 Review
the essay “With these Words, I can
sell you Anything” in your Dialogues
textbook.
 What is the main point, and what are the
supporting points?
 The
essay introduces the term “weasel
words” to refer to words that appear to have
substance and appear to make a claim, but
in fact do not. Lutz claims that advertisers
deceptively use these words to sell products
and that consumers need to examine the
advertising language before relying on a
product.
 “Helps”
 According
to Lutz, this word simply means to
aid. When this word is used in an advertising
claim, it causes the ad to claim next to
nothing.
 Example:
 “Helps relieve pain”
 The product aids in the relief of pain but
may not relieve the pain all by itself. Also,
the degree to which it helps relieve pain is
unknown.
 “Virtually”
 According
to Lutz, “Virtually” means “In
essence of effect, but not in fact.”
 Therefore, using this word essentially adds
“not in fact” to the claim so that the claim is
essentially meaningless.
 For example, “Virtually Spotless Dishes”
could very well mean dishes that are not in
fact or not entirely spotless.
 “New
and Improved”
 According to Lutz, this term means that the
product has simply been changed in some
way, often some superficial way like
changing the packaging.
 For example, a “new and improved” floor
cleaner could simply be the same cleaner
with a different color dye added to it.
 “Acts
Fast”
 Lutz indicates that these two words in ads
are intentionally vague. Acts means that the
product does something, although what it in
fact does is often not indicated.
Furthermore, there is no indication of how
fast is defined. Fast could mean a turtle’s
pace by the company’s definition.
 For example, a cold medicine that “acts
fast” could simply make the user sleepy
within 12 hours.
 “Works”
 According
to Lutz, “Works” functions just
like “acts” does. All it indicates is that it
does something without indicating what it
does.
 For example, an ad that says a product
“works great” doesn’t indicate what it
specifically does that’s great.
 “Like
Magic”
 According to Lutz, this weasel word is vague
because it references a fantastical element
“magic.” He says we don’t really know how
magic would work so the comparison is
vague.
 For example, an ad that claims its product
“works like magic” could be claiming that
the product functions adequately because
that could be how magic functions.
“Can” or “up to”
 According to Lutz, “can” only shows possibility.
If a product says it “can provide relief,” it’s
saying that it’s possible, but it isn’t saying that it
will.
 “up to” functions to very heavily qualify an ad’s
claim. An ad that claims “up to 50% off” is only
saying that the most discounted item or items is
50% off. All other items are not marked down as
much. With this claim, it is possible to mark
down only one unpopular item 50% and still
claim that it is a “big” sale with items “up to
50% off.”

 This
isn’t really a single word but a class of
them: Unfinished comparisons.
 Lutz says not finishing a comparison allows
an advertiser to greatly water down a claim.
 For example, an ad may say “Works better.”
Note that it doesn’t say what it works better
than. The product might only work better
than using nothing at all.
 Lutz
also says advertisers combine weasel
words to further diminish the claim made by
an ad.
 Lutz
finishes by stating that since much of
this deception is legal, it is up to us the
consumer to look closely at the language
used before we decide on purchases.
 What
does pulling apart ads have to do with
thinking critically about arguments?
 Basically, the same deceptive tactics that are
often used in advertisements are sometimes
used either intentionally or unintentionally in
arguments outside of advertising. These
vague terms are referred to as ambiguity.
 Consider

the following argument:
School dress codes are limits put on
inappropriate clothing to help keep the learning
environment focused. It can be quite a
distraction for students if a classmate wears
inappropriate clothing. The use of a dress code
during school is not preventing freedom of
expression. Unlike required uniform dress codes,
the dress code still allows for students to choose
what they wear as long as it is not deemed
inappropriate.
 Note
that the author never explains what
“inappropriate clothing” specifically is.
 It is also unclear what the writer means by
“learning environment” and “focused.”
 Ambiguity
also functions in other ways as
well.
 Often this takes the form of glittering
generalities. These are positive, yet vague
buzz words and phrases that are frequently
used but never defined.

For example, “freedom,” “change,” and “family
values” are often used by politicians, yet are
never defined.

Aside from not being taken in by vague claims, understanding
ambiguity helps students improve their own claims. Look at the
following thesis statement:

Schools should have a zero-tolerance policy.
Does this contain any ambiguity?
Note that the writer doesn’t say which schools he or she is talking about
and doesn’t indicate what actions the school would have the zerotolerance policy for.
A better thesis might be the following:
Public middle schools and high schools should have a zero-tolerance
policy for sexual harassment among students, suspending or expelling
students after only one or two incidents.
Although not perfect, this thesis reduces the ambiguity.
 Look
at your own thesis statement. Does it
contain any ambiguity? If so, how could it be
improved?