Webinar Wire

Webinar Gets Terminology Approval in NY Times

Posted by Ken Molay February 27 2010 5:46 PM EDT

I had to follow up my last post about "webinar" as useful vs. unuseful terminology when I saw a story in today's New York Times by Bryan A. Garner. Part of the Times' "On Language" category, the article is simply titled "Webinar."

Mr. Garner starts his article with this paragraph:

Webinar (Web + seminar) seems like a fine neologism for a seminar offered online. A blend of two common terms, it’s immediately understood by most people. I’ve been taking Webinars lately; I like them and appreciate having a handy word for them — even though I’m often inclined to object to linguistic “innovations.”

The battle over the use of the word has spurred various parties to fits of vitriol over the past few years. I have reported on the controversy both seriously and with tongue firmly planted in cheek. Here are some links if you really enjoy the subject:

What's The Matter With Webinar?

Legal Status of "Webinar"

Trademark Controversy Followup

You Can Say Webinar

Webinar Webinar Webinar... Nyah Nyah!

Webinar Is Not A Marketing Term

I have received both blog comments and private emails from people convinced that the term offers concrete evidence of the decline and fall of the English language, as if our language is a static, unchangeable absolute. I direct these people to the following sentence from Mr. Garner:

Once a word acquires general currency, only a hopelessly out-of-touch pedant would take up quixotic arms against it.

Nifty.

So I think I will continue to use the term, secure in the knowledge that the New York Times, that bastion of linguistic style and propriety, has given its blessing.