Aggravated by acronyms

This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.

Sid Turkish of Beverly Hills writes: ‘For more than 30 years, I have been writing to ask The Times to change its editorial stance on the use of acronyms. Acronyms should either immediately follow, or immediately precede, the word group that it stands for. The Times continues to use acronyms which are often many paragraphs after the [full name] the acronym refers to, requiring the reader to search diligently through all the preceding sentences.’

From Clark Stevens, who oversees style and usage at The Times:
A newswriting tradition dictates that an acronym or initialism be immediately attached to the full phrase for which it stands. But in the interest of readability, The Times doesn’t require that. However, also in the interest of readability, writers should introduce the two forms close together, or in a context that makes it is readily clear what the initials refer to. Readers shouldn’t be left searching the page for an explanation.

We are also somewhat flexible in deciding whether to use spelled-out forms at all. Some abbreviations -- AIDS and NAACP, to cite a couple -- have become so much more familiar and widely used than their cumbersome expanded versions that it can be more reader-friendly to leave the full term out, especially in passing references or short articles.