Re: Marketing vs. Engineering

Subject: Re: Marketing vs. Engineering
From: Mona Albano <Mona -dot- Albano -at- PROMIS -dot- COM>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 14:21:15 -0600

Mike Wing <mjwing -at- INGR -dot- COM> said:

Most Marketing groups with whom I have associated like a lot of
graphics; lengthy, flowery introductory text; lists; and so forth. They
also like two manuals; a thin one that they could hand out at trade
shows and send as "freebies:, and a nice, thick, fluffy one they could
plop down on the customer's briefcase. They also like writers to
"sensationalize" what they write. How many more times do we have to use
trite phrases like "leading edge", "state-of-the-art", "top-down", "low
maintenance", and so forth. When left under too-much Marketing
influence, an exorbitant amount of time is spent on wording the
trademarks section, positioning graphics, and making sure the company
name appears 20 times per page (and bold face).

I was warned that manuals with even a little ["new, improved"] puffery
in the intro could be re-classified from technical to advertising, with
repercussions on tax write-offs and customs duties.
Any comments?

-- Mona Albano
mona -dot- albano -at- promis -dot- com

"Accordians don't play 'Lady of Spain.' People do."

TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
Search the archives at or search and
browse the archives at

Previous by Author: Re: Do techies really know what other techies need? (#718616)
Next by Author: Re: Is use of "(s)" allowed?
Previous by Thread: FW: Marketing vs. Engineering
Next by Thread: Job Posting: Bethesda, MD

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads