Me ha llegado, por medio de mi querido amigo Joaquín Peón, la referencia de una publicación en The Chronicle of Higher Education que nos remite a un caso de comunicación muy interesante. Se trata de una nota que describe los recientes esfuerzos de la Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities de Estados Unidos por lograr que cuando hable algún representante de una institución de educación superior con fines de lucro, sus palabras inspiren respeto y reflejen profesionalismo.
Esta búsqueda del eufemismo, tan común hoy día entre los políticos y la gente de empresa, de entrada puede resultar
graciosa, o al menos peculiar y llamativa, pero no demasiado relevante; es probable que mucha gente la vea como algo de importancia secundaria, más bien cosmético. Pero sabemos que no es así. Si afinamos la mira veremos que la elección de una expresión “más adecuada” con mucha frecuencia busca ocultar o redefinir realidades incómodas a que apuntan las expresiones acuñadas más o menos espontáneamente a lo largo del tiempo por sus usuarios. Es decir, intenta desviar la atención hacia otra parte o hacer ver las cosas de manera distinta a la usual. Esto no es bueno ni malo en sí, desde luego, y con toda seguridad habrá muchas situaciones en las que la terminología para referirse a algún sector de la realidad deba ser puesta al día y mejorada (un ejemplo básico se encuentra en la terminología judicial), pero mejor estar en guardia para evitar que nos den “atole con el dedo”.
De cualquier forma, este caso me parece digno de dedicarle unos minutos –y por eso copio abajo la nota íntegramente- porque tiene que ver con una actividad de los comunicadores que se está volviendo cada día más común: renombrar. Es una tarea que tiene un montón de aristas, éticas, políticas, históricas y lingüísticas, que no debería hacerse a la ligera ni dejarse en manos de cualquier “comunicador”.
Hace unos días, comentando sobre este tema, una joven coleguita trivializaba el hecho de manipular a través del (mal) uso de las palabras y cuando se quedó sin argumentos (lo que sucedió en pocos minutos, por cierto) espetó: “hay que perderle el respeto al lenguaje”. Yo pensé que uno no puede perder lo que nunca ha tenido, y recordé que la vida es corta como para desperdiciar el tiempo con quien no merece la pena.
Al lenguaje hay que conocerlo, respetarlo y amarlo hasta para faltarle al respeto y darle mal uso. Cuando tienes una relación así con el lenguaje, entre otras muchas otras cosas sabes que cambiar las palabras muy raramente cambia la realidad a que se refieren, y que el camino más directo para cambiar el modo como se nombra algo es cambiar la realidad de lo nombrado.
March 11, 2012
By Any Other Name: For-Profit Colleges Watch Their Language
By Goldie Blumenstyk
Would that which we call a "parent company" seem worthier if it were a "university system?" Would it impress Congress if student "recruiters" were called by any other name? "Counselors," perhaps?
It seems so—at least to those in the for-profit-college industry's main trade association. For at least a year, the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities quietly pursued a campaign, called "Project Rose," whose goal was to change the vernacular of the sector to de-emphasize its retail-grade jargon.
A document describing the project was provided anonymously to The Chronicle. The intent, it says, was to ensure that when representatives of for-profit institutions speak, the words they use to describe their institutions, education, and students "command respect and reflect professionalism." The document goes on to list a series of "problematic" advertising tactics and statements made during calls with investors that fostered negative images of the industry, such as "Rise in Student Aid Entitlements = Automatic Revenue Bump."
Another section, titled "How We Talk," proposes alternatives for 45 words and phrases commonly used by people in the sector. It suggests saying "enrollment-assistance center" instead of "call center," "faculty and staff" instead of "employees," and "accept applications" instead of "write some business."
The campaign began back when the association itself was known by another name—it was the Career College Association until the summer of 2010—and was discussed briefly during an open session at its annual meeting in Grapevine, Tex., last summer. "It's time we redefine our vocabulary," David J. Pauldine, president of DeVry University and executive vice president of DeVry Inc., told the audience then.
At the time, Mr. Pauldine emphasized how important it was for companies to change their language and align their culture with their new approach. He reminded his colleagues that when Sen. Tom Harkin, the Iowa Democrat, got hold of some college companies' student-recruiter training manuals and internal memos and published excerpts of them in the Congressional Record, the language reflected poorly on the sector. The excerpts included a memo from an admissions supervisor at ITT Educational Services that said: "The department needs to focus on the selling of the appointment by digging in and getting to the pain of each and every prospective student."
The association held a closed-door session on Project Rose during that meeting but declined to admit a reporter.
A DeVry spokesman said last week that Mr. Pauldine, whose name appears on the document provided to The Chronicle, was not available to comment, and the spokesman referred calls to the association, saying it was an Apscu project. The official from Apscu listed on the document is Bob Cohen, who until the fall of 2011 was senior vice president for communications at the association.
The president of the association left in June, and a new president, Steve Gunderson, assumed office in January. Brian Moran, who has been executive vice president of Apscu under both leaders, said Project Rose began under the auspices of the communications department around the same time the association was changing its name. He said it was meant to encourage the use of "vocabulary that better reflected our mission of education." With the turnover of personnel and the association's focus on helping its members comply with new regulations on student recruiting, he said other activities have "superceded the issue of Project Rose."
The campaign was apparently named as a homage to Shakespeare's well-known musing in Romeo and Juliet—"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." The Bard's question appears at the beginning of the 32-page PowerPoint document describing the project. In the play, however, his point was that reality matters more than what we call it.
PROJECT ROSE
A "How We Talk" chart shows terms the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities proposed changing as part of a campaign for new ways to present the sector to the public.
| OLD | NEW |
| Brands | Institutions |
| Parent company | University system |
| Starts | New students |
| Call center | Enrollment-assistance center |
| Write some business | Accept applications |
| Phone script | Appointment set outline |
| Recruiters | Counselors |
| Career college | Private-sector college or university |
| Mom and pop | Family owned |
| Market presence | Regional campuses |
| Teachers, instructors | Faculty, professors (where appropriate) |
| Open enrollment | Equal opportunity |
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario