Post #1932324
2025-02-13 13:08 UTC
Replies (2)
-
@DrPen@mastodon.social 2025-02-13 13:25
@DavidBHimself True of a lot of things but more for some products and brands than others. I dont own a whirlpool, I own a washer, for example. But back in the day a 'Hoover' was more common than a vacuum cleaner. videotape - thats VHS or Betamax, or DAT so more generic.
-
@corbden@defcon.social 2025-02-13 17:31
@DavidBHimself @DrPen Language works a lot of different ways, so when trying to use language to achieve change, you have to work within the circumstances. I've intentionally used the generic coke, kleenex, etc in my writing because in the 90s, brands would actually publish in writers magazines telling us NOT to. (I still remember one: "You wouldn't XEROX a XEROX on a XEROX!" (This was long before that infamous anti-piracy ad.) In this case, I'd lean towards avoiding the brand names, because they essentially have a monopoly. When I write the word kleenex in defiance of the trademark, it's because the box I have next to me is definitely a generic. This is true for most people, who rarely are going to have exactly kleenex™ brand tissues. Not so with spreadsheets, slidedecks, or teleconf brands, where all we do is reinforce the fact that they own us and we lack much of a choice. But we can choose what we call them and remind folks, even if subconsciously, that there are alternatives.