Tip of the hat to Karen Schriver who showed this video during her talk at the STC conference in Minneapolis last year.
This entry was posted on Monday, August 4th, 2008 at 1:56 am and is filed under technical communication. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
9 Responses to “Why we need technical communicators”
This is funny — but how exactly does it argue for better technical communication skills?
The fellow may be using made-up jargon, but it’s no more or less understandable than real jargon. The presentation, in other words, assumes the viewer has some expertise in the subject.
Whether or not a layman understands it is entirely irrelevant. What’s jargon to Jonathan is lingua franca to an specialist.
This guy strikes me as being an excellent communicator. I suspect that, with access to the right SMEs, he could explain the workings of a real machine very well.
That’s great, especially the bit about the “logarithmic casing”
I’m surprised it doesn’t have panchromatic suspension in the duodenal undercarriage as well.
Sorry for the late response to your comments, folks!
Tom,
No, I believe it was produced as a parody of some other Rockwell videos with very dense technical language.
Thanks for the Writer River plug, too.
Steve,
Yes, you have a point.
But there are many experts who deliberately use complex technical language to intimidate, obscure, or impress.
It’s those instances where a technical communicator is needed.
August 7, 2008 at 3:42 am |
wow, is that for real? That’s crazy. I wonder how many times they taped it before he was able to say it all without error.
August 7, 2008 at 3:50 am |
[...] Why we need technical communicators « Don’t Call Me Tina. Tom Johnson | August 6, 2008 | permalink Tags: jargon, SME’s [...]
August 7, 2008 at 1:24 pm |
This is funny — but how exactly does it argue for better technical communication skills?
The fellow may be using made-up jargon, but it’s no more or less understandable than real jargon. The presentation, in other words, assumes the viewer has some expertise in the subject.
Whether or not a layman understands it is entirely irrelevant. What’s jargon to Jonathan is lingua franca to an specialist.
This guy strikes me as being an excellent communicator. I suspect that, with access to the right SMEs, he could explain the workings of a real machine very well.
For more on the value of jargon, see my post at http://blog.shoap.com/2007/12/06/in-defense-of-jargon/
August 7, 2008 at 2:12 pm |
Thanks Holly! I had to share this on our tech comm blog because it was just too funny not to share it with more people. You rock!
http://forums.blackbaud.com/blogs/documentation/default.aspx
August 7, 2008 at 8:04 pm |
That’s great, especially the bit about the “logarithmic casing”
I’m surprised it doesn’t have panchromatic suspension in the duodenal undercarriage as well.
August 12, 2008 at 7:00 pm |
Sorry for the late response to your comments, folks!
Tom,
No, I believe it was produced as a parody of some other Rockwell videos with very dense technical language.
Thanks for the Writer River plug, too.
Steve,
Yes, you have a point.
But there are many experts who deliberately use complex technical language to intimidate, obscure, or impress.
It’s those instances where a technical communicator is needed.
Lindsey,
thanks for sharing!
David,
You’re too funny.
September 13, 2008 at 12:06 am |
[...] Why We Need Technical Writers Share and Enjoy: [...]
September 29, 2008 at 6:13 am |
Hey buddy…
i am very much impressed abt “logarithmic casing”…………
its cool man…
Techwriters
mail@futuretechwriters.com
October 29, 2008 at 6:06 am |
[...] hands-down, this is the best video to show. Hat tip to Holly Harkness and Karen Shriver for finding [...]