文案与商业写作2020adaged.blogspot.com编辑精选
好文笔是一种商业优势
Good writing is a business advantage
导读
这是广告人 George Tannenbaum 的一篇博客短文，主张清晰的写作在商业中是实打实的竞争优势——能把事情说明白的人，在会议、邮件、提案里就已经赢了一半。对写作者来说，值得一读的地方不在论证有多严密（评论区也有人吐槽它本身结构松散），而在于它提醒我们：写作不是文艺青年的附加技能，而是可以直接折算成职业价值的硬通货。
可以直接用的写作要点
- 01
把“写清楚”当成职业能力而不是天赋：无论是技术文档、内部通知还是提案，先问自己读者看完能不能立刻知道该做什么。
- 02
四条可操作的标准——精确（把关键细节说到别人不用追问）、直接（重要的话放最前面，不铺垫寒暄）、简洁（用最少的字承载同样的信息）、有条理（把复杂事物还原成清晰的关系和因果）。
- 03
写作前先确认目的：是要传递具体信息，还是要营造情绪和品牌印象？目的不同，写法完全不同，用错标准就会写出“看不懂也没用”的东西。
- 04
翻译能力比术语能力更值钱：能把专业内容改写成非专业同事看得懂、愿意接受的说法，这种人往往比技术专家更被管理层需要。
HN 评论精选
好写作的四个标准：精确、直接、简洁、有条理，而且绝不要在结构上耍小聪明。
优秀的写作能力是区分新手和专家开发者的两个关键因素之一。从经验来看，除了糟糕的开发者，所有人都能感受到这一点。通常最重要的几条标准是：精确——能把极其细微的细节讲清楚，让广泛的读者以同样的方式立即理解整体；直接——说你想说的，不要用废话和客套浪费别人的时间，把最重要的放前面，读者想读更多自然会读下去；简洁——用最少的词句把技术细节和论证说清楚，这是门艺术，词汇量大有帮助；有条理——复杂的东西大多可以还原成内在关系的简单描述，能看穿并传达这些关系就是逻辑的根基，但前提是关系有序且有证据支撑。一个常见错误是在结构和逻辑上耍小聪明，那是一种软弱的操控手段，真正强大的沟通者一眼就能拆穿。
austincheney查看英文原文
Superior writing skills are one of two things that separate novice developers from experts. This, as judged from experience, is self-evident to all people except bad developers. Here are the criteria that are generally most important: * precision: This is perhaps most important. The ability to communicate tiny finite details that immediately reflects the product as a whole in a way that is universally clear to a wide audience in the same way is paramount. * directness: Say what you mean. Don’t waste people’s time with distractions and pleasantries. Put the most important things first. If the audience wishes to read more they will. * conciseness: There is an art to the careful description of technical details, behaviors, and examination of a subject that is both precise and still expressed in the fewest words/statements. An extended vocabulary is helpful. * organization: Almost everything complex is open to more simplistic description as a subject of intrinsic relationships. The ability to perceive, understand, and convey those relationships is logic at its most base foundation but only when the those relationships are orderly and supported by evidence. A common mistake is to be clever about organization, relationships, and their logic. Don’t do that. People do this as a weak form of manipulation, but strong communicators will tear it apart. All of these points on writing are directly evident in well written code as well as formally expressed writings for general audiences.
评价一段文案前先分清它的目的：传递信息还是营造情绪，用错尺子就会误判。
博客作者误解了那条宝马广告：它本来就不是用来传递具体信息的。抽象广告是“品牌认知型广告”的典型做法，和“产品信息型广告”是两回事。选择抽象表达的广告公司确实让我们恼火，但他们不在乎，因为他们追求的是刻意计算过的情绪效果。
jasode查看英文原文
>Here's a promotional film on the car that was sent to me on Saturday. It's almost impossible for me to believe this passes for work today. It's incomprehensible, unappealing, uninteresting and meaningless. It provides no information that makes me want the car. The blog author misunderstands that the BMW car video ad is deliberately not supposed to convey concrete information. Abstract ads are typical of "brand awareness advertising" vs "product specific advertising". I made some previous comments about the difference between "concrete informational ads" vs "abstract aspirational ads"[0][1]. Yes, the ad agencies choosing to communicate abstract ads are infuriating to us but they don't care because they are going for a deliberate and calculated emotional effect. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20034558 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9877422
能把专业内容翻译成外行看得懂的语言，是一种被管理层真正买单的稀缺能力。
总体而言，技术人员严重低估了好写作的价值。我妻子有专业写作的硕士学位，没有技术背景，却被一家大型出版公司的 IT 部门招了进去，全部工作就是撰写要发给全公司的指南、公告之类。管理层发现，IT 团队里没人能用非技术语言写作，导致非技术员工对 IT 改动大量抵触，浪费了很多时间和钱。尽管 IT 同事经常嘲讽她拿的是“软学位”，管理层却很看重她——她能把自己未必完全理解的技术信息，转化成全公司都能看懂的形式。
dx87查看英文原文
In general, technical people severely underestimate the value of good writing. My wife has a MS in Professional Writing, no technical background, and got hired to work in the IT department at a major publishing company. While there, her entire job was writing up guides, announcements, etc., that were going to be disseminated to the rest of the company. Management had identified that a bunch of time/money was being wasted because the IT team had nobody who could write in a non-technical matter, so non-technical employees were giving a lot of pushback on IT changes that they didn't see the benefit of. Even though the IT employees would constantly make snide remarks about her having a "soft degree", management loved her because she could take technical information, even if she didn't fully understand it herself, and translate it into a format that could be understood by the rest of the company.
文章自己就是反例：结构松散、重点不明，说明讲写作的道理必须靠写作本身兑现。
我不理解这篇文章为什么先扯一大段经济衰退，然后绕个弯才谈到写作，中间作者还把自己比作爱因斯坦，最后又以一堆宝马广告截图收尾——显然是想当作“过去的好文案”范例，可那些截图放大也看不清。恕我直言，这本身就是极糟糕的写作。
paultopia查看英文原文
I don't understand why this essay starts with an excursus on economic decline before veering around the corner to talk about writing and the author's---no shit---comparison of himself to Einstein? And then closes with a bunch of screenshots of BMW ads, evidently (?) as an example of Good Writing of the Past, but where those ads (that is, the alleged exemplars of writing) are too blurry to read, even zoomed in? This is, dare I say it, exceedingly bad writing.
同类还值得读
如何为落地页撰写文案
Writing copy for landing pages
这是 Stripe Atlas 关于落地页文案的写作指南，核心是把文案当成回答读者疑问的工具，而不是自我表达。
文案与商业写作2018 · 416 分 · 84 评4 条写作要点编辑精选我曾是扎克伯格的演讲稿撰写人
I was Zuckerberg’s speechwriter
这篇是第一人称回忆：作者曾为扎克伯格写演讲稿，借此复盘在剑桥分析丑闻前后，科技巨头的公开表达如何被构思、修饰和交付。
文案与商业写作2018 · 347 分 · 254 评4 条写作要点编辑精选一句话产品描述写作的艺术
The Art of Writing One-Sentence Product Descriptions
这篇文章讨论如何为产品写一句话描述，核心是把复杂产品压缩成一个能打动人的句子。
文案与商业写作2017 · 335 分 · 57 评4 条写作要点编辑精选Ask HN：为技术岗位写求职信
Ask HN: Writing cover letters for tech jobs
这篇 HN 讨论科技岗位是否需要写求职信、写给谁看、用什么语气和格式。
文案与商业写作2017 · 265 分 · 123 评4 条写作要点编辑精选分析 1 亿篇帖子：写出最佳标题的要点
100M Posts Analyzed: What You Need to Write the Best Headlines
BuzzSumo 分析了 1 亿条帖子，找出高点击标题的常见句式，但评论者提醒：这些“最佳标题公式”在两年内就完全失效，说明它测的可能是 Facebook 算法的偏好而非人类读者…
文案与商业写作2021 · 218 分 · 110 评4 条写作要点编辑精选