<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>WHWG &#124; White House Writers Group &#187; William Safire</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.whwg.com/tag/william-safire/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.whwg.com</link>
	<description>Effective Messages. Clear Results.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 20:43:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Watch Those Acronyms</title>
		<link>http://www.whwg.com/2009/11/watch-those-acronyms/</link>
		<comments>http://www.whwg.com/2009/11/watch-those-acronyms/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:15:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Allan Golombek</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[acronyms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CREEP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PCABO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[William Safire]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.whwg.com/?p=810</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As the 1972 election campaignwas approaching, strategists for President Richard Nixon had a problem. They wanted to announce the formation of a re-election committee. But there had been some question raised in the media about whether Vice-President Spiro Agnew would be on the ticket. They couldn&#8217;t call it &#8220;Citizens for Nixon-Agnew&#8221; because that would pre-empt the President&#8217;s [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As the 1972 election campaignwas approaching, strategists for President Richard Nixon had a problem. They wanted to announce the formation of a re-election committee. But there had been some question raised in the media about whether Vice-President Spiro Agnew would be on the ticket. They couldn&#8217;t call it &#8220;Citizens for Nixon-Agnew&#8221; because that would pre-empt the President&#8217;s decision. And they couldn&#8217;t call it &#8220;Citizens for Nixon&#8221; because that might appear to be throwing Agnew under the bus. They turned to the resident master of language, William Safire, who was then writing speeches for the President. His suggestion? &#8220;Committee to Re-elect the President.&#8221; <span id="more-810"></span></p>
<p>Safire had been in the business long enough to know that the first thing you check for is the acronym &#8212; what will it spell?As Safire relates in <em>Safire&#8217;s New Political Dictionary</em>, he figured CRP was fine. Even if you threw in an extra &#8220;E&#8221; for &#8221;re-elect&#8221; the worst it would spell is CREP. They announced the Committee to Re-Elect the President and, sure enough, it wasn&#8217;t long before it was dubbed CREEP.</p>
<p>The lesson? Watch out for those unintended acronyms, and don&#8217;t assume people will stick to the exact spelling. Take the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, created in the wake of Enron. It didn&#8217;t take long for a lot of lawyers and accountants to start calling it peek-a-boo, proving you don&#8217;t have to be able to spell to come up with a soundbite.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s even more embarrassing when you serve up a title that can be turned into a negative acronym without playing with the initials. A few years ago the federal government of Canada proposed a new tax that would blend together the federal and provincial sales taxes. Straightforwardly enough, they called it the Blended Sales Tax. Until opponents started calling it the BS Tax. Then the name was changed to the <em>Harmonized</em> Sales Tax.</p>
<p>So it pays to check out the acronym &#8212; and look for any possible way a critic can turn it against you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.whwg.com/2009/11/watch-those-acronyms/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
