Call me “behind the times.” Call me “old fashioned.” Call me “old.” I don’t care. I love newspapers. And I hate to see them dying.

There’s nothing like reading the paper with morning coffee (while putting off work), spreading it out in front of me or folding it up so I can concentrate on one section. I like doing the crossword puzzle on the airplane. I like tearing out an article or a recipe. I like taking the paper with me for the wait in the doctor’s office.

Yes, I know. I can get more information faster and fresher online. I do that too. But nothing will ever replace my newspaper.

It’s difficult to watch venerable institutions like the Los Angeles Times cut budget and staff. It’s sad to see people who really care, like editor Jim O’Shea, get fired because he wouldn’t cut any more. What’s the point? Chopping costs may improve profits in the short run, but does nothing to solve the fundamental problem — how are newspapers going to survive?

I don’t know how they’ll carry on, but I can’t believe they won’t. Like any other industry in a world of change, they have to innovate. They must look at markets and consumers in new ways. The accounts won’t figure it out, but maybe those who care about their craft — and their profession — will.

What if your water isn’t safe to drink, but nobody tells you? That’s what happened to many residents of Paradise Valley, Arizona yesterday.

Luckily, I was one of the those who did get notified, at about 5 PM. It was one of those recorded messages — I couldn’t stop it, play it back, or ask questions.

At first I thought it was a joke, but then realized that Arizona American Water seriously didn’t want us to drink, cook with, or clean dishes with our tap water for at least two days. There had been some kind of malfunction at the treatment plant. (I later learned that the levels of TCE, a potential cancer-causing solvent, were dangerously high).

I didn’t have a pen handy to write down the number the message said to call for more information, so I went to Arizona American Water’s website. Wouldn’t you think if the company had a concern about the quality of water going to 5000 of its customers, it might want to post something?

But nothing was mentioned then (or even by this morning). In fact, under “Latest News,” one item said “Water Quality Meets or Surpasses Standards.” Uh, no, I don’t think so.

I called one of my good friends who also lives in Paradise Valley. She had not been notified. Neither had one of my neighbors. Apparently, dozens of people didn’t know about the dangerous water unless they happened to see the story on TV or get a call from a friend.

This kind of behavior by a company that provides an important service to the public is just plain unacceptable. There’s no excuse for not notifying all residents, and in this age of the internet, it’s ridiculous for a company not to immediately post information on its website.

Most of all I wonder, how long had we been drinking contaminated water before the company got around to notifying us? After all, Arizona American Water hasn’t done much to gain the public’s trust.

The utilization and deployment of complicated, overblown, jargon-filled language has permeated the cultural landscape of businesses, organizations and government agencies across the country, interfering with the conveyance of understanding between individuals both inside and outside of the enterprise.

Whew! It takes work for me to write like that. But for some businesses, tech companies, lawyers, health care organizations and governments, it’s the only way they know how to communicate.

That kind of writing is not only annoying and difficult to comprehend, it also costs money — in people not complying with laws or rules because they can’t understand them, and in time wasted explaining overly complicated documents to employees, customers or citizens who can’t decipher them.

An initiative called the plain language movement has been around for awhile in this country, and even got a boost when Vice President Al Gore promoted simplifying language in Federal Government communications. The campaign has slowly gotten traction. A handful of states have taken up the cause, rewriting their letters and other documents in plain English.

It’s paid off — literally.

In Washington state, the Department of Revenue rewrote one letter asking people to pay an often ignored “use tax” on products bought out of state. After the new version went out, the number of businesses paying the tax tripled, adding an extra $800,000 to state coffers over two years.

I just read that Arizona has also gotten on board, starting with the Department of Revenue, then expanding statewide. According to the Arizona Republic, staffers have rewritten 100 form letters, with many more to go. They’ve already seen results.

The unclaimed property section got 11,000 fewer phone calls in 2007 than 2006 after rewriting its letters. Because people could understand what they read, they didn’t have to waste time calling for clarification. Not only are citizens happier with better customer service, but employees feel better about their jobs because they don’t have to repeatedly answer the same questions. And the department doesn’t have to add staffers just to man the phones.

What are the hallmarks of plain language? Logical organization with the reader in mind; active voice; short sentences; common, everyday words; the use of “you” and other pronouns; a design that’s easy to follow. The bottom line — it’s easy to read, understand, and use.

Simplifying government letters, websites, forms and other documents is a good start. But many other industries and professions need to step up. How much time and money does your business lose because your audiences can’t understand what you’re saying? Evidence shows it’s worth finding out.

Why are so many people who are quoted in press releases “excited?” Here’s just a small sampling of what I’ve collected:

• “We’re excited about selling more products with X company.”
• “I’m excited about this new opportunity and the much broader responsibilities I will have.”
• “We are excited about the benefits this relationship will bring to our customers, vendors, and employees.”
• “We are excited to add X company to our European distribution network.”
• “We’re excited about this mixed-use project and delighted to have found this location.”
• “We are excited that our senior management team is now in place.”
• “We’re excited to once again offer our customers the chance to enjoy this delicious bayou delight.”

I could go on and on, but you get the idea. If writers are making up these quotes, it’s just plain lazy, colorless writing. If people are actually saying them, it’s dull, trite thinking. Some do try to change the pace, but with equally bland results:

• “X company is pleased to enter into this partnership with Y company.”
• “I am pleased that X company has delivered the perfect satellite to Y company.”
• “We are pleased to offer this unique technology to our colleagues”

Blah, blah, blah…..Why don’t these writers come up with a quote (or prod their spokesperson for a quote) that actually adds something to the story?

• “Selling more products with X Company will give us much wider distribution in Europe. That allows us to show potential customers just how easily and inexpensively we can solve their technical problems.”

• “This is the perfect place for our mixed-use project. It’s a growing, vibrant part of the city close to the freeway. And residents there have told us they’re looking forward to the new shopping, restaurants and offices we will bring to their neighborhood.”

Even worse are the supposed “quotes” that in reality, no one would ever, or could ever say.

“X company represents the best-in-class customer-focused distribution in the electronics components industry,” said John Doe, Vice President of Sales at Y company. “Their extensive product catalog published every 90 days combined with their intuitive, user-friendly website and online catalog, along with their expansive shipping capacity, will be a great advantage to customers who are looking for up-to-date product information and availability of the X company components available for their next generation of electronic devices.”

Huh?

Is it so difficult to do a real interview with spokespersons? If that’s not possible, then at least put words in their mouth that they might actually say.

Many pundits are saying the traditional press release is or should be dead, with the more interactive, social press release taking over. I am excited for that day to come.

The President and CEO of Wells Fargo, John Stumpf, delivered a PowerPoint presentation to an investment conference in New York, the same kind of presentation he’s probably given dozens of times. He outlined the company’s record third quarter results. He showed how well-positioned Wells Fargo is in a tough market, and the company’s many opportunities for future growth.

He never got much news coverage before when he gave these kinds of presentations. So what made this one at the Merrill Lynch banking conference so different?

A deliciously juicy quote that no reporter could resist.

“We have not seen a nationwide decline in housing like this since the Great Depression,” Stumpf said. “I don’t think we’re in the ninth inning of unwinding this. If we are, it’s an extra inning game.”

Headline writing can be a boring job, but not this time. “Wells Fargo: Housing Worst Since Great Depression” (Reuters); “Wells Fargo CEO says housing worst since Great Depression” (Sacramento Business Journal); “Well Fargo: Housing Crisis Worst Since Depression Era” (St. Paul Pioneer Press); “Wells Fargo: Housing Slump Worst Since Depression” (CNBC.com); “Wells Fargo: Home Slump Like Great Depression” (Forbes.com). And so it continued in publication after publication.

What’s wrong with that, you ask? Wells Fargo got lots of free publicity. The problem is, that headline was not the main point Stumpf wanted to convey. His overriding message, to the audience and to investors, was that Wells Fargo is in better shape than most other financial institutions, and is well-positioned to ride out the crisis.

Unfortunately, that “good news” was barely mentioned in the articles, and if it was, it was buried in the middle of the story. Anyone who just skimmed the headline and first paragraph would assume Wells Fargo was suffering terribly from the housing slump. At least that’s what the market thought. The company’s stock dropped $1.68, 3.9 percent.

Yes, we want to make our presentations and interviews interesting to audiences and reporters with vivid, colorful language. But we have to be always on guard for what overriding message that language might convey. And never underestimate the media’s desire to focus on “what’s wrong,” not on “what’s right.”