Comments on: The Power of Positive Language — Yes We Can

By: Dean Rodgers

Dean Rodgers — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 23:01:46 +0000

No sir, no how. I love curmudgeonly writing. And I’m sure it wouldn’t take you very long to find plenty of negative writing style on this very blog.

Until recently, I wasn’t even aware of it.

By: Loring Wirbel

Loring Wirbel — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:28:43 +0000

Geez, Dean, are you TRYING to put curmudgeons out of business? Seriously, this is a useful guide in 95 percent of situations, but for those that need to place something negative on the table (which implies violating the Thumper-to-Bambi rule and “putting on your jackal voice”), there’s a simple related rule: Be blunt and brief in your negativism. Don’t say “Band of Horses and Fleet Foxes fail to inspire me the way they do many.” Say, “Despite the apparent majority opinion, Band of Horse and Fleet Foxes simply suck.” Then go on to boosterism.

By: Dean Rodgers

Dean Rodgers — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:28:01 +0000

Thanks Brian and Laurent. Yes, the delta between the actual meaning of the positive vs. negative statements is much wider than the literal meaning — and that’s my point.

When someone consistently consistently uses negative wording to express something positive (or the other way around) It might just their style sense of humor. However, it could also be that they are such negative people that this is the best they can muster.

I do agree that there are plenty of good reasons to use negative — particularly if you are trying to underscore a point.

I do find Obama’s repeated use of “There is no reason why we can’t” pretty interesting — what I’d really like to know is if he uses it intentionally as a way of throwing out subtle challenges that we must over come or it is something more indicative of they way he looks at the world.

BTW, Brian, as a reader and a writer, I am no fan of flaccid. However, for some marketing pieces, “solution” or “state-of-the-art” have their place — particularly for some of that deep-in-the-weeds stuff that you and I both will never escape.

And, let’s face it, some segments of Corporate America can’t get enough of flaccid.

By: Brian Fuller

Brian Fuller — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 20:15:40 +0000

Best post I’ve read in days.
I’d add to it that in your negative v. positive examples, they actually don’t mean the same thing. The positive affirms while the negative simply rules out one degree on a spectrum. “He’s not a bad guy” could mean he’s a great guy, an average joe or something other than a bad guy. It could mean he’s evil, actually.
Negative writing is more than just negative; it’s flaccid, imprecise. Negative writing, when done with purpose, is actually good because he communicates something definitively. Flaccid writing just serves to confuse (and it’s emblematic I think of greater cultural problems we have–we don’t know what we stand for much of the time; but that’s another comment on a another post).
Flaccid writing is “solutions,” the bane of messaging’s existence. It’s “best-in-class” etc.
Flaccid writing obscures what’s at the core of great messaging: solving real problems for people.
Bottom line: Just say it, for god’s sake!
Great post, Dean!

By: laurent

laurent — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:34:51 +0000

Very true.
Indeed science has established that we remember negative emotions better than positive one. Worlds are just symbols to give reality to a concept. And we also have this skill to complete a puzzle (i.e: add to a sentence for example)
When I read “he isn’t a bad guy”, I really read “he isn’t a bad guy BUT IT’S UNCLEAR IF HE IS A GREAT GUY”. I see the concept “he isn’t bad but he isn’t great..he is somewhere in between.
When I read “he is a great guy”. That’s it, the concept is complete and I don’t add to it.

Everytime