Robert Fisk's article, "The Jargon Disease," critiques the growing use of complex and meaningless language, especially in bureaucratic, political, and media circles. Fisk argues that jargon—a specialized or technical language that’s often convoluted and obscure—acts as a kind of barrier between the speaker or writer and their audience, intentionally or unintentionally confusing rather than clarifying.
What "Jargon" Signifies
In this context, jargon refers to language that’s overly technical, inflated, or obscure, often used within specific fields like politics, academia, business, or journalism. Instead of clear, direct terms, jargon relies on abstract words or phrases that can be hard for the average person to understand. While jargon can serve as a shorthand within a specialized community (like medical terminology among doctors), when it enters broader public discourse, it often complicates rather than communicates.
In Fisk’s view, jargon creates a sense of authority or sophistication for the speaker or writer but leaves the audience in the dark, unable to engage with or challenge what’s being said. He believes that jargon serves to disguise a lack of genuine substance or to manipulate the audience into thinking that something profound or important is being conveyed when it may not be.
The "Disease" of Jargon
The "disease" Fisk describes is essentially the spread of this jargon-laden language into everyday communication, especially in fields where clarity and honesty are crucial—such as journalism, politics, and public service. This “jargon disease” leads to a culture where people are discouraged from questioning or thinking critically about what’s being said. Instead of transparent communication, jargon acts as a tool for obfuscation, allowing institutions, governments, or media to evade accountability and transparency.
According to Fisk, this language problem infects various domains:
Politics: Politicians use jargon to sound more official or to obscure the truth about policies or actions. For example, using terms like "collateral damage" instead of "civilian casualties" softens the reality of harm caused by military actions.
Media: Journalists sometimes adopt jargon to avoid taking a clear stance or to sound authoritative without providing concrete evidence or clarity.
Bureaucracy: Bureaucrats use jargon to create a sense of importance around mundane procedures, using terms like “framework” or “streamlining” to discuss routine or unremarkable activities.
Why Fisk Criticizes Jargon as a "Disease"
Fisk’s term “disease” reflects how pervasive and damaging he believes jargon has become. He suggests that when jargon is used, it erodes trust and honesty in communication. Rather than presenting facts and allowing people to form their own opinions, jargon manipulates the narrative, subtly steering people’s interpretations. Over time, this use of language can create a society that’s desensitized to euphemisms, misleading statements, and doublespeak.
Examples of Jargon in Action
Fisk highlights examples where complex, abstract terms replace clear and direct ones. Terms like “interfacing” instead of “meeting” or “leveraging” instead of “using” show how simple language becomes inflated. In politics, Fisk often cites terms like “surgical strikes,” which make military attacks sound precise and controlled, when in reality they may result in significant harm to civilians.
By breaking down the jargon and using plain language, Fisk argues that the audience would be better informed and able to hold powerful people accountable. He also believes journalists should avoid jargon altogether, focusing on clear, honest reporting.
The Importance of Plain Language
One of Fisk’s main points is the importance of plain language in journalism and public communication. He believed that journalists have a duty to serve the public by reporting clearly and truthfully without embellishment or distortion. To him, jargon in journalism was a failure to meet that responsibility. In "The Jargon Disease," he calls on readers and journalists alike to reject these convoluted terms and push for clarity and honesty in communication.
Legacy of "The Jargon Disease"
Fisk’s article remains relevant because jargon is still pervasive in many fields. His critique encourages a return to transparency and accountability, advocating for a journalism and public discourse that is direct, truthful, and respectful of the audience's intelligence.
Comments
Post a Comment