The Law of the Letter

Acronyms can reinforce or negate your message.

Phrased differently:

Acronyms
Can
Reinforce
Or
Negate
Your
Message.

Not every idea, initiative or government program requires a snappy acronym, but having one that brings positive connotations can only help your cause. Having a negative one can undermine your cause.

Which brings me to Sen. Barbara Mikulski. She’s introduced legislation that would force federal agencies through a review process, to see if they are contracting out services that could be done in-house. Rather than debate the merits of Senate Bill 924, known as the Correction of Longstanding Errors in Agencies Unsustainable Procurements Act, lets focus on Mikulski’s missed opportunity.

She wants you to vote for CLEAUP.

Okay… can anyone out there see the obvious? How hard would it have been to throw in an extra ‘N’ so you can get people to back the CLEANUP Act? Correction of Longstanding Errors in Agencies NEGOTIATING Unsustainable Procurements.

How hard was that? It took me all of 6 seconds. The psychological boost of having a name like CLEANUP is worth the time and effort to find an ‘N,’ even if it takes you an hour or brainstorming!

The acronym can be a powerful tool, because often it is the first word or concept used to introduce your proposal or identity. It’s not a replacement for explanation or persuasion, but it is a framing tool. The Coalition Reducing Airborne Pollutants might encounter resistance from people who don’t want to deal with CRAP, for example.

Framing is so powerful a rhetorical technique, and acronyms are flexible enough that you can usually get something close enough to represent what you want and earn the extra shine that you need.

If Mikulski’s bill fails, we might have a new formulation for the Law of the Letter: “For the want of an ‘N,’ a bill was lost…”