LAST week all of D.C. was agog because of the leak of a flurry of e-mails between one Elizabeth Becton, a scheduler (yes, they no longer call ’em “secretary” or “assistant” over there!) of a basically unheard of Democratic congressman, Jim McDermott, and an unnamed executive assistant at the lobby firm McBee Strategic.

The unnamed McBee EA was seeking a meeting with Representative McDermott for one of its clients, JP Morgan Chase. Simple request, right? Unfortunately, the unnamed McBee EA made the now infamous mistake of addressing Elizabeth as—tadaah!—“Liz.” And from then on, Liz  unleashed a torrent of hate, scorn and condescension on the hapless EA. (Remarkably, the EA still managed to return Liz’s e-mails with profuse apologies and closed her message with a cheerful “Best.”) According to online news sites and bloggers, a total of 12 e-mails were exchanged primarily revolving around why Elizabeth never, never, never! wants anyone to call her “Liz.”

Just to give you an idea why the issue suddenly exploded into the blogosphere and captured almost everyone’s fascination, here’s one of the e-mails sent by Liz.

From: Becton, Elizabeth

Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 5:20 PM

To: XXX

Subject: RE: JPMC Meeting Request

Importance: High

XXX:

If I wanted you to call me by any other name, I would have offered that to you. I think it’s rude when people don’t even ask permission and take all sorts of liberties with your name. This is a real sore spot with me. My name has a lot of “nicknames” which I don’t use. I use either my first name or my last name because I row with a lot of other women who share the same first name. Now, please do not ever call me by a nickname again.

Of course, even after the McBee EA apologized once more and said she must’ve misheard someone telling her how to address the Democratic congressman’s scheduler. But the latter’s tirade didn’t end there:

From: Becton, Elizabeth

Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 6:04 PM

To: XXX

Subject: RE: JPMC Meeting Request

Let me put it this way, they don’t know me and perhaps they were PRETENDING to know me better than they do and pretended that I go by Liz. They did YOU a disservice.

Quit apologizing and never call me anything but Elizabeth again. Also, make sure you correct anyone who attempts to call me by any other name but Elizabeth. Are we clear on this? Like I said, it’s a hot button for me.

Okay, all together now, “beyooootch!” (More from “Liz” at http://www.politico.com/blogs/anneschroeder/0609/No_namecalling_Page2.html#comments)

Now, if I were in the McBee EA’s shoes, I would’ve probably addressed Liz as “Ms. Becton,” especially since I don’t know her. Unfortunately, there are many people today who grew up in the Age of the Internet, and have not really been taught how to write formal business letters.

I’m not defending Liz here, mind you. She should’ve just returned the first e-mail of the McBee EA with a reply about the firm’s request and perhaps ended it with a polite: “By the way, I would really prefer it if you call me Elizabeth. Thank you.” Period. (Actually, the McBee EA did address her as “Elizabeth” in the first e-mail but which went unanswered, so she e-mailed “Liz”, five days after, to follow up.)

But like many in my generation who were born in the age of longhand and who wrote letters, used postage stamps, and mailed their letters (now called snail mail) in their youth, we have noticed how e-mail messaging has virtually reduced official business communication to informality.

Personally, I still write e-mails in the formal business-letter format  (Date, Heading with formal title of addressee and their snail mail address, Opening salutation with a “Dear Mr.” or “Ms.” and ending with a “Thank you”, followed by a complimentary close—“Sincerely” or “Very Truly Yours”—before writing my name and contact details). When I e-mail people I don’t know, I address them either with a Ms., Mr., attaching that to their surname, or by their formal titles, especially if they are older, occupy a ranking position in government or in private companies.

Some of them do e-mail me back, addressing me with just my first name. This is fine really, especially if they close the e-mail with their first name as well. I suppose this is a way for them to convey friendship, although the first time it happened, I was kind of taken aback, and my thought balloon, read: “Ay close tayo?” I usually notice this informal style from people in their 30s and below, and who are mostly foreigners. So I just ascribe it to a cultural thing and take no offense at this.

Because to me, that is really a minor issue in the grand scheme of things. What is more disturbing or offensive is not getting your e-mails answered at all. And this, I think, is even more discourteous than assuming you can address someone by his/her first name even if he/she never offered you to do so. I’ve noticed that this lack of e-mail etiquette primarily afflicts government offices.

In such cases, I don’t know if the government official is just lazy to answer the e-mail (or maybe he really doesn’t know what the answer is), or he or his executive assistant is just too technologically challenged to use the computer. I mean, hello, we’re in the new millennium, so you must accept that e-mail is the business communication of choice by most people. So you better learn how to use that machine!

The official cannot also make the excuse of being “too busy” because he can very well just delegate the matter to his staff or assistant. And, frankly, if other government officials are capable of answering their e-mails, I don’t see what makes you so special that you cannot do so. 

One primary example of government inefficiency, for instance, is this one particular undersecretary at the Department of Tourism. Because his boss, my favorite Secretary Ace Durano, and his usual next-in-line undersecretary were out of town, Durano’s staff referred my questions to said mannerless undersecretary. Of course, despite repeated e-mails and my subsequent follow-ups, nothing ever came out of it. Deadma!

It amuses me a bit that this kind of behavior can exist at the DOT, considering that Secretary Durano is one of the more accommodating government officials I know. He is one to call or text back, no matter how delayed, just so he can attend to your questions, unless he’s out of the country, of course. As my gay pals would say, “Winner!” (Other winners in the “most responsive government official” category include BSP Gov. Say Tetangco and most BSP officers, Education Secretary Jing Lapus and Finance Secretary Gary Teves.)

Going back to that particular DOT undersecretary, this is just the kind of behavior that makes the citizenry abhor the government and its officials. What is the point of these government agencies publishing the email addresses of their officers if they don’t want to be contacted, or will not respond to e-mails anyway, ’di ba? Just to show the public how high-tech the agency is? Blkkkkk! (That’s me sticking my tongue out. And, yes, it’s rude, but he asked for it. Hmmph!)

Of course, this inadequate e-mail etiquette is also prevalent in some private companies and business organizations. I had this one particular experience recently with this organization of, ahem, DRESSMAKERS. Although composed of some of the more well-known business leaders and supposedly intelligent and highly educated experts, the officers of this organization didn’t even bother to return my phone calls, requests for interviews, or repeated e-mails. Funny thing is, I was told that the organization’s head was the one who requested me to just e-mail my questionnaires. In the month that I kept following up, all the secretary would say was, “Ifa-follow up ko po ke Ma’am.” Loser!

The conclusion next week....

/ http://www.stella-arnaldo.blogspot.com