“It takes a big man to admit when he’s wrong, and I am that big man.”
- Michael Scott, The Office

I wrote a post a few days ago called “The Power of ‘What?’” that was meant to criticize the use of shallow Web 2.0 catchphrases in web design and how badly it needs to be stopped. Instead, I wrote an article that focused on a very small, annoying group of clients because I thought cursing about a common foe to my fellow designers would give us all a laugh. All I accomplished was talking about an important topic in a profoundly stupid way. I’m going to try and make this right by talking about what’s really important, even if it isn’t that funny.

Language is immensely powerful to me. I’d go so far as to say that words are more powerful than their meaning, and I think that’s why I have such an affinity for design. Design is based on the idea that how something is said has more of an influence on the viewer than what is being said. So you can imagine my horror when I hear careless language being used to dirty design’s good name and all those that love it.

On my recent job hunt, I stumbled upon a studio that described themselves as “providing fluid interactive solutions founded upon the importance of the user experience”. To clarify, they’re a web design agency. Literally every piece of work in their portfolio was a website or internet ad campaign. Not once on their site were they clear or open about what they did. This is indicative of a much larger issue that’s been weighing on my mind, and nearly our entire industry is guilty.

When I hear someone exchange the term website for “interactive experience” or a “solution”, I cringe. When agencies describe making a Facebook fan page and a Twitter account for a product as a “social media campaign”, I can’t help but feel immensely disappointed in my peers.

What is our medium’s fascination with using mystic, overblown language to describe the cornerstones of what we do? Why are we so insecure about our profession not being taken seriously if we use plain, clear language? If we refer to a website as a website instead of a confusing, alienating term that requires a three hour pitch to clarify, will clients really stop buying websites and ad campaigns?

Not only is this language needlessly confusing and showy, it’s also disrespectful. When a client or studio approaches me with this kind of language, I feel as if they’re assuming I’m going to be mesmerized by the magical, glossy garbage they’re spitting out at me and calling a pitch. When most clients hear this language, they feel confused and reluctant. The disconnect between client and designer is based first and foremost upon language, and it’s worsened when we try and hypnotize them with the proverbial “swinging pocketwatch” of Web 2.0 jargon.

Do you want clearer communication between yourself and members of your team? Do you want a stronger presence among your peers? Do you want your clients to know exactly what you’re talking about when you’re talking about it, and not after you spend countless hours re-explaining exactly what a “viral media ad campaign” entails? Of course you do. So speak clearly. Speak plainly. Speak from your heart and mean every word you say. When you’re offering a website, say you’re offering a website and all that it entails. Discard the language of the current trends in design in favor of inclusive, familiar terminology that fosters understanding rather than bafflement.

Every profession has always had its own jargon, and this particular problem is certainly not exclusive to what we do. However, our medium is very young, and we still have time to lop off the cancer of this non-sense language before it spreads too far. Keep design beautiful and say no to the language of Web 2.0