Words to Avoid in Business White Papers
By Michael StelznerJerry Sanscrainte asked, “Is there a list of certain words to avoid in white papers?”
Hey Jerry, great question!
Yes, there are certain words that should be avoided in white papers. However, it is not as cut-and-dried as you might think.
First, if writing to businesses, you should avoid the words “you” and “I.” Why? Because most white papers aimed at business professionals are written in the third person (unlike this how-to article).
Third-person writing helps eliminate the personal nature of a discussion. Often business white papers address problems. If you use the word “you” and the reader does not have that exact problem, you have lost that reader.
This means if you are talking to marketing pros, you should say, “Marketing experts often seek out new ways to generate leads for their clients. Lead generation specialists are helping marketing professionals expand their campaigns.”
The wrong way to say this would be, “You are often looking for new ways to generate leads for your clients. I can help you expand your lead generation campaigns.”
While the wrong way “sounds right,” it is too personal for the business white paper.
Engaging readers directly with the word “you” IS appropriate in white papers when you are writing to consumers. Consumers are used to a more informal and direct communication style.
As far as other words to avoid… David M. Scott has a great list of words to avoid in all of your communications. See his article entitled, “The Gobbledygook Manifesto.”
What are some other words to avoid in white papers?
If you're new here, be sure to signup for my newsletter and join 20,000 others. You can also follow me on Twitter. Thanks for visiting!
Receive email updates when new articles are posted.
>> Related Articles on This Blog
January 9th, 2007 at 5:56 am
Hey Michael, great writeup and thanks for including a link to my Gobbledygook Manifesto. I’ve recently tried to avoid anything “2.0″ as in “Web 2.0″ “PR 2.0″ and so on. These things are so overused to have been rendered meaningless.
Cheers, David
January 9th, 2007 at 8:41 am
David - Thanks for stopping in!
So tell what the problem is with 2.0?
Just wondering.
Mike
January 9th, 2007 at 8:51 am
It seems to me to be faddish and a cop out used by marketers who want their widget to appear new and hip. Of course, I am fine with 2.0 as a software version number, but when used after a process or a market category, it just seems forced to me. What do you think Michael?
January 9th, 2007 at 8:55 am
It does seem odd to me to say Web 2.0 David, I agree.
It is most certainly a marketing deal.
January 9th, 2008 at 8:27 am
Yes, the term “2.0″ is so 1.0 these days…
Actually, I think the term officially lost its hipness soon after Garbage enshrined it in the popular culture with their album “Version 2.0″ — and that was in 1999.
I think that all cliches should be avoided in white papers. But then that would be true of all writing, no? The biggest current offender is the “thinking outside of the box” and all the variations that are used to “prove” that companies are actually thinking outside of the box.
Of course, there is a fine line between cliches and touchstones or “speaking the readers’ language”. But that’s one good reason why the world needs professional writers!
~Graham
February 17th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
Great Blog! This helped me just now, im writing something where i can apply this.
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:50 pm
So make it sound like a school text book.
January 19th, 2009 at 7:16 am
Thinking outside the box? Who started that and why a “box”? annoying! Try thinking about all of it (whatever it maybe) and stop coming up with terms that just tell me your’e just not thinking in, out or around the so called “box”