We received this comment on our article “The death of the Technical Author?”
Comments: Interesting evaluation of the changing role of the ‘Technical Author’ but I don’t agree with the use of the expression ‘Information Designer’ in the context of “Explaining technical information to a non-technical audience”. The advertising and marketing profession in general provides ‘Information Design’ when originating brochure layout and developing documentation stylesheets, etc. and it is the understanding of desk top publishing that is the skill required for today’s ‘Information Design’.
The real meaning of ‘Information Design’ is best illustrated by the London Underground Map where all the information required by the reader has been creatively designed and presented with simplicity and relevant accuracy. In my experience, very few technical authors are capable of the creativity required for true ‘Information Design’.
‘Information Communicator’ is perhaps a more appropriate expression for a technical Author to adopt if they don’t want to be recognised as a ‘technical’ communicator.
Please preserve the word ‘design’ for where it belongs, alongside creativity and ingenuity.
Is he right?
Hey, in the company where I worked, we (technical writers/technical authors, as you call us) were referred to as “Information Developers.”
But I like “Information Communicator” too. It’s a shame that the field as it stands cannot decide what to call us, nor can we decide what to call ourselves.
“Information Developer” was a term developed at IBM (and possibly elsewhere) to bestow some sort of semantic parity with “Software Developers”. “Learning Product Engineer” was an ugly neologism from Hewlett-Packard that attempted to provide the same sort of parity with their Software Engineers.
The problem with “Information Communicator” is that it would appear to distinguish someone only from “Non-information Communicators” (politicians, perhaps) and “Disinformation Communicators” (politicians’ Press Sectretaries, perhaps).
As for “Information Designers”, I am more inclined to think of these people http://infosthetics.com/
rather than technical writers.
I think too many of us in this line of work get hung up on titles. I’ve seen so many different ones: Technical Writer, Technical Communicator, Technical Author, Documentation Specialist, Publishing Specialist, Documentation Engineer, Information Developer, Information Designer, Word Monkey, ad nauseum.
Are we just insecure, or are we trying to be trendy? I see nothing wrong with Technical Writer …
anonymous 2 – you forgot “Information Engineer” (used at Intel)! – my current title is “Technical Editor and Writer”
Broadly speaking, yes, I think he is right. I wouldn’t want to draw a hard line between “designer” and another term, such as “communicator”, but I think for the most part what we do is communicate the information, rather than actually design or create it for ourselves. There are exceptions, of course, but when you’re that 342nd entry for the reference manual, it’s hard to persuade yourself that you’re doing anything close to designing …
I always wait a few seconds after telling someone I’m a Technical Writer to see if there is any spark of recognition as to what I really do. Mostly there is just a blank look and sometimes an assumption (normally wrong). The problem is that “we” are a diverse bunch of people working in different industries with their own specific demands. No two jobs are ever the same in what they require. The thing that binds us however is the need to clearly communicate a message or idea. Technical Writer? Information Designer? Who cares! It’s our skill in communicating the message that’s important.