Apparently, "impactful" is a word (and by this I mean it's recognized by a handful of reasonably reputable sources).
I choose not to use it, however. I think it sounds horrible, like an impacted wisdom tooth or, heaven forefend, an impacted bowel.
I guess the days of saying, "That 'Hi, I'm a Mac' campaign sure had an impact" are gone; now it's all, "That 'Hi, I'm a Mac' campaign sure was impactful."
I cringe every time I hear "impactful." In my heart of hearts, I just want "impact" to be a noun. I prefer things to have an impact or make an impact or approach the point of impact; I don't want them to impact each other or behave impactfully.
Yeah, there's "impactive," but to these oh-so-sensitive ears, that's only marginally less offensive than "impactful." I guess I should consider myself lucky that "impactitudinous" hasn't caught on. This doomsday scenario was suggested by Mike Livingston, who commented about "impactful" on the delightful blog "You Don't Say," a place for requisitely bespectacled, bow-tied Baltimore Sun Copy Desk Director John E. McIntyre to write about "language, usage, journalism & arbitrarily chosen subjects." (McIntyre was recently let go by the Sun in a restructuring of their newsroom. His new blog can be found here.)
Because I'm a devoted fan of "The Wire," the final season of which starred The Baltimore Sun, and because John McIntyre is a former president of the American Copy Editors Society (and ignoring, rather generously, that he's a graduate of Michigan State University — go blue!), I will now quote from his blog entry "Oh, the impact":
"Given the dubious status of the word impact as a verb, which several authorities recommend against, and the lack of citations for impactful in standard references, The Sun's copy desk affirms ... that impactful may be used in direct quotes, if the writer insists on it, but not otherwise in the paper. This decision remains in effect until the word achieves a more secure purchase on the language, or the A.M.E. [Assistant Managing Editor]/Copy Desk is overruled by a Higher Authority."
Granted, McIntyre was writing in February of 2007 and I think we can say with crestfallen confidence that, like the jaws of a long-tailed weasel clamping down upon the neck of a hapless Arctic hare, the word has indeed achieved a more secure purchase.
I blame local news anchors, law enforcement and especially middle managers for ruining "impact," and I'm not alone. Regarding the latter culprits, suspected Pastafarian J. Spaghetti contributed this definition to UrbanDictionary.com on May 30, 2007 (evidently a watershed year for "impactful"):
"A nonexistent word coined by corporate advertising, marketing and business drones to make their work sound far more useful, exciting and beneficial to humanity than it really is. This term is most frequently used in 'team building' seminars and conferences in which said drones discuss the most effective ways to convince consumer zombies to purchase crap they clearly do not need or even want."Unfortunately, I'm with Whitney Houston in believing that children are our future, and I thus fear a bright future for "impactful." As explained in the 1996 edition of The American Heritage Book of English Usage: A Practical and Authoritative Guide to Contemporary English, quoted on Bartleby.com:
" ... Impact has been used as a verb since 1601, and its figurative use dates from 1935, allowing people plenty of time to get accustomed to it [I, for one, need more time]. It may be that its frequent appearance in jargon-riddled remarks of politicians, military officials, and financial analysts has made people suspicious. Nevertheless, the use of impact as a verb has become so common in corporations and institutions that younger speakers [that would be the aforementioned children] have begun to regard it as standard ... "Kids these days. Go ahead — call me an old coot, a fuddy-duddy, a cantankerous codger, a linguistic Luddite. Use "impactful" with impunity. Just don't expect me to like it.
What verbiage makes you seize up? Vent in the comments below!
Join the conversation
Comments from our users:
As is the use of "fun" in ways strange to my ears (& years!) - no longer just a noun or adjective! It just doesn't sound right as a verb - it seemed at first a very N. American habit, but of course it has reached the shores of Oz, too...
He is either MSU or 'blue', take the word of a Wolverine alum! He'd be Go Green!
Ah, the things that can turn a reader's mind from the point of an article!
(I'm laughing so hard I don't know whether I'll be able to read, but I'll try!)
I'm befuddled by so many usages now. The 'like' that tossed around so casually when someone has nothing to say, the 'no problem' instead of 'you're welcome'... the ubiquitous 'laying' around that the words 'lie' and 'lay' give rise to.
However, I've come to realize that the language will change and that perhaps those last two verbs will merge, or one will disappear, language evolution being what it is.
I try to stay 'unvexed', but it doesn't usually work!
The author referred to the columnist as being a graduate of MSU (Spartans) who would not appreciate 'Go Blue' being attributed to them.
I was mistaken in my first reading.
Okay, I shouldn't have mentioned it, but he did say 'Go Blue' implying that he is a Michigan alum.
That isn't a common usage expression beyond the state of Michigan, until those schools play!
Sorry for befuddling you.
I think I agreed mostly with everyone else. The small letter writer (who doesn't use capitals where most of us do) is doing what some other writers do. I mostly avoid them. But it's her choice, so I wouldn't put her down. She's obviously literate (otherwise).
Yikes. The aforementioned sentence was intended to be humorous, but sadly it is typical of corporate-speak where perfectly good words are pumped with linguistic steroids until they collapse under their own multisyllabic weight and clumsiness. And then let's throw in a few incorrect usages --eh, hm, literally-- and voila, we have everyday language.
Thank you for defending "impact" and making the case for limiting "impacted" to a couple bodily malfunctions.
Other words on steroids that make me cringe are "utilized" as in "I utilized my pen," and "orientated" as in "He is orientated to the job."
One word that I simply despise simply because people have collectively agreed to use it incorrectly is: myself. Why do people think that when they are speaking about themselves that they have to say "myself" rather than me or I? It literally makes my skin crawl.
Still haven't got on a handle on whether I can have "issues"? I heard that one thing that I cannot have is "issues."
Thanks so much for your comments -- they mean the world. And yes, the editor I quoted is a Michigan State grad (Spartan) and I'm a diehard University of Michigan fan (Wolverine); we say, "Go Blue!" (The team colors are maize -- it's pretty much yellow -- and blue.) Also, Winda, I have ranted about "myself" elsewhere in these pages. You are not alone, my friend.
Best,
Julia
"Impactful" insight! We could say that:
Impactful is a turd of a word,
Designed for the herd.
Hopefully, this impact will pass!
Sorry for your luck with both schools. I'm a Jayhawk fan that went to Mid-America Nazarene University (college in my day) but could never be a Pioneer. Something to do with the funky bonnett and covered wagon thing. Our players just couldn't win in those long dresses.
Would somebody please tell News Anchors that the word is "Supremists" not "Supremacists" as in; "White Supremists eat their young".
Since 'White Supremacy' is the theory, is supremacist not the logical noun rather than 'supremist'?
Another bit of corporate jargon that makes me cringe is "an initiative" ("we're launching a new initiative") which makes me think that someone is about to start something they aren't going to finish.
And for Patricia, "Many writers utilize "utilize" where they should use "use."
Virginia, what's happened with the French language police and English expressions such as 'red card' and 'weekend'? There was a move to Francacize (word ?) them all!
The two Americans on a mission were, I believe, jailed a year or two ago or at any rate fined, when they corrected a board at the Grand Canyon which was a historical artefact, having been hand-painted in the 19th century. Bad mistake, but a pity all the same, they were really impactful!
My husband was born in France to French parents and only started learning English at the age of 16 after WWII. He has little patience for the attempt of the officials to hang on.
Years ago in Quebec, he was corrected in a restaurant for ordering 'pomme de terres', and told 'potates'.
Being sort of 'stuck' in another century, he's of the opinion that what we have here in Canada is not French, but Quebecois!
report this as inappropriate."
(I must learn the coding used here!)
We had a mistake with an apostrophe carved in limestone on a new bridge! Great pains (and money) were taken to correct it by officials. Perhaps that's what these fellows should have done.
Still they were 'impactful' as you say -- but 'impacted' too!