Yesterday an art director wrote with a request for validation that she is correct. Copywriters who submit their work to her have been using quotation marks to emphasize words. But she believes that the marks have the opposite effect–that they, in fact, undermine the message. Is she correct?
Here are examples (my own, not the art director’s):
"Genuine" glove leather uppers
A "quality" heirloom piece
A "stunning" onyx pendant
These quotation marks do not emphasize. They destabilize. That’s because quotation marks used this way indicate that the writer intends a loose or ironic meaning of the word. "Genuine" leather is probably fake. A "quality" piece is of doubtful quality. A "stunning" pendant may actually stun us cold rather than awe us with beauty.
If the copywriters’ intention is to emphasize, quotation marks are the wrong choice. Italic type might be the right choice. Or better yet, the writers may find words that communicate without visual emphasis. If the words genuine, quality, and stunning are not persuasive enough, the writers need different words, ones that will speak to their customers. Here are suggestions:
Exquisite [or rich or silky] glove leather uppers
An heirloom of exceptional beauty
A dazzling onyx pendant
I don’t think my suggestions are especially good because I don’t know the customers and what appeals to them. But the copywriters probably do know.
You may be wondering why it is okay to use "First-rate!" and "Stunning" in things like movie ads. Why are those quotation marks acceptable? Because they are just that–quotations. Somebody said the movie is first-rate. Somebody described it as stunning.
To art directors everywhere: Yes, it is correct to instruct "copywriters" to omit quotation marks unless they are actually quoting someone.
I am just kidding–the quotation marks around copywriters are wrong!