TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: in defense of passive voice From:Chris Hamilton <caxdj -at- earthlink -dot- net> To:techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com Date:Tue, 09 Nov 1999 13:35:37 -0500
Coupla points:
-- Sometimes the action is considerably more important than the person
who
performs the action. In this case, passive voice could be a better
choice.
-- More importantly, in the real world, politics (office or otherwise)
are a
powerful player when you're trying to figure out how to word something.
There
are times in any communication when politically, it's appropriate and
desirable
to de-emphasize the player. For instance, if there's a deficiency in the
software, you want to let the user know about it, but you don't want to
write
that your company's product doesn't handle it. Instead of saying "Our
low-flow
toilet sometimes clogs after usage." you could write "Clogging sometimes
occurs
after usage." You're telling people what they need to know without
raising a
flag and saying "Hey, we blew it."
