New Analysis of UK Parliamentary Language from 1935 to 2010 Demonstrates an Increase in the Use of Jargon Terminology

London, United Kingdom, May 23, 2010 --(PR.com)-- Using raw data from parliamentary debates, the Content Strategy consultancy Contentini has compiled a series of analytical charts that highlight the important trends and priorities of various UK administrations over the past 75 years.

Key trends include:

An increased use of the word important.
· In recent years, the word community is used more than the word British.
· Tax has always been a key word but now police and health are of nearly equal importance.
· There was a decline in the use of the word industry during the Thatcher years.
· Women are now discussed more than men in parliamentary debate.

“Politicians tend to choose their language strategically,” said Amy Thibodeau Partner at Contentini. “This analysis is only a precursory look at how social trends and priorities are reflected in the language of politicians. As content strategists who are always thinking about the nuances of language choice, we find this kind of data fascinating.”

The complete report titled An Analysis of UK Parliamentary Language : 1935-2010 can be found at http://contentini.com/an-analysis-of-uk-parliamentary-language-1935-2010/.

###

Contact:

Amy Thibodeau
Contentini
Phone: +44 (0)78 1437 9474
amy@contentini.com
http://contentini.com

Notes to editors:

1. Contentini is a boutique agency devoted to creating online content. Our work focuses on Website Content Analysis, Web Content Strategy, Copywriting and Social Media Services.
2. In An Analysis of UK Parliamentary Language: 1935-2010, we used parliamentary debates raw data provided by the website They Work for You (http://www.theyworkforyou.com/). Common words such as the, at, honourable, minister, in, of, order, debate and sir were removed, with the remaining words grouped into a database by year.
3. Please note that the data from the years 1935 and 2010 is incomplete. We only used the data from the 26th November 1935 to 31st March 2010. As such, the statistics from the first and final year may not be reliable.
4. Each year differs in the number of debates, and hence volume of data. Therefore, rather than analysing the absolute count of usage for each word, we instead compared the count of each word against the total number of words recorded in our database for the year. This resulted in a percentage, which is more reliably comparable across years.