Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the minimalistix domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home3/lwbean/public_html/wordsonpageblog.com/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114

Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the minimalistix domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home3/lwbean/public_html/wordsonpageblog.com/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6114
Free Advice Friday: The Words that Spell Doom to Your Freelance Writing Career – Words on the Page

Words on the Page

a freelance writing resource.

Free Advice Friday: The Words that Spell Doom to Your Freelance Writing Career

What I’m listening to: Ghost in the Machine by Our Last Night

“Terms are terms. They aren’t good or bad until we add context.”

That’s the argument I received after objecting to someone’s use of the term “liberal snowflakes” to describe my Facebook video of the recent snowstorm. It seems I made it political by interpreting it wrong. At least that’s what I was told.

Really. Weak. Argument.

Also an argument that holds no water. While the friend was trying to inject what he called “non-political” levity into the conversation, he did the opposite. It was a weather post. He managed, maybe inadvertently, to make it about politics and choosing sides. I didn’t bother to address the obvious point, which was that the “term” he was arguing was just a term — liberal snowflakes — was coined as a derogatory statement. It’s never been anything else but a politically charged term.

It’s why I choose not to argue politics online. I may “like” a tweet, agree with a Facebook argument, but it’s rare that I’ll speak my opinion online. Why? Because no one is listening. My two cents would be heaped onto the pile of he said/she said, making that pile we eventually have to dig out from under that much higher.

Another reason I won’t share my politics online: my clients are watching.

I write for a Conservative With a Capital C industry. My views are not always in line with those of my clients. And you know what? It doesn’t matter. I don’t write about politics. I write about their businesses. I find common ground in what they’re doing for others — maybe just via their products or services — and I help them promote that.

Because again, what either of us believes politically doesn’t matter. It. Doesn’t. Fucking. Matter.

If they asked me to promote their political agenda, that would be a no. I won’t enter into futile political debates, either for or against my own ideals. It’s my boundary.

The incident got me thinking about how powerful our words can be, and not always in a positive way. We justify what we’ve done on a project, or we respond when a client is unhappy or laying out sixteen bad excuses for not paying the invoice. But how  we address clients could be getting us into some hot water.

Let’s look at an example:

Marcia’s client Bill has asked her for a project revision. Only problem is Bill, who hasn’t hired a freelancer before, is now telling Marcia “I’ve changed my mind. I don’t want an article on the benefits of soy farming. Let’s make it about how people can sell their soybeans to wholesalers.”

Ah, but Marcia knows her business and has a contract with the original project terms spelled out. Bill is asking for a change in the scope, which means he’s just asked for a new project. Here’s how Marcia brings it up:

Bill,

You need to look at the original contract. You agreed, in writing, to the project. You can’t just change it now. If you do, I’ll be forced to charge you for a new project, and you’ll have to pay me for the original project. I’ll send the invoice over for the first project, and you have 15 days to pay it. I won’t start on the second project until you sign the attached agreement and pay the first invoice.

Marcia

Marcia, Marcia, Marcia… (pun intended)

Where did Marcia go wrong?

Let’s look at it again, this time with Marcia’s inflammatory terms highlighted:

You need to look at the original contract. You agreed, in writing, to the project. You can’t just change it now. If you do, I’ll be forced to charge you for a new project, and you’ll have to pay me for the original project. I’ll send the invoice over for the first project, and you have 15 days to pay it. I won’t start on the second project until you sign the attached agreement and pay the first invoice.

Ouch. You can almost hear her jabbing her finger into his chest, can’t you? Telling anyone what they must do, need to do, or have to do is the first ingredient for an all-out battle. Also, the word “just” in this case is particularly like a finger in a fresh wound. Marcia has forgotten one thing — this is Bill’s project, and he does have a say in the end product.

So let’s see if Marcia can remove all the emotionally charged language and get to the point:

Hi Bill,

Thanks for letting me know you’d like to try a different approach. Happy to do that. Just wanted to point out that the original contract terms do specify that the project we’ve completed is the one we agreed to. Because the project scope has changed, we will need a new contract for this new project. If the project parameters are expected to be the same as the last project, I can quote you the same rate for this project.

I have attached the invoice for the first project as well as the new agreement. As soon as you sign and send back the new agreement, I’ll get to work.

Best,

Marcia

Will Bill push back on Marcia? Maybe. But Marcia has cordially and professionally addressed the main issue — the project described is not the one Bill is now asking for.

Whenever writing a sensitive email or post, particularly when you’re upset or angry, let it sit before sending it. Reread it, and in your mind, replace the intended recipient with someone you know and respect. Would you write to your favorite editor or a terrific client that way?

Before you send it, remove the inflammatory words. Those would include:

  • outraged
  • sick and tired
  • never
  • can’t
  • pointless
  • don’t/won’t
  • only/just

In truth, nearly any word could come across as you being combative if you take on a tone of challenge, defense, or indignation. Take care when writing or responding in any situation where you have to contradict or correct a client.

Also, be careful how you phrase things. I received a note recently from someone who agreed to a request, then said this: “I will then need to see (something from me)…” So my request was met with a rather terse demand. Since I had sent my original request with that very condition included, there was no need for it, and it left me feeling a bit ordered to obey. Never a good impression to leave.

There are so many ways to rephrase anything to make it come across in a less challenging, more congenial way. Why take the tough-guy approach when it could cost you business?

Writers, what examples of emotionally charged language have you seen? 
Has a client ever sent you an email or left a voice message that required mine detectors to navigate? How did you manage it?

 

4 responses to “Free Advice Friday: The Words that Spell Doom to Your Freelance Writing Career”

  1. Paula Hendrickson Avatar
    Paula Hendrickson

    I see lot of that type of language in complaint letters, and that’s a good way to ensure your complaint is not taken seriously – or resolved.

    The industry I work in the most often is the opposite extreme. In fact, today I pitched an editor a story about a director who started a superPAC to produce free political videos for progressive candidates in “flippable” districts. My editor replied, “I like it!” (It would be for an issue she hasn’t thought of assigning for yet, but it sounds promising!)

    1. lwidmer Avatar
      lwidmer

      Exactly that, Paula. No one hears the inflammatory language. Stick to the facts, be cordial, and don’t fight.

  2. Devon Ellington Avatar
    Devon Ellington

    I think it goes back to listening. Maybe it’s because I spent so many years in theatre/film/radio, but I like to HEAR something before I send it/publish it. When a client changes direction, I may do a “venting” draft for myself, to clarify why I’m angry. Then I’ll read it aloud. Then I’ll walk away. Then I’ll work on a more professional-sounding draft –okay, drafts. I’ll read them out loud, too.

    Far too often, we skim — both with eyes and ears. We don’t really LISTEN to what the other party says. We’re jumping ahead on an assumption of a buzz or trigger word to what we THINK they meant and framing our reactive response.

    Granted, with some, it’s like talking to wallpaper, because they just will never get it. So you finish your contract, move on, and don’t work with them again. But I find that taking the extra time to listen, to look for subtext, often helps me in phrasing a professional response that addresses the issue.

    1. lwidmer Avatar
      lwidmer

      Oh, you are so right, Devon! We do skim. Listening is an art, and far too few of us practice it. It’s true — most often, clients are telling us what they want. We’re simply not listening closely.

      I like the idea of venting privately on paper. I’ve done it a few times with personal issues (divorce teaches you how to actively disengage!), but I never thought to apply it to business issues. Thank you for that!