Hacker News Reader

Comment by systemvoltage | Hacker News Reader

There is one particular corporate leader who speaks their mind and has made a tremendous impact on the world. So, it's not clear if it has anything to do with polished big-corp language.

I'd rather listen to someone who is straightforward than Sundar Pichai speaking entirely in corporate-speak while saying absolutely nothing of value or substance. Completely uninspiring.

All corporate speak is rather an invention of the 80's and 90's. Listen to corporate leaders from any other time before that.

View on HN

Why is one thing a corporate persona and the other "speaking their mind"? I think most CEOs are good at cultivating a personal brand that speaks to the people they want to be reaching out to.

Musk is equally if not more pompous with his nuggets of wisdom, and offers no value or substance either.

Can't deny that Musk is an incredibly successful man, but if it's the choice between Sundar Pichai's corporate speech and someone who attacks a rescue expert as "pedo guy" because his ego is hurt, I'd rather work for Pichai.

I mean, if we can excuse Musk's behavior as "So what? His companies have been incredibly successful," then, fine, but why can't we say the same for other CEOs? Other CEOs at least have a good sense of keeping their personal feuds out of twitter.

It was an old white SEA expat who attacked him first. And calling him "rescue expert" is charitable to say the least.

Who is that?

Musk

It's funny to me that you think Musk isn't an "always-be-selling" type of person and that you think he speaks his mind without spewing "corporate speak" because to me, "Musk speak" is just another form of corporate speak.

Musk isn't so much "speaking the truth", he's more "selling things, his way".

That's cool; I was just answering ghostly_'s question as to whom systemvoltage was implying

You've essentially expanded the definition of "corporate speak" to be "anything a person in a leadership position says"

When you're a corporate leader, the way you speak is by default a form of corporate speak, because as a public figure who is listened to, everything you say is a reflection of the brand.

No. Corporate speak is a specific way of speaking.

Will you agree with this?

Corporate speak, definition:

- to say what's in the best interest of the corporation, no matter what the circumstance

- to not tell the truth, unless it's something that can become a huge PR success for the corporation

- to not tell a lie, unless it's something that can become a huge PR success for the corporation

For the "Musk speak" definition, simply replace "the corporation" with "Musk".

I think there's a specific "corporate style" of speaking that's very stiff and blandly positive, which is what they're thinking of when they're saying corporate speak. But I agree with your point and was making it, even though Musk speak is a different style, it ultimately works the same way as the corporate style, which is to buff up his brand in a way that maximizes shareholder value. Musk speak might not be the corporate style, but it's still a form of corporate speak, as per your definition.

Exactly, his shtick just happens to be the complete opposite of conventional corporate speak. It's edgy "tell-it-like-it-is" trolling, but it's still designed to build a brand and a relationship with the consumer. He's not even the only corpo who does that.

LOL, Github has made more impact on the world than Elon.

systemvoltage made no comparison between impact of Musk & impact of GitHub

Elon

Edit: lol, this will be the most downvotes on a char count basis I've ever received. I thought it was generally accepted that for better or worse, he does not mince words.

Ah yes Elon Musk also tweets about “TITS university”. I’m sure there’s no one that finds issue with that, but doesn’t have the power to speak against it.

There are over 7 billion people on this planet. I'm sure that for every utterance you could construct in the English language, you could find someone who "finds issue with that, but doesn’t have the power to speak against it".

If someone finds issue with it but doesn't have the power to speak against it, then who cares that they find issue with it? If Elon was worried about making sure he didn't offend anyone, he wouldn't speak the way he does.

People are entitled to their opinions, but I personally just can't take the pearl clutchers seriously in their offense-taking on this one.

The framing on this as a demonstration of deep misogyny in tech is just way, way too morbidly absurd.

Agree. Corporate speak is un-open. It's a spin. It's pejorative because it's essentially manipulative. To get out of that and to work from one's own experience requires intelligence and some (not a ton) of confidence. If the putative speaker doesn't have that, how in the hell did he get into the top spot? To be sure, such plain speak also comes with a take, a slant, and frame. Is that manipulative? Not in the end: you see it coming. You see from whom it's coming. And the listener can assess how it lands. If there's a meeting of the minds, great. If not no harm, no-foul.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com