tfp11

"THE FINE PRINT"

The musings of Michael Schrader

   A SPADE ISN’T ALWAYS A SPADE, SOMETIMES IT’S A SHOVEL
(Written 1994; previously unpublished. Posted in toto with Preface and Epilogue 23 July 2001)

PREFACE -- There is an old joke about some construction workers working next to a convent. The Mother Superior talks to the foreman about the workers’ language. “Sister”, the foreman explains, “my men are simple men, and call a spade a spade.” “That’s not the problem”, explained the nun. “It’s when they call it a ******* shovel!!”

A full-page write-up for a subdivision appeared in the Farmington Press-Leader. This ad was loaded with euphemisms, and made just this ordinary average subdivision sound like a new utopia. To top it off, the ad was written in such a way as to read like a news article.

The reason this column was never published should be pretty obvious--you don’t bite the hand that feeds you. And, you don’t question your own ethics and good taste by allowing the ad to be published to begin with.

        It used to be that a person could distinguish between advertisements and news. Unfortunately, this is no longer the case. With the advent of infomercials and cleverly written ads, what seems like news really isn't. Advertisements have been disguised so well it is difficult to identify them. Difficult, but not impossible.
       Unlike news articles, advertisements have a very specific topic or theme, which is repeated numerous times throughout the advertisement. Second, advertisements are heavy on euphemism, that is phrases or words that make things seem better than what they really are. "Household engineer", for example, is a euphemism for "housewife."    "Landfill" is a euphemism for "dump." "Sandwich artist" is a euphemism for "some guy who makes sub sandwiches."
       The only problem with euphemisms is they can distort reality too much, so much as to be lies. This is where the trouble begins. For example, several of the "infomercial" producers have been fined by the FCC for distorting the truth in violation of the "truth in advertising laws".   After all, it one thing to put the best possible spin on your product; its another to flat out lie.
       The reason why I mention this is the recent "advertisement" for Spring Brook Park subdivision here in Farmington. Printed in the Business Section of this paper, at first glance it looks like a news item. Upon reading the "news," however, it is obvious it is an advertisement. For example, the phrase "Spring Brook" is used a half-dozen times, and the "news item" is full of euphemism.    Most disturbing about this particular ad, however, is that some of its statements could be interpreted by some as boldface lies.
       For example, the very first sentence states "potential home builders hoping to find prime sites within the city of Farmington have found lots essentially non-existent." Oh really? Within a one-mile radius of the intersection of Hillsboro & Wallace Roads are three subdivisions with lots available (with a fourth having been approved), all within the city of Farmington.
       "Spring Brook LLC has taken great care to preserve the land's ... rich farm heritage."
       I don't think I quite follow this logic. The only way to preserve the farm heritage is to maintain it as a farm, not by building houses. Unless, of course, corn and soybeans will be planted in the yards instead of grass.
       "...several common areas will be meticulously landscaped for homeowners' enjoyment," i.e. homeowners children will have a couple of neat creeks to play in. Don't be fooled; "common ground" is a euphemism for stormwater detention ponds and creeks.
         "Spring Brook will have a bicycle path linking the subdivision to a nearby elementary school ... providing recreation for homeowners." Makes you think of the KATY trail, doesn't it? This "bicycle path" is actually a 4' wide sidewalk between two houses. (Some recreational opportunity.)
       "Wood-accented bridges will dot the community, allowing scenic crossings over a brook..."
       Hold it. Enough is enough. From what I've heard about the development at city council meetings, the "brook" is nothing more than a drainage ditch, and the bridges are culverts. Let's call a spade a spade, shall we? This development is nothing more than a subdivision. People like subdivisions, so what's wrong with being a subdivision? Future owners will be happier if they know the truth, rather than be deceived. If homeowners are happy, the city will be happy, and the developer will be happy. I love happy endings, don't you?

EPILOGUE -- Although this column was never published, it remains among my favorite columns. I would tackle the issue of euphemisms again in the future.