Writing: Can You Criticize without Being Arrogant?
One of the better communications speakers and commentators, Steve Crescenzo, defends a recent rant, saying that he doesn’t know how he can dish out his C.R.A.P. awards without appearing arrogant.
A recent column of his at Ragan.com takes the hammer to a newsletter article by a non-profit group that works with people with special needs.
Accused by readers of being arrogant, insensitive, racist and (gasp) punctuationally challenged, he defends himself in the comments, saying:
"First, to those who say I sound arrogant. The whole premise of the C.R.A.P. Awards is to find the worst examples of corporate communication out there, and skewer them. That was my assignment, and it’s been working for more than three years now.
"But if there’s a way to do that WITHOUT sounding arrogant, I’d like to hear about it."
Actually, Steve, there is a way to criticize people’s work without sounding arrogant. It’s called constructive criticism, and it involves thinking about things from the point of view of the person whose work you’re skewering.
If readers, turn the tables on you and criticize your writing, maybe they’re right.
Your C.R.A.P. column, ripping a new one for someone who’s probably an overworked, underpaid employee of a charity, makes you come off like a bully. Based on your latest blog post about all the consulting/speaking work you’ve done in the past two months, I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say you probably grossed more in those two months than the newsletter editor makes in a whole year. They probably don’t have the budget to attend one of your corporate writing workshops.
So when you let loose on that newsletter editor with the same blunt instrument you use when critiquing someone at a Fortune 500 company, it sounds a lot like the guy at the wedding reception who, during the toast to the bride, calls her a slut.
The problem with your piece isn’t that it makes you sound arrogant. The problem is that it isn’t funny, and your advice for the newsletter article wouldn’t serve its readers any better. (Did I mention the song lyrics to the tune of Where Have all the Flowers Gone? are pretty lame, too?)
I’m with you when you reacted defensively to the complaint that you didn’t put your punctuation on the correct side of your quotation marks. But the rest of your rebuttals to your critics sound hollow to me.
Instead of viewing the criticism as an attack, why not learn from it? How about a simple response along the lines of:
"Yeah, I was in a hurry writing that one, and it came off a bit nastier than I intended. Sorry about that. Sometimes humor misses the mark a bit."
You take a lot of chances in your writing, and I respect you for that. I’d rather read one of your lesser efforts than many of the laboriously-crafted tomes earnestly written by others urging me to elevate my professionalism.
Writing the occasional dud is nothing unusual. Given your style, it’s inevitable that every once in a while you’ll push the humor so hard that it doesn’t work.
No big deal. Just don’t act like anyone who calls you on it is full of C.R.A.P.
Tags: steve crescenzo, ragan, criticism, critique, defensiveness, business, communications, newsletters, editing
Related Stories
POSTED IN: Audiences, Communication Tactics, Humor, Social Media, Writing
3 opinions for Writing: Can You Criticize without Being Arrogant?
Steve Crescenzo
Nov 24, 2007 at 1:18 pm
Hey, Eric:
You’re certainly right . . . you can’t hit it out of the park all the time. I’ve been writing the CRAP Awards for five years now, and have some great successes and some great failures. Like any other columnist or blogger, I suppose.
But here’s the thing about that column. Forget about this one . . . it wasn’t one of the best, for sure.
The tricky part of the column is that it is not SUPPOSED to be constructive criticism. My mandate from the publishers at Ragan were to do a “darts and laurels” type of column, without the laurels.
I write thousands of words for Ragan every month—columns, case studies, articles, interviews, etc.
In 99 percent of them, I’m highlighting someone who has done something right.
The CRAP (Corporate Rhetoric Awards Program) are something else entirely. They’re supposed to poke fun at the worst of the worst in corporate communication. The silly photos and horrible quotes and terrible headlines.
It’s not supposed to be constructive criticism. People are supposed to get a laugh (if possible) and learn what NOT to do.
And 90 percent of the time, the formula works. I get more mail, and more compliments, on the CRAP columns than on everything else I write put together.
Sure, it can come across as mean spirited. As someone who speaks to hundreds of communicators every year, I understand they’re underpaid, overworked, and handcuffed by red tape.
But, while that may prevent you from doing great or even good communication . . . it’s no excuse for churning out the really, really lousy stuff. And that’s what the CRAP Awards makes fun of, most of the time.
Anyway, thanks for letting me say my piece. I really enjoy your blog.
Steve C.
Eric Eggertson
Nov 24, 2007 at 5:56 pm
Thanks for the note. (Aw, you didn’t rise to my bait with the slutty bride comment!)
Given the amount of crap out there, I have no problem with the premise of the C.R.A.P. awards. We need less B.S. and more clear communication.
Surya
Nov 24, 2007 at 6:17 pm
It’s other people that will see us arrogant, not ourself. So we need to know what other people categories for arrogant. Then we need a self control whether we make criticize arrogant or not depend on that cateogories.
Just my opinion :)
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: