What do you think?
Rate this book
Death Sentence: The Decay of Public Language
"Don Watson, one-time political speechwriter and author of the acclaimed 'Recollections of a Bleeding Heart', can take it no longer. In 'Death Sentence", he takes a blowtorch to the words - and their users - who kill joy, imagination and clarity. Scathing, funny and brilliant, 'Death Sentence' is a small look of profound weight - and timeliness." (From back cover)
198 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 2003
About the author
Don Watson
67 books72 followersWatson grew up on a farm in Gippsland, took his undergraduate degree at La Trobe University and a Ph.D at Monash University and was for ten years an academic historian. He wrote three books on Australian history before turning his hand to TV and the stage. For several years he combined writing political satire for the actor Max Gillies with political speeches for the former Premier of Victoria, John Cain.
In 1992 he became Prime Minister Paul Keating's speech-writer and adviser and his best-selling account of those years, Recollections of a Bleeding Heart': Paul Keating Prime Minister, won both the The Age Book of the Year and non-fiction Prizes, the Brisbane Courier Mail Book of the Year, the National Biography Award and the Australian Literary Studies Association's Book of the Year.
In addition to regular books, articles and essays, in recent years he has also written feature films, including The Man Who Sued God, starring Billy Connolly and Judy Davis. His 2001 Quarterly Essay Rabbit Syndrome: Australia and America won the inaugural Alfred Deakin Prize in the Victorian Premier's Literary Awards. Death Sentence, his book about the decay of public language, was also a best seller and won the Australian Booksellers Association Book of the Year. Watson's Dictionary of Weasel Words was published in 2004 and continued to encourage readers to renounce what he perceives to be meaningless corporate and government jargon that is spreading throughout Australia and embrace meaningful, precise language. More recently Watson contributed the preface to a selection of Mark Twain's writings, The Wayward Tourist.
His latest book, American Journeys is a narrative of modern America from Watson's travels in the United States following Hurricane Katrina. It was published by Knopf in 2008 and won both the The Age Book of the Year non-fiction and Book of the Year awards.[4]. It also won the 2008 Walkley Award for the best non-fiction book.
In 1992 he became Prime Minister Paul Keating's speech-writer and adviser and his best-selling account of those years, Recollections of a Bleeding Heart': Paul Keating Prime Minister, won both the The Age Book of the Year and non-fiction Prizes, the Brisbane Courier Mail Book of the Year, the National Biography Award and the Australian Literary Studies Association's Book of the Year.
In addition to regular books, articles and essays, in recent years he has also written feature films, including The Man Who Sued God, starring Billy Connolly and Judy Davis. His 2001 Quarterly Essay Rabbit Syndrome: Australia and America won the inaugural Alfred Deakin Prize in the Victorian Premier's Literary Awards. Death Sentence, his book about the decay of public language, was also a best seller and won the Australian Booksellers Association Book of the Year. Watson's Dictionary of Weasel Words was published in 2004 and continued to encourage readers to renounce what he perceives to be meaningless corporate and government jargon that is spreading throughout Australia and embrace meaningful, precise language. More recently Watson contributed the preface to a selection of Mark Twain's writings, The Wayward Tourist.
His latest book, American Journeys is a narrative of modern America from Watson's travels in the United States following Hurricane Katrina. It was published by Knopf in 2008 and won both the The Age Book of the Year non-fiction and Book of the Year awards.[4]. It also won the 2008 Walkley Award for the best non-fiction book.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 71 reviews
December 27, 2015
5★
This was given to me because I love words. I’ve been immersed in so much bureaucratese over the last 20 years that I felt as if this was directed personally at me. Not for perpetrating the assault on good language myself but maybe for perpetuating it. I’ve contributed to enough policies and procedures to choke a horse. There ya go—two examples, one of corporate speak (P&P) and a cliché. Easy, isn’t it?
This was written during the end of John Howard’s prime ministership, and there are many references to Howard and the then U.S. President, George W. Bush. Watson has enjoyed including several of Bush’s famous slips “More and more of our imports come from overseas”, and also plenty of the constructions created for Howard “alert but not alarmed” and “core promises” (to weasel out of an election promise).
Although English is spoken in more and more countries and new words are added every year, the actual vocabularies of our kids and leaders are smaller and smaller. Journalists either don’t know more words or they avoid using them, thinking their readers won’t know them. And to be fair, if people don’t understand what you’re saying, you might as well pack your tent and go home.
Business-speak is everywhere. “Business language is a desert. Like a public company, the public language is being trimmed of excess and subtlety; what it doesn’t need is shed, what is useful is reorganised, prioritised and attached either to new words or to old ones stripped of meaning.”
Watson has designed the format of this book so that in certain margins there are examples of glorious, simple writing alongside an extract from a management document that is repetitive, almost incomprehensible, and basically meaningless.
Sports commentators come in for some gentle ribbing, but I have a certain sympathy for their desire to fill the silence during time-outs. Watson knows that former athletes are not necessarily naturally eloquent, and he enjoys some of their colourful descriptions. But they tend to waffle, as Keith Stackpole did “Hopefully in terms of the batting the English might improve somewhat, Tim.” Watson (who is no fan of the word ‘hopefully’ used this way) asks why couldn’t Stackpole just say “I hope the English batting improves, Tim.” I agree.
Following a quotation full of company-speak from a university, Watson says: “You get this far and all you know is that any moment now they’ll be talking about ‘challenging environments’ and ‘identifying core issues’ and ‘key issues' (not to say ‘key tasks’) and the need for ‘strategic models’; and that some progress has been made in ‘deriving synergies between the separate entities; but the pace of reform must be accelerated’.”
You get the idea. And he reminds us that speech is revolving between TV shows, politicians, journalists, and kids and back again. Like political talking points and politicians being on message, speech patterns are getting sillier, more repetitive, and less informative.
He touches on the apostrophe catastrophe and upspeak (where so many sentences sound like questions) but says mainly, he wants words to say what they mean so that people understand them. He wants children to learn how to express themselves clearly.
If only.
I think that’s why I’ve started reading books with such a passion again. I need to read language that says what it means and says it well. Watson quotes philosophers, Lincoln, Faulkner, Elmore Leonard, and, of course, the inimitable George W. Bush. He knows what he’s talking about (Watson, not Bush).
A great read for anyone who deplores the current propaganda that passes for business and political discourse these days.
This was given to me because I love words. I’ve been immersed in so much bureaucratese over the last 20 years that I felt as if this was directed personally at me. Not for perpetrating the assault on good language myself but maybe for perpetuating it. I’ve contributed to enough policies and procedures to choke a horse. There ya go—two examples, one of corporate speak (P&P) and a cliché. Easy, isn’t it?
This was written during the end of John Howard’s prime ministership, and there are many references to Howard and the then U.S. President, George W. Bush. Watson has enjoyed including several of Bush’s famous slips “More and more of our imports come from overseas”, and also plenty of the constructions created for Howard “alert but not alarmed” and “core promises” (to weasel out of an election promise).
Although English is spoken in more and more countries and new words are added every year, the actual vocabularies of our kids and leaders are smaller and smaller. Journalists either don’t know more words or they avoid using them, thinking their readers won’t know them. And to be fair, if people don’t understand what you’re saying, you might as well pack your tent and go home.
Business-speak is everywhere. “Business language is a desert. Like a public company, the public language is being trimmed of excess and subtlety; what it doesn’t need is shed, what is useful is reorganised, prioritised and attached either to new words or to old ones stripped of meaning.”
Watson has designed the format of this book so that in certain margins there are examples of glorious, simple writing alongside an extract from a management document that is repetitive, almost incomprehensible, and basically meaningless.
Sports commentators come in for some gentle ribbing, but I have a certain sympathy for their desire to fill the silence during time-outs. Watson knows that former athletes are not necessarily naturally eloquent, and he enjoys some of their colourful descriptions. But they tend to waffle, as Keith Stackpole did “Hopefully in terms of the batting the English might improve somewhat, Tim.” Watson (who is no fan of the word ‘hopefully’ used this way) asks why couldn’t Stackpole just say “I hope the English batting improves, Tim.” I agree.
Following a quotation full of company-speak from a university, Watson says: “You get this far and all you know is that any moment now they’ll be talking about ‘challenging environments’ and ‘identifying core issues’ and ‘key issues' (not to say ‘key tasks’) and the need for ‘strategic models’; and that some progress has been made in ‘deriving synergies between the separate entities; but the pace of reform must be accelerated’.”
You get the idea. And he reminds us that speech is revolving between TV shows, politicians, journalists, and kids and back again. Like political talking points and politicians being on message, speech patterns are getting sillier, more repetitive, and less informative.
He touches on the apostrophe catastrophe and upspeak (where so many sentences sound like questions) but says mainly, he wants words to say what they mean so that people understand them. He wants children to learn how to express themselves clearly.
If only.
I think that’s why I’ve started reading books with such a passion again. I need to read language that says what it means and says it well. Watson quotes philosophers, Lincoln, Faulkner, Elmore Leonard, and, of course, the inimitable George W. Bush. He knows what he’s talking about (Watson, not Bush).
A great read for anyone who deplores the current propaganda that passes for business and political discourse these days.
February 17, 2026
Furphies and Drongos?
In Death Sentence, Don Watson rails against the decay of public language and since that is the subtitle, why not. A furphy is a noun: a rumour, a false report, a tall story. It was also, incidentally, a brand of beer I didn’t much care for. A drongo is likewise a noun, Australian slang for a fool or inept person.
“Pass me a Furphy, you bloody drongo.”
How I would love to hear a politician say that in a pub. I suspect Watson, having uses these two words in his book, might even approve. After all, he remarks at one point that it is not in our breeding to be eloquent.
But is the jargon of politics and business that he attacks in this slim polemic itself a furphy, advanced by a drongo of a bloke? No idea. How’s that for fence-sitting.
What I did admire was his disdain for hollow terms like mateship and battler. Those words have been flogged mercilessly in political and media chat. Watson is at his wittiest when exposing such sanctimonious clap trap.
There is also plenty of humour in his demolition of “managerial language” as it seeps into politics, bureaucracy, education, the arts and even AFL footy. Though I confess, if I hear a BT scream non managerial language such as “they’re cumiiiiiiing!” when a side is six goals down with ten minutes left, only to see them kick a behind, it will be too soon. Watson quotes one commentator describing a forward entry as “validation by foot.” As he drily notes, and to use jargon, that may at the end of the day in fact be correct.
Published in 2003, the book remains relevant. One might say it continues to enhance our core strategic reading outcomes and prioritise linguistic empowerment going forward, at a key input point in time, if we leverage its impact across stakeholder markets. Something like that.
In Death Sentence, Don Watson rails against the decay of public language and since that is the subtitle, why not. A furphy is a noun: a rumour, a false report, a tall story. It was also, incidentally, a brand of beer I didn’t much care for. A drongo is likewise a noun, Australian slang for a fool or inept person.
“Pass me a Furphy, you bloody drongo.”
How I would love to hear a politician say that in a pub. I suspect Watson, having uses these two words in his book, might even approve. After all, he remarks at one point that it is not in our breeding to be eloquent.
But is the jargon of politics and business that he attacks in this slim polemic itself a furphy, advanced by a drongo of a bloke? No idea. How’s that for fence-sitting.
What I did admire was his disdain for hollow terms like mateship and battler. Those words have been flogged mercilessly in political and media chat. Watson is at his wittiest when exposing such sanctimonious clap trap.
There is also plenty of humour in his demolition of “managerial language” as it seeps into politics, bureaucracy, education, the arts and even AFL footy. Though I confess, if I hear a BT scream non managerial language such as “they’re cumiiiiiiing!” when a side is six goals down with ten minutes left, only to see them kick a behind, it will be too soon. Watson quotes one commentator describing a forward entry as “validation by foot.” As he drily notes, and to use jargon, that may at the end of the day in fact be correct.
Published in 2003, the book remains relevant. One might say it continues to enhance our core strategic reading outcomes and prioritise linguistic empowerment going forward, at a key input point in time, if we leverage its impact across stakeholder markets. Something like that.
July 28, 2007
I really wanted this book to be good. It is on a topic that is essential, it is written by the speech writer for Paul Keating (an ex-Australian Prime Minister) - it simply sounded like it had everything going for it.
Like anyone interested in language I hate the corporatisation of English that has been going on for well over a century now. I work in an industry where people actually say they seek 'closure' without a hint of embarrassment - and I've learnt that one can only feel sorry for them for so long. Action is needed to defend our language!
So, I started this book with the best of expectations - which proved all the worse when those expectations were shattered. The main problem with the book is structural. There are quotes placed at random throughout - now, normally I really like a good quote, but in this case it was hard to see how the quotes, in text boxes separate to the actual text, fit with what was being discussed on the page.
To make matters worse, it became hard to know when to stop reading the actual text and to read these 'asides'. So, they became incredibly distracting - so much so that they felt a bit like an annoying child prattling on about something quite tangential to the point of the text. In the end it was hard to concentrate on either the writer's point or these asides.
The writer's point isn't too different from Orwell in Politics and the English Language - in fact, Orwell did in a few pages what it takes an entire book here, and I feel Orwell did it much more successfully. So, if brevity is the soul of wit... Well, you might just want to read Orwell and not bother with this at all. The writer is even aware that this is a potential criticism of his work and even mentions this along the way - but his discussion of this point is less than convincing.
All this is a pity, as the topic is one that is incredibly important. The world we live in is a world embarrassed by convictions - unless, of course, they are the convictions of the charlatan or the advertising executive. Then it seems necessary to pretend, perhaps for politeness sake, not to notice their irrationality and blatant self-interest. The antidote to this modern malaise is a clear statement of the writer's intent, not one shrouded in pretty sounding words of little or no meaning. Such a clear statement quickly shows anyone paying the least attention whether the speaker is worth listening to in the first place or not, and hence why such clear statements are increasingly rare. This book promised to state the case for such a view - it is a pity it fell so far short of that aim.
Like anyone interested in language I hate the corporatisation of English that has been going on for well over a century now. I work in an industry where people actually say they seek 'closure' without a hint of embarrassment - and I've learnt that one can only feel sorry for them for so long. Action is needed to defend our language!
So, I started this book with the best of expectations - which proved all the worse when those expectations were shattered. The main problem with the book is structural. There are quotes placed at random throughout - now, normally I really like a good quote, but in this case it was hard to see how the quotes, in text boxes separate to the actual text, fit with what was being discussed on the page.
To make matters worse, it became hard to know when to stop reading the actual text and to read these 'asides'. So, they became incredibly distracting - so much so that they felt a bit like an annoying child prattling on about something quite tangential to the point of the text. In the end it was hard to concentrate on either the writer's point or these asides.
The writer's point isn't too different from Orwell in Politics and the English Language - in fact, Orwell did in a few pages what it takes an entire book here, and I feel Orwell did it much more successfully. So, if brevity is the soul of wit... Well, you might just want to read Orwell and not bother with this at all. The writer is even aware that this is a potential criticism of his work and even mentions this along the way - but his discussion of this point is less than convincing.
All this is a pity, as the topic is one that is incredibly important. The world we live in is a world embarrassed by convictions - unless, of course, they are the convictions of the charlatan or the advertising executive. Then it seems necessary to pretend, perhaps for politeness sake, not to notice their irrationality and blatant self-interest. The antidote to this modern malaise is a clear statement of the writer's intent, not one shrouded in pretty sounding words of little or no meaning. Such a clear statement quickly shows anyone paying the least attention whether the speaker is worth listening to in the first place or not, and hence why such clear statements are increasingly rare. This book promised to state the case for such a view - it is a pity it fell so far short of that aim.
June 19, 2012
I get it. The guy can write a good, clean sentence. One dip in the pool of his prose will carry your eye across several pages to the Ocean of English Ecstasy. You might even say he's fun to read.
For a while.
The problem is this: every page in the book says about the same thing as every other. There's no structure, no organization. Just a steady stream of lambasting the mundane babble of corporations, governments, schools, news, nonprofits. And while he does a damn good job of that, he also needs to take the plank out of his own eye and stop writing just to hear himself write.
For a while.
The problem is this: every page in the book says about the same thing as every other. There's no structure, no organization. Just a steady stream of lambasting the mundane babble of corporations, governments, schools, news, nonprofits. And while he does a damn good job of that, he also needs to take the plank out of his own eye and stop writing just to hear himself write.
December 8, 2007
I was extremely disappointed in this book. His point--that vague, wordy, and meaningless corporate speech has become the new standard for all speech--is valid. Unfortunately, that point was made in the first few pages, and the rest of the book is spent remaking the point. Rather than offering solutions for what one should do when such speech is expected (resumes, for example), he labors the point with too many examples, most of which are drawn from American politics and business.
December 21, 2009
I recently re-read this. I remembered not liking it very much for some inspecific reason but, nevertheless, picked it up as I was running for the train certain that it would enrich my knowledge of the English language and spark some thought in my almost dead brain. Unfortunately, by the half-way point the reason for my vague recollections of dislike came flooding back to me in a tsunami of regret (how's that for a mixed metaphor Don?!). Although Don makes marvellous points with wonderful language, the whining is simply unbearable. Yes, people use jargon to simplify their message. Yes, we all write very plainly in ways that clever people can choose to deliberately misinterpret. Unfortunately, however, the bulk of us write for an audience with a 5th grade education and the attention-span of a 3 year old.
One of the things I recall most clearly about the first business writing workshop I ever attended was the oft-told story of the news room at the London Mirror (I suspect the publication changes depending upon the reader) where the editor-in-cheif had posted the mantra 'remember they are only 8' over the floor for all to see.
When I am writing an email that I want upwards of 10,000 people in over 20 countries (most of whom do not speak English as their language of choice) I'm not going to launch into a soliloquy comparing legislative amendments to the tribulations of a 13th Century agrarian farmer, however much Don would like it.
I also think all of his whinging about colloquialisms and the misappropriation of certain phrases is a bit rich from someone who acknowledges that the English language is a living thing.
Although I find every reference by a real-estate agent to flats 'comprising of' certain rooms or amenities, and while I may find the persistent use of 'whereby' as a means of converting a normal sentence structure into a bizarre 3rd person fragmented mess full of dangling participles as irritating as the next reasonably educated fellow, they are all English and only time will tell whether they are idiocy or genius.
One of the things I recall most clearly about the first business writing workshop I ever attended was the oft-told story of the news room at the London Mirror (I suspect the publication changes depending upon the reader) where the editor-in-cheif had posted the mantra 'remember they are only 8' over the floor for all to see.
When I am writing an email that I want upwards of 10,000 people in over 20 countries (most of whom do not speak English as their language of choice) I'm not going to launch into a soliloquy comparing legislative amendments to the tribulations of a 13th Century agrarian farmer, however much Don would like it.
I also think all of his whinging about colloquialisms and the misappropriation of certain phrases is a bit rich from someone who acknowledges that the English language is a living thing.
Although I find every reference by a real-estate agent to flats 'comprising of' certain rooms or amenities, and while I may find the persistent use of 'whereby' as a means of converting a normal sentence structure into a bizarre 3rd person fragmented mess full of dangling participles as irritating as the next reasonably educated fellow, they are all English and only time will tell whether they are idiocy or genius.
June 4, 2008
Should be required reading for all modern writers. Do not read this however if you are already entrenched in the corporate world, it will shake your foundation too violently.
April 8, 2024
Marketing and PR has truly made everyone sound like an organization and I’m sorry for that.
January 30, 2019
Death Sentence - A Decay In Public Language by Don Watson.
Random House Publication, NSW, Australia.
Not so great contrary to my expectation hence awarding 3 stars.
Watson explores languages mainly use in cooperate world. I was expecting real life samples of speeches/ remarks and their analysis to back up his theories. There are so many quotes and sources being cited.
I am particularly impress with the analysis of the famous Mark Anthony's eulogy. Probably because I am a devotee of William Shakespeare!! I would agree that his speech is a political spin. A dog whistling kind!! The words and how Anthony groups them really stirs the populace into mutiny and rampage. Yes Watson points it out correctly '..Eloquence is no guarantee of truth. Antony's speech is one proof of that..'
(Pp85 - 88)
In a democratic country, to have a common understanding, simple and plain English is imperative. That should be the case. No need to have confused citizens with obscure and meaningless words! I always believe in that.
Thanks for reading and feel free to comment!
Random House Publication, NSW, Australia.
Not so great contrary to my expectation hence awarding 3 stars.
Watson explores languages mainly use in cooperate world. I was expecting real life samples of speeches/ remarks and their analysis to back up his theories. There are so many quotes and sources being cited.
I am particularly impress with the analysis of the famous Mark Anthony's eulogy. Probably because I am a devotee of William Shakespeare!! I would agree that his speech is a political spin. A dog whistling kind!! The words and how Anthony groups them really stirs the populace into mutiny and rampage. Yes Watson points it out correctly '..Eloquence is no guarantee of truth. Antony's speech is one proof of that..'
(Pp85 - 88)
In a democratic country, to have a common understanding, simple and plain English is imperative. That should be the case. No need to have confused citizens with obscure and meaningless words! I always believe in that.
Thanks for reading and feel free to comment!
October 23, 2022
Not me reading a linguistics book 4 days before the english language exam 👀
literally only read this to steal ideas and quotes, did not care about what he had to say and often disagreed with the points he was trying to make, but I wasn't reading his saltiness for the fun of it so I can't be too mad
literally only read this to steal ideas and quotes, did not care about what he had to say and often disagreed with the points he was trying to make, but I wasn't reading his saltiness for the fun of it so I can't be too mad
March 15, 2014
Don Watson has delivered to us a much needed text to redirect our path forward in enhancement of communication.
Just kidding.
But I did discover that I really need to clean up my language. I've fallen prey to exactly what this book is about.
Mainly, that in our world, it seems like it's:
I really enjoyed this book - Watson has a great writing style, and I found it pretty funny. I always feel like a nerd when I laugh loudly reading books like this.
I'd like everyone I know to read this. Failing that, I'll just have to change the way I speak, email, text, and write. We have to start somewhere, right?
At the very least, I'll never use the word enhance again. As Watson writes, "...that is the way with enhancements—often they don't amount to anything at all. It's just that the word enhancement has become irresistible, like ice cream or chicken pox. Enhance is the McDonald's of corporate English."
This book has helped me to appreciate the extent of my own sins in terms of language and communication.
It was saddening how much of the managerial language and jargon I understood - as if it has become a second language to me, which it nearly has.
Read this book. If you need some reasons to read it, I'll leave you with some of the pithy things Watson had to say:
But most chilling was that, again, I am presented with the phrase that haunts my dreams: In the midst of life we are in death.
(I read it for the first time in Uncle Tom's Cabin .)
Just kidding.
But I did discover that I really need to clean up my language. I've fallen prey to exactly what this book is about.
Mainly, that in our world, it seems like it's:
"...better to speak in buzzwords and cliches because there can be no argument with words that have no meaning at their core."
I really enjoyed this book - Watson has a great writing style, and I found it pretty funny. I always feel like a nerd when I laugh loudly reading books like this.
I'd like everyone I know to read this. Failing that, I'll just have to change the way I speak, email, text, and write. We have to start somewhere, right?
At the very least, I'll never use the word enhance again. As Watson writes, "...that is the way with enhancements—often they don't amount to anything at all. It's just that the word enhancement has become irresistible, like ice cream or chicken pox. Enhance is the McDonald's of corporate English."
This book has helped me to appreciate the extent of my own sins in terms of language and communication.
It was saddening how much of the managerial language and jargon I understood - as if it has become a second language to me, which it nearly has.
Read this book. If you need some reasons to read it, I'll leave you with some of the pithy things Watson had to say:
"PowerPoint, as Edward R. Tufte of Harvard says, 'allows speakers to pretend they are giving a real talk and audiences to pretend they are listening.' It is, he says, 'a prankish conspiracy against substance and thought,' and may even lead to a decline in cognitive abilities."
"The power of The Book of Common Prayer or the King James Bible lies not in its antiquity but in the conviction that the words convey. An atheist can still be moved, entertained, and enlightened by them. You can enjoy the feel of them in your mouth like a sacrament. As well as any, those works illustrate how public language should be an elevated language: it should manifest — and honor — the traditions of the culture."
"Plain writing need not be lifeless writing."
"…political practitioners are prone to believe their own bullshit."
But most chilling was that, again, I am presented with the phrase that haunts my dreams: In the midst of life we are in death.
(I read it for the first time in Uncle Tom's Cabin .)
February 25, 2012
This is the best book I've read for ages. I love it and I want to give Don Watson a hug. I work for an ad agency and I gave it to the copywriter who sits opposite me and now he too wants to hug Watson. In my dream parallel universe, I'll wake up to find Watson is doing a lecture tour of the UK and that I have tickets, and that afterwards I will get to meet him, shake his hand and hug him. Language is getting poisoned, suffocated and strangled by people who cut and paste cliches and expect others to extract sense from them. Much of the way people in the marketing departments of companies speak can be summed up as (Watson's words) 'witless, meaningless dreck'. He calls it anaesthetic language and he's so right he makes me want to high five the nearest human. Please, if you work in media, politics, education, marketing or anywhere that uses the written word to communicate, read this book. Five out of five.
May 15, 2014
I made it through two thirds of the book before I had to give up. While the premise is interesting and there is clear evidence that the author is deft with words, the book as a whole is unclear and meandering. It's as though the author was so intent on crafting sentences that the paragraphs, sections, and chapters got ignored.
I enjoyed the few examples where specific sentences were reworked and there were valid points made the dangers of management-speak and its creep toward ubiquity but the lack of structure and focus made the book unreadable.
I enjoyed the few examples where specific sentences were reworked and there were valid points made the dangers of management-speak and its creep toward ubiquity but the lack of structure and focus made the book unreadable.
November 22, 2010
Though the author beats the subject to death (and then some), his points are very valid and ever-increasing. Too much of public and corporate language is about using cliches and business-speak. I keep this book as a recommendation for friends who are trying to avoid "changing new paradigms" and "circling back on our key initiatives." The more we all use real words, the better we'll all be at talking to each other.
December 17, 2009
Like porn for pedants, but something of a pandora's box: once you've read this you'll be looking for shocking examples of 'officialese' everywhere!
February 20, 2021
Don Watson approaches this subject as an Australian and speaks mostly of superfluous and meaningless words and phrases used by those in business and politics (public language.) Yet his knowledge of all English-speaking countries is remarkable. And the cliches he cites are some of the same ones used by people on the street, which he explains as having begun in business and politics and trickled down from there.
The book was published in 2005. He quotes politicians of the time. I couldn’t help wondering what he would have to say now, some 15 years later, of more recent politicians. Watson does not reveal much about his own view of politics. Rather he writes of the words politicians use.
Before I thought to look up what was available on this subject, I pondered the idea of coming up with something myself as it is a topic that is much on my mind (too much). But I didn’t feel I could do it justice. I was glad to see that there were already books written about it.
While watching television reruns from shows of the eighties in the past few months, I have heard cliches that are still with us today. They have been in the neighborhood of 40 years, at least. I lamented that they have had to last that long. I have found that Watson points out some that I had noticed myself and that are still with us. These include ‘at the end of the day,’ ‘game plan,’ and ‘no brainer.’ The latter, to me, is an insult. If you tell someone that a thought you have come up with is a ‘no brainer,’ it seems to say that you didn’t need a brain to think of that. Why would you want to intentionally insult someone (unless you do)?
Of the use of PowerPoint, Watson says, “Bullet points and slides have an appearance of truth that is largely illusory.” He quotes Edward R. Tufte of Harvard as saying it “allows speakers to pretend they are giving a real talk and audiences to pretend that they are listening.” Watson concludes that PowerPoint does no good to the language.
The way he projected the placing of the word ‘event’ in popular songs, particularly as relating to weather, was humorous, as in ‘weather event’ or ‘rain event.’ If we had had that phenomenon a few decades earlier we’d have had “Singin’ in the Rain Event” and “Stormy Weather Event” as song titles.
One point that he doesn’t seem to make, but that has certainly occurred to me, is that the widespread practice of using these tired words and phrases day in, day out, behind the cash register and with every customer, is indicative of a lack of desire to think for oneself. I haven’t studied medical suggestions for preventing or slowing diseases such as Alzheimer’s. But it seems to me that striving to say things besides “have a good one” or “no problem” when concluding a sale would make for excellent brain exercise. Saying those phrases 50 times a day shows me that you’re not much of a thinker. And I “totally” don’t understand why well-known media personalities desire to be thought of as non-thinkers by using some themselves, such as “at the end of the day” every 10 minutes.
As other reviewers have stated, this book is not going to change many people’s speech habits. But it could well make a few people give their mode of speech some thought should they become aware of the book and have an interest in reading it.
The book was published in 2005. He quotes politicians of the time. I couldn’t help wondering what he would have to say now, some 15 years later, of more recent politicians. Watson does not reveal much about his own view of politics. Rather he writes of the words politicians use.
Before I thought to look up what was available on this subject, I pondered the idea of coming up with something myself as it is a topic that is much on my mind (too much). But I didn’t feel I could do it justice. I was glad to see that there were already books written about it.
While watching television reruns from shows of the eighties in the past few months, I have heard cliches that are still with us today. They have been in the neighborhood of 40 years, at least. I lamented that they have had to last that long. I have found that Watson points out some that I had noticed myself and that are still with us. These include ‘at the end of the day,’ ‘game plan,’ and ‘no brainer.’ The latter, to me, is an insult. If you tell someone that a thought you have come up with is a ‘no brainer,’ it seems to say that you didn’t need a brain to think of that. Why would you want to intentionally insult someone (unless you do)?
Of the use of PowerPoint, Watson says, “Bullet points and slides have an appearance of truth that is largely illusory.” He quotes Edward R. Tufte of Harvard as saying it “allows speakers to pretend they are giving a real talk and audiences to pretend that they are listening.” Watson concludes that PowerPoint does no good to the language.
The way he projected the placing of the word ‘event’ in popular songs, particularly as relating to weather, was humorous, as in ‘weather event’ or ‘rain event.’ If we had had that phenomenon a few decades earlier we’d have had “Singin’ in the Rain Event” and “Stormy Weather Event” as song titles.
One point that he doesn’t seem to make, but that has certainly occurred to me, is that the widespread practice of using these tired words and phrases day in, day out, behind the cash register and with every customer, is indicative of a lack of desire to think for oneself. I haven’t studied medical suggestions for preventing or slowing diseases such as Alzheimer’s. But it seems to me that striving to say things besides “have a good one” or “no problem” when concluding a sale would make for excellent brain exercise. Saying those phrases 50 times a day shows me that you’re not much of a thinker. And I “totally” don’t understand why well-known media personalities desire to be thought of as non-thinkers by using some themselves, such as “at the end of the day” every 10 minutes.
As other reviewers have stated, this book is not going to change many people’s speech habits. But it could well make a few people give their mode of speech some thought should they become aware of the book and have an interest in reading it.
June 30, 2017
I just discovered a book that I highly recommend to folks like me who cringe at the language of politicians, daily newspapers, radio announcers and others.
Death Sentences: How Clichés, Weasel Words, and Management-Speak Are Strangling Public Language by Don Watson. (Gotham Books: 2005.)
Here’s another significant statement:
Don Watson, who is Australian, goes on:
And he adds a glossary of words and phrases that should be banned from our language. The list includes (but is not limited to) the following:
Action/actioned/actioning, bottom line, closure, commit/committed/commitment, core, customer, deliver/deliverable, empower/empowered/empowerment, enhance (and all its forms), event, going forward, hopefully, impact, implement, input, in terms of, issue, outcome, point in time, prioritize, product, scenario, strategic in any form, and workshop.
Thank you, Don Watson.
# # #
Death Sentences: How Clichés, Weasel Words, and Management-Speak Are Strangling Public Language by Don Watson. (Gotham Books: 2005.)
If I deface a war memorial or rampage through St. Paul’s with a sledgehammer I will be locked up as a criminal or lunatic. I can expect the same treatment if I release some noxious weed or insect into the natural environment. It is right that the culture and environment should be so respected. Yet every day our leaders vandalize the language, which is the foundation, the frame, and joinery of the culture, if not its greatest glory, and there is no penalty and no way to impose one. We can only be indignant. And we should resist.
Here’s another significant statement:
Wherever demagogues and bullies went, there also went obfuscation, pomposity, and doublespeak. . . . Civilized society depends on the exercise of common sense, which depends upon our saying what we mean clearly enough for everyone of reasonable intelligence to understand. The political point follows from the general one Ben Jonson made. ‘Language springs out of the most retired and inmost parts of us, and is the image of the parent of it, the mind. No glass renders a man’s form and likeness so true as his speech.’
Democracy depends upon plain language. It depends upon common understanding. We need to feel safe in the assumption that words mean what they are commonly understood to mean. Deliberate ambiguities, slides of meaning, and obscure, incomprehensible, or meaningless words poison the democratic process by leaving people less able to make informed or rational decisions. They erode trust.” (p. 120)
Don Watson, who is Australian, goes on:
That is why we should not vote for any politician who says, for instance, there are no quick fixes more than three times a year. Punish her for banality and the contempt for us that it implies.” (p. 137)
And he adds a glossary of words and phrases that should be banned from our language. The list includes (but is not limited to) the following:
Action/actioned/actioning, bottom line, closure, commit/committed/commitment, core, customer, deliver/deliverable, empower/empowered/empowerment, enhance (and all its forms), event, going forward, hopefully, impact, implement, input, in terms of, issue, outcome, point in time, prioritize, product, scenario, strategic in any form, and workshop.
Thank you, Don Watson.
# # #
July 30, 2020
Death Sentence by Don Watson was published in 2003 and in it Watson tracks what he sees as the decay in the use of language, English in this case, in the public sphere. Watson was famously Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating's speech-writer, among other achievements, and is well qualified to write on this topic as he was the author of Keating's Redfern Speech and the Unknown Soldier speech, which are widely regarded as some of the best examples of Australian public language in recent decades.
It is not an overstatement to say that in Death Sentence, Watson rails against the decline in the use of language amongst public officials. From the start the book provides numerous examples of lazy and obscure use of language by politicians. executives and bureaucrats. This is not a reference book on how to write well but a series of observations with direct examples of the decay of public language. There are similarities to Orwell's much, much shorter essay on the same topic, Politics and the English Language.
Readers will learn to avoid some key words and phrases such as: 'commitment', 'in terms of', 'enhancement', 'outcomes' and 'closure' to (I refrained from writing 'in order to') write readable text. Watson also has nothing nice to say about the cliche and its seemingly increasing use in political and business language. This is no surprise - I don't think that there is a text on writing that would encourage the use of the cliche, except perhaps manuals on post-match interviews for sports people and coaches.
I did find that at about halfway through Death Sentence I was looking for the end. The point, it seemed to me, had been made and I had to force myself to keep reading. I was glad that I did. The final part of the book Watson shares with the reader why we should expect to read, and listen to, well written test and speeches. Well written test provides transparency essential to a free, market-based democracy. The information that we receive from the political and business leaders should be easily understood and not obscured by the language.
Death Sentence will stay on my bookshelf. Highly recommended.
It is not an overstatement to say that in Death Sentence, Watson rails against the decline in the use of language amongst public officials. From the start the book provides numerous examples of lazy and obscure use of language by politicians. executives and bureaucrats. This is not a reference book on how to write well but a series of observations with direct examples of the decay of public language. There are similarities to Orwell's much, much shorter essay on the same topic, Politics and the English Language.
Readers will learn to avoid some key words and phrases such as: 'commitment', 'in terms of', 'enhancement', 'outcomes' and 'closure' to (I refrained from writing 'in order to') write readable text. Watson also has nothing nice to say about the cliche and its seemingly increasing use in political and business language. This is no surprise - I don't think that there is a text on writing that would encourage the use of the cliche, except perhaps manuals on post-match interviews for sports people and coaches.
I did find that at about halfway through Death Sentence I was looking for the end. The point, it seemed to me, had been made and I had to force myself to keep reading. I was glad that I did. The final part of the book Watson shares with the reader why we should expect to read, and listen to, well written test and speeches. Well written test provides transparency essential to a free, market-based democracy. The information that we receive from the political and business leaders should be easily understood and not obscured by the language.
Death Sentence will stay on my bookshelf. Highly recommended.
October 18, 2017
I must confess that my heart sank when I saw that my CAE reading group book for this month was Don Watson’s Death Sentence. I had read it when it came out in 2003 and now I struggled to re-read it for our meeting. It seemed repetitive and unstructured, with just one argument repeated over again. ...
The book itself has several unnamed chapters, marked only by a blank page separating them from the previous chapter. It’s hard to work out quite how one chapter differs from the next, or if there is a theme to distinguish one chapter from the other, especially as the book goes on. The pages have a wide margin, in which are quotes from other texts: some pithy and elegant; others the type of verbal glue that he declaims against. I can’t help feeling that the book is too long: that it would have been better served in a Quarterly Essay format of a lesser length.
...
Some fourteen years on, I suspect that Watson’s howl of anger is more about the application of managerial thinking as a construct, rather than the language itself (although the two are, admittedly, inseparable).
For my review, visit:
https://residentjudge.wordpress.com/2...
The book itself has several unnamed chapters, marked only by a blank page separating them from the previous chapter. It’s hard to work out quite how one chapter differs from the next, or if there is a theme to distinguish one chapter from the other, especially as the book goes on. The pages have a wide margin, in which are quotes from other texts: some pithy and elegant; others the type of verbal glue that he declaims against. I can’t help feeling that the book is too long: that it would have been better served in a Quarterly Essay format of a lesser length.
...
Some fourteen years on, I suspect that Watson’s howl of anger is more about the application of managerial thinking as a construct, rather than the language itself (although the two are, admittedly, inseparable).
For my review, visit:
https://residentjudge.wordpress.com/2...
August 14, 2026
I did not enjoy this book at the start. I found it to be verbose and pompous, and lacking nuance. The repetition made me groan.
But after getting through the first chapter, the book grew on me as it made some insightful points. One such point:
I also got some chuckles from Don Watson pointing out the absurd. Some of my favourites:
But after getting through the first chapter, the book grew on me as it made some insightful points. One such point:
Active language incites activity. It helps to establish trust between the governors and the governed and the managers and the managed. Honesty and good intentions and deceit and incompetence are more easily recognised.
I also got some chuckles from Don Watson pointing out the absurd. Some of my favourites:
I am committed to the future of Africa: why don't I just look in the general direction of Nairobi and wave? It would mean as much.
"You teach a child to read and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test"; or "More and more of our imports come from overseas"; or "I've been misunderestimated." Or, in reach for something grand, he might say the family is where "our wings take dream."
"We must all hear the universal call to like your neighbor just like you like to be liked yourself."
January 5, 2019
Don't get me wrong - I wholeheartedly agree with Don Watson's view of how insidious, vile, and horrifying the creep of management-speak and empty cliches into both public and personal language is...but this was a somewhat disappointing book.
The book was longer than it needed to be; this would have been better suited to an essay. Instead, there were oodles of examples and quotes plugged throughout the narrative that felt like they were placed there more for padding than to advance an argument. There were three chapters, though I honestly don't know if I could clearly tell you how each of them differ from each other. Watson rambled about the same points over and over again throughout the text...I really liked the introduction, but liked the book less and less as I passed through each chapter. A shame, because his "permanent gripe" is a legitimate one.
The book was longer than it needed to be; this would have been better suited to an essay. Instead, there were oodles of examples and quotes plugged throughout the narrative that felt like they were placed there more for padding than to advance an argument. There were three chapters, though I honestly don't know if I could clearly tell you how each of them differ from each other. Watson rambled about the same points over and over again throughout the text...I really liked the introduction, but liked the book less and less as I passed through each chapter. A shame, because his "permanent gripe" is a legitimate one.
March 19, 2019
Started out very well, was engaging, amusing and very interesting however at about the two thirds mark I began getting bogged. I finished reading by skimming and still rate it a good book. Don Watson puts forward an excellent case for the death of good language in public speaking, public print media and much of today's conversation, personally I'd have enjoyed it far more in shorter format.
June 21, 2019
Hard to get through. I felt like this was much of the same throughout; it could have been twenty pages and still I would have still gained as much information. I was hoping for more of the evolution of language. This was more the author complaining about how language is used.
May 3, 2021
An enjoyable look at the ways in which the language of neoliberal managerialism has invaded all aspects of Australian public life, though some more examples or what Watson deems proper or effective English would have been helpful.
November 2, 2022
Humorous and true but repetitive. Midway through I thought "ok, ok, I got it" but I pressed on and finished. I'm glad to have read it but I think the author could have made his point in half the pages.
July 14, 2023
This book resonated with my experience of living the invasion of marketing and managerial language into education. Now I get it with my power bill. Written in 2003, its relevance has not diminished. Let's start to challenge this nonsense.
July 31, 2023
A delightful journey through the myriad ways that politicians, businesses and others are turning English to sludge.
If my copy was on a Kindle (instead of being a signed paperback) I’d have been constantly highlighting phrases or passages.
If my copy was on a Kindle (instead of being a signed paperback) I’d have been constantly highlighting phrases or passages.
May 14, 2018
An important topic but the book is hard to follow.
July 23, 2019
For anyone worried about the state of the language it's a must.
August 10, 2019
I find Don Watson's works on language to be immensely readable. This one was no exception. 3 Stars only because it could be updated.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 71 reviews