Letters of exclusion

I think my co-workers are getting annoyed with me. Any time they use an acronym or initialism—either in a video call or Slack—I ask them what it stands for. I’m sure they think I’m being contrarian.

The truth is that most of the time I genuinely don’t know what the letters stand for. And I’ve got to that age where I don’t feel any inhibition about asking “stupid” questions.

But it’s also true that I really, really dislike acronyms, initialisms, and other kinds of jargon. They’re manifestations of gatekeeping. They demarcate in-groups from outsiders.

Of course if you’re in a conversation with an in-group that has the same background and context as you, then sure, you can use acronyms and initialisms with the confidence that there’s a shared understanding. But how often can you be that sure? The more likely situation—and this scales exponentially with group size—is that people have differing levels of inside knowledge and experience.

I feel sorry for anyone trying to get into the field of web performance. Not only are there complex browser behaviours to understand, there’s also a veritable alphabet soup of initialisms to memorise. Here’s a really good post on web performance by Harry, but notice how the initialisms multiply like tribbles as the post progresses until we’re talking about using CWV metrics like LCP, FID, and CLS—alongside TTFB and SI—to look at PLPs, PDPs, and SRPs. And fair play to Harry; he expands each initialism the first time he introduces it.

But are we really saving any time by saying FID instead of first input delay? I suspect that the only reason why the word “cumulative” precedes “layout shift” is just to make it into the three-letter initialism CLS.

Still, I get why initialisms run rampant in technical discussions. You can be sure that most discussions of particle physics would be incomprehensible to outsiders, not necessarily because of the concepts, but because of the terminology.

Again, if you’re certain that you’re speaking to peers, that’s fine. But if you’re trying to communicate even a little more widely, then initialisms and abbreviations are obstacles to overcome. And once you’re in the habit of using the short forms, it gets harder and harder to apply context-shifting in your language. So the safest habit to form is to generally avoid using acronyms and initialisms.

Unnecessary initialisms are exclusionary.

Think about on-boarding someone new to your organisation. They’ve already got a lot to wrap their heads around without making them figure out what a TAM is. That’s a real example from Clearleft. We have a regular Thursday afternoon meeting. I call it the Thursday afternoon meeting. Other people …don’t.

I’m trying—as gently as possible—to ensure we’re not being exclusionary in our language. My co-workers indulge me, even it’s just to shut me up.

But here’s the thing. I remember many years back when a job ad went out on the Clearleft website that included the phrase “culture fit”. I winced and explained why I thought that was a really bad phrase to use—one that is used as code for “more people like us”. At the time my concerns were met with eye-rolls and chuckles. Now, as knowledge about diversity and inclusion has become more widespread, everyone understands that using a phrase like “culture fit” can be exclusionary.

But when I ask people to expand their acronyms and initialisms today, I get the same kind of chuckles. My aversion to abbreviations is an eccentric foible to be tolerated.

But this isn’t about me.

Responses

dirk döring

i agree. worst example: a11y which is the most inaccessible acronym i know.

Craig Grannell

This is an interesting piece by @adactio on the modern tendency towards acronyms and initials — especially within the tech industry — which are broadly exclusionary. Companies and individuals must do better to make communications more widely accessible. adactio.com/journal/17770

Alan Ralph

Jeremy Keith:

I think my co-workers are getting annoyed with me. Any time they use an acronym or initialism—either in a video call or Slack—I ask them what it stands for. I’m sure they think I’m being contrarian.

The truth is that most of the time I genuinely don’t know what the letters stand for. And I’ve got to that age where I don’t feel any inhibition about asking “stupid” questions.

But it’s also true that I really, really dislike acronyms, initialisms, and other kinds of jargon. They’re manifestations of gatekeeping. They demarcate in-groups from outsiders.

Three-letter acronyms (TLAs) and their ilk have been around for a long time, and I’ve encountered a lot more over my lifetime than I’d like. I have particularly vivid memories of all the TLAs I had to grapple with during my time as a software developer working with DOS and various versions of Windows, plus a load more I came across as a tech support / sysadmin managing a network of Windows machines plus a server running Small Business Server 2003.

As Jeremy mentions, it can quickly become normalised within a group of people working on similar things. But it has also spread more widely thanks to social media, in particular Twitter with its limits on message length.

I’ve come across web pages that have supposedly been written for non-experts, where acronyms have been mentioned without any explanation on the page. I realise that content management systems might not make it easy to do, but HTML has supported a means of communicating acronyms or abbreviations since the early days, so it really shouldn’t be that hard!

This has gotten me thinking, I’m certain that my Pinboard bookmarks probably have a lot of acronyms as tags — I will make more effort to avoid those in future.

# Posted by Alan Ralph on Friday, January 22nd, 2021 at 2:24pm

fantastic ms.

ohhh, yes, that’s a very good observation and a part of the barrier. another example is the fact that a lot of people work on perf for SEO thinking it’s the pagespeed score that counts but it has no bearing on ranking. the algorithm is not described at best & secretive at worst

Melanie Richards

In this post on exclusionary acronyms, @adactio mentions “TAM”. I thought “ah yes, total addressable market, I too had to clarify that one when I first heard it”. …”TAM” in this case stands for “Thursday afternoon meeting”. Way to prove the point! adactio.com/journal/17770

dirk döring

i do repeat myself but still the most exclusionary acronym/initialism is a11y

2 Shares

# Shared by Barry Pollard on Thursday, January 28th, 2021 at 7:51am

# Friday, February 19th, 2021 at 11:30am

6 Likes

# Liked by Chris Coyier on Thursday, January 21st, 2021 at 2:43pm

# Liked by Marty McGuire on Thursday, January 21st, 2021 at 4:06pm

# Liked by Boris Schapira on Wednesday, January 27th, 2021 at 10:34am

# Liked by jina (they/she) 🇰🇷 on Thursday, January 28th, 2021 at 5:46am

# Liked by Barry Pollard on Thursday, January 28th, 2021 at 8:54am

# Liked by Fasterize on Tuesday, February 9th, 2021 at 9:56am

1 Bookmark

# Tuesday, February 9th, 2021 at 12:00am

Related links

Use the words normal people use

When you’re struggling to write something that sounds clear and sounds human (two of the essential basics of a good blog post, I’d argue), just use the words normal people would use. The best way to find out what those words are is to try talking the thing through to someone who doesn’t know anything about it. Remember what you just said, then write that.

Tagged with

Getting help from your worst enemy

Onboarding. Reaching out. In terms of. Synergy. Bandwidth. Headcount. Forward planning. Multichannel. Going forward. We are constantly bombarded and polluted with nonsense speak. These words and phrases snag and attach themselves to our vocabulary like sticky weeds.

Words become walls.

I love this post from Ben on the value of plain language!

We’re not dumbing things down by using simple terms. We’re being smarter.

Read on for the story of the one exception that Ben makes—it’s a good one.

Tagged with

Use the words normal people use

When you’re struggling to write something that sounds clear and sounds human (two of the essential basics of a good blog post, I’d argue), just use the words normal people would use.

Tagged with

John Spencer: “There’s no bullshit like design bullshit” - Design Week

If we use jargon, we reveal our insecurity. If we use pretentious language, we expose our arrogance. But if we use language that anyone can understand, people are much more likely to value what we do.

Tagged with

Previously on this day

12 years ago I wrote Long time

Why does a decade on the web feel like an epoch?

14 years ago I wrote Clarity

HTML, with or without the 5, emerges stronger than ever after the confusion of the past few days.

23 years ago I wrote burster!

I’m impressed.