision on their own.  When I've had a question on these things in the past, I've always had a company standard to refer to.  The standard isn't usually unique to the company -- the Chicago Manual of Style is often employed -- but it's still something that's been established.  Yet here I was, asked to make a decision that would affect all other documents from that time forward.

I went back through the marketing style guide and found a couple of examples where serial commas could be used and weren't, so I used that as my standard.  I also inferred that the standard was a single space between sentences, so that was another decision I didn't have to make.  I was certainly relieved.

I doubt anyone outside of a technical writer or a devoted editor would really care about something so small, but for me, it was a nerve wracking experience.

Simply the Best

Last Friday, I presented a document that I've been working on for a project at work to that project's manager.  He really liked it.

Let me back up a bit.

One of the problems that I was brought in to help solve was a lack of uniformity for product instructions.  I approached the problem like any good technical writer by doing research.  I reviewed every single instruction I could find, looking for good and bad qualities alike.  Once I had a pretty good idea where things stood, I looked online for instructions produced by other HVAC companies, to see if they had any better examples of how to do things (answer: not really).  Then, I searched for the writing standards to be used within Danfoss.  While there is a writer's guide, instructions are not addressed at all.  So, seeing as how "writer" is in my job title, I decided to write an instructions standard.

I hadn't realized that I hadn't told the project manager that I was writing an instructions standard, but I guess I hadn't because when I presented to him what I had completed, he was really impressed, both with what I had produced and the fact that I had decided to even write it.  Now, this particular document is far from finished and I'll need to talk with other subject matter experts before we're ready to make the standard official, but I'm off to a good start.

This is just another example of how much I like this job.  I was presented a problem, was given enough flexibility to do things my way, and was given positive feedback when I gave an update to the project manager.  I feel like I'm gushing about this job like I'm the company's founder, but it really is that good.  It's nice feel some job satisfaction for a change.

Building a Reputation

I've been working at Danfoss for just over two weeks now and I've only worked on a few assignments.  For the most part, I've spent my time either doing research or talking to people who are experts in their particular field.  It's been a slow start, but considering that I'm brand new to the HVAC industry, that shouldn't be surprising.

Despite my inexperience in this industry, I'm not a novice in my field.  Just a few weeks back, I was talking to my dad and excitedly telling him about a recent time when I realized that I was thinking like a technical writer.  And while I haven't fully adopted that way of thinking just yet, I'm able to get in that mindset easily enough that it's not a big deal any more.  And the people I work with have been noticing.

Last week I sent an email to one of the managers (I report only to the Marketing Manager, but I take assignments from the Product Manager and the Sales Manager, too) to ask some questions about a document that I was editing.  When he responded, he threw in something extra:

I have gotten some good feedback from people that have met you, and I think you have the right strategy with digesting the information and asking very direct questions.

That may seem like a something small, but it means that in the very short time that I've been with the company, I've already started making good impressions with people.  And it's a wonderful thing to do your job well and be noticed for it.  I can't wait until I get an assignment I can really sink my teeth into.

New Blog!

I've decided to launch a new blog dedicated to my fictional writings.  It is now easier than ever to read my short stories and other works of fiction by visiting thefictionalworksofjordanclarsen.blogspot.com, which is also a link on the right side of this blog.  It already has all of the stories previously posted on this blog and will be the new home of any new writing in the future.  In fact, there's a new story debuting there today, so follow the link and check it out!

As always, feedback is appreciated.

Job Satisfaction

Since I am now the go-to writer in my office, I was tasked this week with editing an article written for a trade magazine.  I was happy to oblige since it meant that I got to have an actual assignment, but I was surprised at the writer's style choices.

You see, while I was never given a company style guide (and had been told that we didn't have one), I went digging around on the company's intranet and found something close: a writer's guide.  The guide didn't teach me anything new, but it did give me some clear guidance on stylistic matters.  I bring this up because it was pretty clear that the article's writer had not seen the writer's guide.

For example, the writer's guide recommends using short sentences whenever possible.  I agree with this technique and often use it myself.  This article, however, was written with overly-long and complex sentence that were cumbersome to read at best and hard to follow at worst.

Another problem was repeated word usage.  In technical documents, even articles, it's important to establish a vocabulary and use it the same way each time, but only for the technical parts.  Since the article was about the benefits of different refrigerants, each fluid would need to be introduced and then only referred to by that name (you shouldn't bring up the trademarked "Puron" and then call it by its generic name "R-410A").  That said, the other words are not locked in and the writer seemed to not have a lot of creativity when it came to transitions and used the same two throughout the article.

Now, I don't fault the writer of this article for making these mistakes (the second issue wasn't even covered in the writer's guide), but they stood out to me.

This story is just an example of why my position in the company is necessary and why I already like my job so much.