Re: Is passive voice ever OK?

["Doug, Data Librarian at Ext 4225" <engstromdd -at- PHIBRED -dot- COM>]

This is written in response to:

**************************
...occasionally, use of passive voice is the best way to avoid an imperious
use of "we" that can often be offputting to the reader. This comes up
particularly when a subjective judgment is in question.

Example: We consider XYZ software to be the leading bean-counting
         product on the market today.

Better:  XYZ software is considered to be the leading bean-counting
         product on the market today.
**************************

Best: XYZ is the fastest, most flexible bean-counting product available,
      completing the five most common bean-counting tasks in one-half the
      time of Balderdash, it's next-fastest rival.

I may be excessively sensitive to it because I spent years writing stuff
that was worse than either one of Judith's examples (for the US Air Force,
no less).  However, for me, the passive construction "is considered to be"
when combined with the weasle-word "leading" practically sits up and
screams "NOBODY WITH A REPUTATION WORTH HAVING IS WILLING TO SAY EVEN ONE
NICE THING ABOUT THIS PIECE OF CRAP AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY QUANTITATIVE DATA
TO BACK UP OUT CLAIMS."

I don't think I'm that atypical.  The audience is slowly getting smarter
out there and I don't think a lot of the puffery is as effective as it
once was.  People may notice what you're hiding with the passive voice.

Skoal,

Doug                            "Women are designed for long,
ENGSTROMDD -at- phibred -dot- com           miserable lives, whereas men are
                                 designed for short, violent ones."
                                  - Estelle Ramey