Our own Cory Doctorow on how sometimes a word can go viral.

Udhay


Dirty words are politically potent (permalink
<https://pluralistic.net/2024/10/14/pearl-clutching/#this-toilet-has-no-central-nervous-system>
)


<snip>


But every now and again, you get a word that just *kills*. That brings me
to "enshittification," a word I coined in 2022:


https://pluralistic.net/2022/11/28/enshittification/#relentless-payola


"Enshittification" took root in my hindbrain, rolling around and around,
agglomerating lots of different thoughts and critiques I'd been making for
years, crystallizing them into a coherent thesis:


https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/#hey-guys


This kind of spontaneous crystallization is the dividend of doing lots of
work in public, trying to take every half-formed thought and pin it down in
public writing, something I've been doing for decades:



https://pluralistic.net/2021/05/09/the-memex-method/

After those first couple articles, "enshittification" raced around the
internet. There's two reasons for this: first, "enshittification" is a
naughty word that's fun to say. Journalists love getting to put "shit" in
their copy:


https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/15/crosswords/linguistics-word-of-the-year.html


Radio journalists love to tweak the FCC with cheekily bleeped syllables in
slightly dirty compound words:


https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/otm/projects/enshitification


And nothing enlivens an academic's day like getting to use a word like
"enshittification" in a journal article (doubtless this also amuses the
editors, peer-reviewers, copyeditors, typesetters, etc):


https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&amp;as_sdt=0%2C5&amp;q=enshittification&amp;btnG=&amp;oq=ensh

That was where I started, too! The first time I used "enshittification" was
in a throwaway bad-tempered rant about the decay of Tripadvisor into utter
uselessness, which drew a small chorus of appreciative chuckles about the
word:


https://twitter.com/doctorow/status/1550457808222552065


The word rattled around my mind for five months before attaching itself to
my detailed theory of platform decay. But it was that detailed critique,
*coupled* with a minor license to swear, that gave "enshittification" a
life of its own. How do I know that the theory was as important as the
swearing? Because the small wave of amusement that followed my first use of
"enshittification" petered out in less than a day. It was only when I added
the theory that the word took hold.


Likewise: how do I know that the theory *needed* to be blended with
swearing to break out of the esoteric realm of tech policy debates (which
the public had roundly ignored for more than two decades)? Well, because *I
spent two decades* writing about this stuff without making anything like
the dents that appeared once I added an Anglo-Saxon monosyllable to that
critique.


Adding "enshittification" to the critique got me more column inches, a
longer hearing, a more vibrant debate, than *anything* else I'd tried.
First, *Wired* availed itself of the Creative Commons license on my second
long-form article on the subject and reprinted it as a 4,200-word feature.
I've been writing for Wired for more than *thirty years* and this is by
*far* the longest thing I've published with them – a big, roomy, discursive
piece that was run *verbatim*, with every one of my cherished darlings
unmurdered.


That gave the word – and the whole critique, with all its spiky corners – a
global airing, leading to more pickup and discussion. Eventually, the
American Dialect Society named it their "Word of the Year" (and their "Tech
Word of the Year"):


https://americandialect.org/2023-word-of-the-year-is-enshittification/


"Enshittification" turns out to be catnip for language nerds:

https://becauselanguage.com/90-enpoopification/#transcript-60

I've been dragged into (good natured) fights over the German, Spanish,
French and Italian translations for the term. When I taped an NPR show
before a live audience with ASL interpretation, I got to watch a Deaf fan
politely inform the interpreter that she didn't need to finger-spell
"enshittification," because it had already been given an ASL sign by the US
Deaf community:


https://maximumfun.org/episodes/go-fact-yourself/ep-158-aida-rodriguez-cory-doctorow/


I gave a speech about enshittification in Berlin and published the
transcript:


https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/30/go-nuts-meine-kerle/#ich-bin-ein-bratapfel


Which prompted the rock-ribbed *Financial Times* to get in touch with me
and publish the speech – again, nearly verbatim – as a whopping 6,400 word
feature in their weekend magazine:


https://www.ft.com/content/6fb1602d-a08b-4a8c-bac0-047b7d64aba5


Though they could have had it for free (just as *Wired* had), they insisted
on paying me (very well, as it happens!), as did *De Zeit*:


https://www.zeit.de/digital/internet/2024-03/plattformen-facebook-google-internet-cory-doctorow


This was the *start* of the rise of enshittification. The word is spreading
farther than ever, in ways that I have nothing to do with, along with the
critique I hung on it. In other words, the bit of string that tech policy
wonks have been pushing on for a quarter of a century is actually starting
to move, and it's actually accelerating.


Despite this (or more likely because of it), there's a growing chorus of
"concerned" people who say they like the critique but fret that it is being
held back because you can't use it "at church or when talking to K-12
students" (my favorite variant: "I couldn't say this at a NATO
conference"). I leave it up to you whether you use the word with your K-12
students, NATO generals, or fellow parishoners (though I assure you that
all three groups are conversant with the dirty little word at the root of
my coinage). If you don't want to use "enshittification," you can coin your
own word – or just use one of the dozens of words that failed to gain
public attention over the past 25 years (might I suggest "platform decay?").


What's so funny about all this pearl-clutching is that it comes from people
who universally profess to have the intestinal fortitude to hear the word
"enshittification" without experiencing psychological trauma, but worry
that *other* people might not be so strong-minded. They continue to say
this even as the most conservative officials in the most staid of exalted
forums use the word without a hint of embarrassment, much less apology:


https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/chairman-of-irish-social-media-regulator-says-europe-should-not-be-seduced-by-mario-draghis-claims/a526530600.html


I mean, I'm giving a speech on enshittification next month at a conference
where I'm opening for the Secretary General of the United Nations:

https://icanewdelhi2024.coop/welcome/pages/Programme

After spending half my life trying to get stuff like this into the
discourse, I've developed some hard-won, informed views on how ideas
succeed:

First: the minor obscenity is a feature, not a bug. The marriage of
something long and serious to something short and funny is a happy one that
makes both the word and the ideas better off than they'd be on their own.
As Lenny Bruce wrote in his canonical work in the subject, the aptly named *How
to Talk Dirty and Influence People*:

*I want to help you if you have a dirty-word problem. There are none, and
I'll spell it out logically to you.*

*Here is a toilet. Specifically-that's all we're concerned with,
specifics-if I can tell you a dirty toilet joke, we must have a dirty
toilet. That's what we're all talking about, a toilet. If we take this
toilet and boil it and it's clean, I can never tell you specifically a
dirty toilet joke about this toilet. I can tell you a dirty toilet joke in
the Milner Hotel, or something like that, but this toilet is a clean toilet
now. Obscenity is a human manifestation. This toilet has no central nervous
system, no level of consciousness. It is not aware; it is a dumb toilet; it
cannot be obscene; it's impossible. If it could be obscene, it could be
cranky, it could be a Communist toilet, a traitorous toilet. It can do none
of these things. This is a dirty toilet here.*

*Nobody can offend you by telling a dirty toilet story. They can offend you
because it's trite; you've heard it many, many times.*

https://www.dacapopress.com/titles/lenny-bruce/how-to-talk-dirty-and-influence-people/9780306825309/

Second: the fact that a neologism is sometimes decoupled from its
theoretical underpinnings and is used colloquially is a *feature*, not a
bug. Many people apply the term "enshittification" very loosely indeed, to
mean "something that is bad," without bothering to learn – or apply – the
theoretical framework. *This is good*. This is what it means for a term to
enter the lexicon: it takes on a life of its own. If 10,000,000 people use
"enshittification" loosely and inspire 10% of their number to look up the
longer, more theoretical work I've done on it, that is *one million
normies* who
have been sucked into a discourse that used to live exclusively in the
world of the most wonkish and obscure practitioners. The only way to
maintain a precise, theoretically grounded use of a term is to confine its
usage to a small group of largely irrelevant insiders. Policing the use of
"enshittification" is worse than a self-limiting move – it would be a
self-inflicted wound. As I said in that Berlin speech:

*Enshittification names the problem and proposes a solution. It's not just
a way to say 'things are getting worse' (though of course, it's fine with
me if you want to use it that way. It's an English word. We don't have **der
Rat für englische Rechtschreibung**. English is a free for all. Go
nuts, **meine
Kerle**).*

Finally: "coinage" is both more – and less – than thinking of the word.
After the American Dialect Society gave honors to "enshittification," a few
people slid into my mentions with citations to "enshittification" that
preceded my usage. I find this completely unsurprising, because English is
such a slippery and playful tongue, because English speakers love to swear,
and because infixing is such a fun way to swear (e.g.
"unfuckingbelievable"). But of course, *I* hadn't encountered any of those
other usages before I came up with the word independently, nor had any of
those other usages spread appreciably beyond the speaker (it appears that
each of the handful of predecessors to my usage represents an act of
independent coinage).

If "coinage" was just a matter of thinking up the word, you could write a
small python script that infixed the word "shit" into every syllable of
every word in the OED, publish the resulting text file, and declare
priority over all subsequent inventive swearers.

On the one hand, coinage takes place when the coiner a) independently
invents a word; and b) creates the context for that word that causes it to
escape from the coiner's immediate milieu and into the wider world.

But on the other hand – and far more importantly – the fact that a
successful coinage *requires* popular uptake by people unknown to the
coiner means that the coiner only ever plays a small role in the coinage.
Yes, there would be no popularization without the coinage – but *there
would also be no coinage without the popularization.* Words belong to
groups of speakers, not individuals. Language is a cultural phenomenon, not
an individual one.

Which is rather the point, isn't it? After a quarter of a century of being
part of a community that fought tirelessly to get a serious and widespread
consideration of tech policy underway, we're closer than ever, thanks, in
part, to "enshittification." If someone else independently used that word
before me, if some people use the word loosely, if the word makes some
people uncomfortable, that's fine, *provided* that the word is doing what I
want it to do, what I've devoted my life to doing.

The point of coining words isn't the pilkunnussija's obsession with precise
usage, nor the petty glory of being known as a coiner, nor ensuring that
NATO generals' virgin ears are protected from the word "shit" – a word
that, incidentally, is also the root of "science":


https://www.arrantpedantry.com/2019/01/24/science-and-shit/


Isn't language fun?



-- 

((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
-- 
Silklist mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.panix.com/listinfo.cgi/silklist

Reply via email to