Have often read that Yale University once
did a study and came up with the 12 most
powerful words in advertising.

Despite trying to locate the source of this
study, I've constantly drawn a blank ...
until today:

http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/langu...es/003662.html

What do you think?

Kind regards,

Eldo

Eldo,

Thanks for posting that. Just for fun I dropped those 12 words into Glyphius and 3 of them are negative:

you -11
proven -4
new -20

I've never understood why 'you' is a negative word. I can see 'new' being overused.

Let's see...

Glyphius is supposed to be up-to-date since it was released less than a month ago...

The Yale words were published back in 1963?

My calculator reads a 43 year difference.

Yeah, I can see why the numbers might not match up.

Heck, since 1963 I'd be willing to bet the dictionary has had at least 30,000 words added.

There's been a lot of testing since then. I'm sure James has done quite a bit of his own testing on these particular Yale words.

Actually, version 2 was recently released but it was a lot longer than a month ago and only the interface changed. In another thread, James said the data was from 2005 to Feb 2006.

So what was the point of them being posted if they're out of date?

I'm really more interested in determining if current copywriters really feel that 'you' and 'your' are negative words when used in a headline?

This thread made me famous:

James D. Brausch

Since my response will likely be moderated away, I thought I'd post them here too:

James,

What an interesting take on my forum posting. Since I’m the one that wrote the post you’re talking about, I hope that you will allow my explanatory comments in this blog entry.

As I stated in another thread, directly to you on that forum, I am a James Brausch fan. I am a repeat customer of yours, owning Statistical Copywriting, Glyphius (bought separately) and the Information Product Course.

I was not making a negative comment about Glyphius by pointing out the three negative keywords. I was asking for opinions, from professional copywriters, why they thought they returned negative values.

I was most interested in the word ‘you’ since it is counterintuitive that it would be negative.

I did notice that it doesn’t score highly negative, but the fact that it scores negative at all is surprising to me.

On a more personal note, your response here and your responses on the forum all seem to come from a defensive position. Perhaps YOU are the one looking at things from a negative viewpoint?

I LOVE Glyphius. I use and trust Glyphius. I will continue to use it, even when publicly insulted by you.

Sincerely,
Bruce

Bruce,
I can certainly understand why James took it to mean you were pointing out deficiencies in Glyphius... much like I took your other post concerning Michel's headlines not being up to speed with the said program.

I know you are not intentionally trying to create controversy, but it just comes off this way.

In the future, If you have any questions about someones product, may I suggest you go directly to the source and get your answers.

I know both Michel and James both would have been very happy to answer any questions "privately" without you going into a public forum and asking other people's "oppinions".

Most of the people in these forums don't even own the Glyphius software, so why ask or even bring it up?

Heck, you could have had a private discussion with me (I own the software and highly recommend it).

Now that I've probably created reverse rapport with you, I will say that I do value your oppinion, so don't hold my comments against me.

Thanks!

Wow! I am truly mystified. Are you saying that when I said,
"Hi Michel,

I would really appreciate it if you would expand on what you know about Glyphius, how and if you use it, etc.

I am a fan of James also. I own Glyphius myself and use it to tweak headlines and some copy."

You thought I was taking issue with Michel's headlines? Or somehow bad-mouthing James?

How anyone can come to that conclusion, given that I am a HUGE fan of both of them, is beyond me. Now James is trying hard to make me not a fan, but as I posted on his blog, I won't be deterred from using his products.

As for Michel, I have nothing but admiration and respect for him. I constantly recommend his lists and sites to friends, newbies, etc. I read everything he writes, listen to the audio interviews he does and can't think of one bad thing to say about him.

I'm truly sitting here scratching my head on all accounts. Its as if one isn't allowed to ask clarifying questions but just expected to take it all on face value.

The good news is, Michel seemed to understand my position better than you or James did.

PS: With regards to going directly to the source. The thread was about Glyphius and Michel's use of it, and I didn't start it. Second, I have asked James about it and didn't get a reply.

I totally understand both Bruce's standpoint, as well as Primo's. Bruce was just asking a question to not only validate the software but also clear up some possible confusion as there seemed to be some contradictory (or counterintuitive) advice.

One says to use "you," the other says don't.

I think questioning that is cool.

As is Primo, who wanted to make sure the question was not in a way to attack. That, too, is commendable. (And thank you.) When questions are asked in a forum, without background information, verbal cues or body language to go with it, it's hard to tell the intent.

It's therefore easy to assume. But assumptions can hurt. (I know that personally. I made that error on my blog just yesterday.)

But let's keep in mind that it is a powerful thing to question. Asking questions makes the world go round. Asking questions opens doors. And yes, asking questions makes better software, better copy, and better business.

James software is an awesome software. And it is new, counterintuitive and seemingly contrarian to what we copywriters were taught. So naturally, it creates great discussions to clarify -- and I believe James did an awesome job on his blog.

Just making sure everyone sees it the way I do, or at least knows about it.

First, thank you, Michel, for your understanding response.


I've been doing a little research. I've located headlines by the following copywriters that contain the word 'you' or 'your' in them:

John Caples, David Ogilvy, Robert Bly, John Carlton, Yanik Silver, Harlan Kilstein, Michel Fortin and 36 out of the Top 100 Headlines of all time as circulated on the net in numerous PDFs.

Its interesting to note that not only did Michel use the word, but he underlined and bold-faced it.

I am not trying to discredit Glyphius.

But, I think its wrong on the words, "you" and "your".

How can this be? I don't know but I have some guesses. Maybe a lot of amateur copywriters, in ADDITION to good copywriters, use those words and therefore, there is a lot of bad copy with those words in it. Perhaps there was enough to skew the data? Its is, after all, a very common word and the word of choice to create self interest.

I propose there is a flaw in Glyphius' results in SOME cases. It does not invalidate Glyphius for use. It simply means, consider the results with your own experience and studies. "You" is not a negative word used in the proper context.

"You" is a negative word?