Schemes on Wall Street and in public policy

It's too bad 'scheme' has such a bad reputation in American English, because we could certainly use a synonym for 'program.'

It was, the news reader sternly intoned, the largest insider trading case ever involving a single stock: a scheme, the government alleges, that netted approximately $57 million in profits for the Level Global Investors hedge fund – which went out of business a few months after federal agents raided its office in November 2010.

The case, involving trades in shares of the computer company Dell, caught my attention, in part because of its size and in part because one of the defendants hails from just up the road from me, give or take a suburb, in Boston. It also provides an occasion to consider how scheme came to have such nefarious connotations, when it ought to be simply another word for "plan."

It's fairly well known that since the advent of the Web, copy-editing standards have suffered as the editing layers have thinned out, and it has become all too easy to post, or publish, now and edit later. Less often remarked upon, however, is how much vigilante copy editing goes on as readers react to one another's various bits of "user-generated content."

Last October someone posted to AskMetaFilter ("querying the hive mind") a message that began thus:

"Need help to think about the details of a feeding scheme for homeless and people in need in my neighbourhood."

The "neighbourhood" in question turns out to be in Brazil, but the poster is evidently a native speaker of English – of the British rather than the American kind.

If, as they say, no good deed goes unpunished, it may also be true that no expression of compassion for one's fellow beings goes unedited. One of the first responses was, "Well, first off, sometimes the word 'scheme' has negative connotations. I'd go with, 'I want to create a food drive,' or something like that."

To which came a quick rejoinder from a third party: "Only in America, pal."

At this point, a fourth voice entered, providing information on food banks, and also quoting at some length from the Oxford English Dictionary, which defines scheme in part as "A plan of action devised in order to attain some end; a purpose together with a system of measures contrived for its accomplishment; a project, enterprise. Often with unfavourable notion, a self-seeking or an underhand project, a plot ... or a visionary or foolish project.... This is now the most prominent use, and in some degree colours the other senses so far as they survive."

And yet one doesn't have to wade too deep into news and public affairs reporting from outside the United States to know that scheme is often used where Americans would use program. "Youth employment scheme," for instance, is a common phrase. It certainly makes for an affirmative acronym: YES!

To give another example, the British government program that lets visitors from outside the European Union claim a refund of the value-added tax paid on cars purchased in Britain and shipped back home is known as the Personal Export Scheme.

But in American English we're stuck with program, which we have to use all the time, at least in the realm of public policy (not so much in the realm of lyric poetry). And program must be one of the most boring words in the English language. It would be helpful to have a synonym. But, in the grand scheme of things, it might not matter that much.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Schemes on Wall Street and in public policy
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/Verbal-Energy/2012/0203/Schemes-on-Wall-Street-and-in-public-policy
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe