This article is more than 1 year old

Proles warm to 'groupthink'

Doubleplusungood

...our beloved readers have decided to reprieve the word "groupthink", as also featured in last week's letters:

"It's not a word, it's a hideous mutant spawned by people who want to appear intelligent when in fact they are trying to hide the fact that they have no idea what they're talking about. It does not exist."

Harsh woords indeed. Who can settle this debate? Step foward: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+groupthink

Coined by sociologist William H. Whyte in 1952. I'd say it looks like a perfectly cromulent word to me..

Gareth


Re "groupthink" - a quick search shows it in three dictionaries: Meriam-Webster, American Heritage Dictionary and Wordnet. The latter defines it as:

"decision making by a group (especially in a manner that discourages creativity or individual responsibility)"

It sounds Orwellian rather than Web 2.0 wordwooze to me.

Martin


Hello :)

Given that 'groupthink' was apparently coined with reference to, the seminal, 1984 by George Orwell though more specifically to Newspeak from that book and given the desirability of Newspeak, and the world it was used in generally, I have to vote against it being used - that and it being a horrible sounding and looking word, what's wrong with the term "conformist thinking"? I know you're journalists and you've a tone and style of language to adhere to but I'm sure you can squeeze in a few niceties now and again! ;)

Just my tu'pence worth,

J *<:@)


God gracious (or this being the Internet: ZOMG LOL!)

Keep the effing 'groupthink' already. Do NOT replace it by 'proximity-induced conformity behaviour' or something like that. It is a word. It is not a mutant. It is not crimethink to use 'groupthink'.

Also, a quick jump to the Merriam-Webster Online Dico says it does, in fact, exist.

Main Entry: group·think Pronunciation: 'grüp-"thi[ng]k Function: noun Etymology: 1 group + -think (as in doublethink) : a pattern of thought characterized by self-deception, forced manufacture of consent, and conformity to group values and ethics

And there you have it.

-- David


p>>> In the article about junk science and the wisdom of chimps by Andrew >> Orlowski, he uses the alleged word 'groupthink'...What's your excuse? >> >> I believe that this should immediately be put to a vote of readers of the >> legendary Reg and let their sensibilities decide. >> > Well, what do you think?

I think I'm God damned sick and tired of seeing the Reg asking its readers what words it should use. The best writers at the most worthwhile tech rag on the planet are not required to satisfy the sensibilities of every obsessive English purist with his balls in a twist!

That, and it worries me -- if you need an example of what happens when you let your audience dictate too much of your show, just go have a long look at Wikipedia. Then decide whether you want the good ship Register to be steered by the load of babbling idiots tucked up in the hold who've got no first idea how to run a newspaper, or by her manifestly competent captain and crew -- I think you can guess which side I come down on.

-- Aaron


I say a stern NO to Mr. Steve Pettifer, who who wote: "In the article about junk science and the wisdom of chimps by Andrew Orlowski, he uses the alleged word 'groupthink', " and insists that the word be expunged from El Reg's lexicon.

First off - "alleged word"? If a sequence of letters conveys meaning then, as far as I'm concerned, it's a word, with no allegedly about it! (Of course, to a programmer, I suppose that any arbitrary-length unit of 0s and 1s can count as a "word" and letters, per se may not be strictly necessary, but you get the idea...)

Secondly, I note from Encyclopedia Brittanica Online: http://www.britannica.com/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=groupthink&query=groupthink

?Main Entry: group·think Pronunciation: 'grüp-"thi[ng]k Function: noun Etymology: 1group + -think (as in doublethink) : a pattern of thought characterized by self-deception, forced manufacture of consent, and conformity to group values and ethics"

Well! I mean! There it is, innit?

In a larger sense, I look forward to reading The Register's charmingly chaotic version of English - Simply put, when I want to read the New York Times' generally dry prose, I read the Times. When I want to read Wired's version of English... well, actually, I never DO want to read Wired, so that may not be the best example... But when I want to read The Register's version of English I read The Register. Those people who would have you drop the "mobe"s and "groupthink"s from your stories are taking the seasoning from them, eventually to leave them bland and flavorless fare.

I say, "No more!" Stop the madness! You've already dropped two perfectly good abbreviated words from your palette of (if you will) Text-ures; don't give in to the lexically-intolerant OneCares and Pettifers of the world! The hate us because of our linguistic freedoms! WE CAN'T LET THE TERRORISTS WIN!!

Yours in lexicological solidarity;

Mike Moyle

That's decided then: groupthink will continue to form a part of El Reg's "charmingly chaotic version of English". There are, however, other alleged linguistic outrages which have recently caught the eye of purists. Read on...


Ususally i dont really give a crap about these sort of things, and i ordinarily wouldnt write to point out mistakes in a comical artical. But i couldnt help but notice your complete mis-use of the word "hoover". That is a trademark name like "dyson" and therefore shouldnt be used in the same context as a "dyson". "Vacum cleaner" is the generic term. I only write this because my girlfriend works for dyson in malmesbury and i think she has brain washed me to do this. Im sorry.

Regards

Thom Wickham

We're going to nip this one in the bud. Hoover is also a generic term, and the average Brit gives not a tinker's cuss whether it's a trademark or not. The Hoover company and Dyson are, of course, perfectly at liberty to take the appropriate legal action against my dear old mum when she refers to a Dyson as "the hoover" without regard for the possible consequences.


Another complaint now, albeit with a rather more legitimate grievance:

The article 'Homebrew chemical terror bombs, hype or horror?' was quite good reading, until it unleashed it's own attack on civilised society - 'weaponising' and 'repurposing' in almost the same sentence. The author even had the cheek to make 'weaponising' sound English (as in Queen's, not US) by use of an ess instead of a zed. I could read no more of the offending article.

Steve

Agreed. This one has cropped up before, as in "the weaponization of space". Hideous and shocking, although we can never be entirely certain whether John Lettice is having a bit of fun with the lingo. If not, he'll be sent to room 101 for a bit of light deamericanismization.


Abbrevs, eh? Don't you just hate 'em?

Please! Since when is "vuln" a word? The headline that used it "Firefox vuln fails to imperil World Cup" had plenty of room to use the complete word. I understand that newspapers/online news sites have their own style sheets, but this is ridiculous.

Jeanne

There is a practical explanation for this one: long words in headlines tend to break out of the Reg's column format, creating browser pandemonium. Hence "vuln" and "vulns", neither of which, btw, is the pet name for Doctor Phibes' deliciously-named Vulnavia.


And finally, get yer laughing gear round this:

Hi I like your coverage of IT and related technologies and I tend to read the Reg at work. However, your use of rude language is tripping off our firewall/filtering software and I am likely to be pulled up.

Could you please keep the language in your articles to a civilised level so that we can read the Reg at work.

Thanks.

Harry

The reply to this request is, sadly, not fit for publication in a family periodical such as El Reg. Doubtless we'll be back Friday with more linguistic quibbles, and in the meantime please refrain from indulging in excessive pedantisization of our content. Thank you.®

More about

TIP US OFF

Send us news


Other stories you might like