Autumn isn't Fall and Naked isn't Nude

Circulation Management, May 1, 2004

Byline: HERSCHELL GORDON LEWIS

Remember that lyric from "Camelot"? "If ever I should leave you ... it wouldn't be in autumn."

If the line had been, "If ever I should leave you ... it wouldn't be in fall," then yes, the lyric wouldn't scan. But if you chose one of those two words for a snail-mail or e-mail subscription or renewal appeal, the difference would be even more profound.

Let's suppose you have two assignments, one for Vanity Fair and one for Workbench. The choice of words becomes significant. I'd hope that without giving your fingers even a two-second pause on the keyboard, you'd know which word to use for either of those two publications.

What would Guccione do?

In its glory days, Penthouse reveled in nakedness. "Nudity" would have suppressed response considerably. Now the publication has a new owner, who has expressed his intention to relaunch as "a young men's magazine akin to Maxim and FHM."

Okay, let's say you're creating the subscription package. Is your key adjective for a package you're aiming at prurient Generation-Y prospects "naked" or "nude"?

This isn't a pitch in favor of one word or the other - oh, no. It's a reminder that simple word choice can affect response on a gut level. No question, "naked" has emotional power that "nude" could never match.

And that works both ways. An artist says to a prospective model, "I want you to pose for me, naked." Bye-bye. But if he says, "I want you to pose for me, in the nude," he has a chance.

Let's suppose Hustler wants to expand its core readership. What claim would bring in more subscriptions, "Loaded with pornographic photos" or "Loaded with erotic photos"?

That's simplistic, but it illustrates the point: Words that may have implicit parallels also have implicit differences.

Synonyms aren't synonymous.

What's the difference between "use" and "utilize"? That's an easy one: "Utilize" has a pomposity-factor - "use" doesn't. (A parenthetical comment: When I'm asked to help administer a creative test to prospective staff writers, I always inject the word "utilize," and if a prospect regurgitates that word back, caution reigns.)

What's the difference between "reply" and "respond"? Now, there's one that can make a considerable difference in a subscription mailing, and an even bigger one in an e-mailing.

"Reply" isn't infected with the commitment factor that's attached to "respond," and that means a prospective subscriber feels less threatened. How much less?

If it's 1/100th of one percent, that's excuse enough. But note, please: You may want that commitment factor, and if so, you'd prefer "respond" to "reply."

While we're in this neighborhood, consider the difference between "refused" and "declined." Here is the perfect example of editorial viewpoint masquerading as factual reporting, and yet escaping the accusation of superimposing attitude onto fact (except from such accusations by individuals who probably aren't your subscribers anyway).

That same difference applies to "suicide bomber" versus "homicide bomber." The entire concept of catering to readership can strengthen itself by word choice.

We have the politician-escape differential between "soon" and "at the appropriate time." In a Woodward-Bernstein era, investigative reporters might follow up with, "What do you regard as the appropriate time?" - a question easily escaped with either "You'll know it when you see it," or "Next question."

On a more placid level we have the difference between "twelve" and "one dozen." That difference, a subtle one, is an example of the fascinating technique of information optimizing, a concept we'll explore more fully in future issues of this publication.

Weapons of mass destruction

Aren't you tired of the worn out cliches we see in just about every newspaper and every magazine, even those aimed at children?

Why not, for one solid issue, take the pledge to eschew (nice pompous word, huh?) such hackneyed terms as "think outside the box" ... "at the end of the day" ... "paradigm shift" ... "core competency" ... "24/7" ... "on the same page" ... and, yes, "weapons of mass destruction"?

Do you know what you'll have done? You'll have deliberately shut down the cliche machine, at least for one issue. Heck, I'd settle for one article.

The twenty dollar misunderstanding

"Your preferred rate is just twenty dollars. That's eighty dollars off the cover price."

What's wrong with that approach?

Right! It not only lacks the emotional wallop numbers have, but it seems to be more money than the numbers indicate. If I'm going to give you money, it's twenty dollars. If I want you to give me money, it's $20:

"Your preferred rate is just $20. That's $80 off the cover price."

Or would you use the decimal and zeroes?

"Your preferred rate is just $20.00. That's $80.00 off the cover price."

Opinion: The higher up the economic scale we go, the less effective the decimal-zero-zero becomes.

Aside from the zeroes, there are lots of decisions to be made here. Exclamation point instead of period? "A discount of" instead of "off"? We can lean on a venerable and always applicable rule of force-communication: Emotion outpulls intellect, provided it doesn't insult the prospect.