why not to use i in an essay

• Tips & Guides

How To Avoid Using “We,” “You,” And “I” in an Essay

• Posted on October 27, 2022 October 27, 2022

Maintaining a formal voice while writing academic essays and papers is essential to sound objective. 

One of the main rules of academic or formal writing is to avoid first-person pronouns like “we,” “you,” and “I.” These words pull focus away from the topic and shift it to the speaker – the opposite of your goal.

While it may seem difficult at first, some tricks can help you avoid personal language and keep a professional tone.

Let’s learn how to avoid using “we” in an essay.

What Is a Personal Pronoun?

Pronouns are words used to refer to a noun indirectly. Examples include “he,” “his,” “her,” and “hers.” Any time you refer to a noun – whether a person, object, or animal – without using its name, you use a pronoun.

Personal pronouns are a type of pronoun. A personal pronoun is a pronoun you use whenever you directly refer to the subject of the sentence. 

Take the following short paragraph as an example:

“Mr. Smith told the class yesterday to work on our essays. Mr. Smith also said that Mr. Smith lost Mr. Smith’s laptop in the lunchroom.”

The above sentence contains no pronouns at all. There are three places where you would insert a pronoun, but only two where you would put a personal pronoun. See the revised sentence below:

“Mr. Smith told the class yesterday to work on our essays. He also said that he lost his laptop in the lunchroom.”

“He” is a personal pronoun because we are talking directly about Mr. Smith. “His” is not a personal pronoun (it’s a possessive pronoun) because we are not speaking directly about Mr. Smith. Rather, we are talking about Mr. Smith’s laptop.

If later on you talk about Mr. Smith’s laptop, you may say:

“Mr. Smith found it in his car, not the lunchroom!” 

In this case, “it” is a personal pronoun because in this point of view we are making a reference to the laptop directly and not as something owned by Mr. Smith.

Why Avoid Personal Pronouns in Essay Writing

We’re teaching you how to avoid using “I” in writing, but why is this necessary? Academic writing aims to focus on a clear topic, sound objective, and paint the writer as a source of authority. Word choice can significantly impact your success in achieving these goals.

Writing that uses personal pronouns can unintentionally shift the reader’s focus onto the writer, pulling their focus away from the topic at hand.

Personal pronouns may also make your work seem less objective. 

One of the most challenging parts of essay writing is learning which words to avoid and how to avoid them. Fortunately, following a few simple tricks, you can master the English Language and write like a pro in no time.

Alternatives To Using Personal Pronouns

How to not use “I” in a paper? What are the alternatives? There are many ways to avoid the use of personal pronouns in academic writing. By shifting your word choice and sentence structure, you can keep the overall meaning of your sentences while re-shaping your tone.

Utilize Passive Voice

In conventional writing, students are taught to avoid the passive voice as much as possible, but it can be an excellent way to avoid first-person pronouns in academic writing.

You can use the passive voice to avoid using pronouns. Take this sentence, for example:

“ We used 150 ml of HCl for the experiment.”

Instead of using “we” and the active voice, you can use a passive voice without a pronoun. The sentence above becomes:

“150 ml of HCl were used for the experiment.” 

Using the passive voice removes your team from the experiment and makes your work sound more objective.

Take a Third-Person Perspective

Another answer to “how to avoid using ‘we’ in an essay?” is the use of a third-person perspective. Changing the perspective is a good way to take first-person pronouns out of a sentence. A third-person point of view will not use any first-person pronouns because the information is not given from the speaker’s perspective.

A third-person sentence is spoken entirely about the subject where the speaker is outside of the sentence.

Take a look at the sentence below:

“In this article you will learn about formal writing.”

The perspective in that sentence is second person, and it uses the personal pronoun “you.” You can change this sentence to sound more objective by using third-person pronouns:

“In this article the reader will learn about formal writing.”

The use of a third-person point of view makes the second sentence sound more academic and confident. Second-person pronouns, like those used in the first sentence, sound less formal and objective.

Be Specific With Word Choice

You can avoid first-personal pronouns by choosing your words carefully. Often, you may find that you are inserting unnecessary nouns into your work. 

Take the following sentence as an example:

“ My research shows the students did poorly on the test.”

In this case, the first-person pronoun ‘my’ can be entirely cut out from the sentence. It then becomes:

“Research shows the students did poorly on the test.”

The second sentence is more succinct and sounds more authoritative without changing the sentence structure.

You should also make sure to watch out for the improper use of adverbs and nouns. Being careful with your word choice regarding nouns, adverbs, verbs, and adjectives can help mitigate your use of personal pronouns. 

“They bravely started the French revolution in 1789.” 

While this sentence might be fine in a story about the revolution, an essay or academic piece should only focus on the facts. The world ‘bravely’ is a good indicator that you are inserting unnecessary personal pronouns into your work.

We can revise this sentence into:

“The French revolution started in 1789.” 

Avoid adverbs (adjectives that describe verbs), and you will find that you avoid personal pronouns by default.

Closing Thoughts

In academic writing, It is crucial to sound objective and focus on the topic. Using personal pronouns pulls the focus away from the subject and makes writing sound subjective.

Hopefully, this article has helped you learn how to avoid using “we” in an essay.

When working on any formal writing assignment, avoid personal pronouns and informal language as much as possible.

While getting the hang of academic writing, you will likely make some mistakes, so revising is vital. Always double-check for personal pronouns, plagiarism , spelling mistakes, and correctly cited pieces. 

 You can prevent and correct mistakes using a plagiarism checker at any time, completely for free.

Quetext is a platform that helps you with all those tasks. Check out all resources that are available to you today.

Sign Up for Quetext Today!

Click below to find a pricing plan that fits your needs.

You May Also Like

How to Write Polished, Professional Emails With AI

• Posted on May 30, 2024

A Safer Learning Environment: The Impact of AI Detection on School Security

• Posted on May 17, 2024

Rethinking Academic Integrity Policies in the AI Era

• Posted on May 10, 2024 May 10, 2024

Jargon Phrases to Avoid in Business Writing

• Posted on May 3, 2024 May 3, 2024

Comparing Two Documents for Plagiarism: Everything You Need to Know

• Posted on April 26, 2024 April 26, 2024

Mastering Tone in Email Communication: A Guide to Professional Correspondence

• Posted on April 17, 2024

Mastering End-of-Sentence Punctuation: Periods, Question Marks, Exclamation Points, and More

• Posted on April 12, 2024

Mastering the Basics: Understanding the 4 Types of Sentences

• Posted on April 5, 2024

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

Using “I” in Academic Writing

Traditionally, some fields have frowned on the use of the first-person singular in an academic essay and others have encouraged that use, and both the frowning and the encouraging persist today—and there are good reasons for both positions (see “Should I”).

I recommend that you not look on the question of using “I” in an academic paper as a matter of a rule to follow, as part of a political agenda (see webb), or even as the need to create a strategy to avoid falling into Scylla-or-Charybdis error. Let the first-person singular be, instead, a tool that you take out when you think it’s needed and that you leave in the toolbox when you think it’s not.

Examples of When “I” May Be Needed

• You are narrating how you made a discovery, and the process of your discovering is important or at the very least entertaining.
• You are describing how you teach something and how your students have responded or respond.
• You disagree with another scholar and want to stress that you are not waving the banner of absolute truth.
• You need “I” for rhetorical effect, to be clear, simple, or direct.

Examples of When “I” Should Be Given a Rest

• It’s off-putting to readers, generally, when “I” appears too often. You may not feel one bit modest, but remember the advice of Benjamin Franklin, still excellent, on the wisdom of preserving the semblance of modesty when your purpose is to convince others.
• You are the author of your paper, so if an opinion is expressed in it, it is usually clear that this opinion is yours. You don’t have to add a phrase like, “I believe” or “it seems to me.”

Works Cited

Franklin, Benjamin. The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin . Project Gutenberg , 28 Dec. 2006, www.gutenberg.org/app/uploads/sites/3/20203/20203-h/20203-h.htm#I.

“Should I Use “I”?” The Writing Center at UNC—Chapel Hill , writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/should-i-use-i/.

webb, Christine. “The Use of the First Person in Academic Writing: Objectivity, Language, and Gatekeeping.” ResearchGate , July 1992, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.1992.tb01974.x.

J.S.Beniwal 05 August 2017 AT 09:08 AM

I have borrowed MLA only yesterday, did my MAEnglish in May 2017.MLA is of immense help for scholars.An overview of the book really enlightened​ me.I should have read it at bachelor's degree level.

Your e-mail address will not be published

Dr. Raymond Harter 25 September 2017 AT 02:09 PM

I discourage the use of "I" in essays for undergraduates to reinforce a conversational tone and to "self-recognize" the writer as an authority or at least a thorough researcher. Writing a play is different than an essay with a purpose.

Osayimwense Osa 22 March 2023 AT 05:03 PM

When a student or writer is strongly and passionately interested in his or her stance and argument to persuade his or her audience, the use of personal pronoun srenghtens his or her passion for the subject. This passion should be clear in his/her expression. However, I encourage the use of the first-person, I, sparingly -- only when and where absolutely necessary.

Eleanor 25 March 2023 AT 04:03 PM

I once had a student use the word "eye" when writing about how to use pronouns. Her peers did not catch it. I made comments, but I think she never understood what eye was saying!

Join the Conversation

We invite you to comment on this post and exchange ideas with other site visitors. Comments are moderated and subject to terms of service.

If you have a question for the MLA's editors, submit it to Ask the MLA!

Table of Contents

Ai, ethics & human agency, collaboration, information literacy, writing process, using first person in an academic essay: when is it okay.

• CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 by Jenna Pack Sheffield

Related Concepts: Academic Writing – How to Write for the Academic Community ; First-Person Point of View ; Rhetorical Analysis; Rhetorical Stance ; The First Person ; Voice

In order to determine whether or not you can speak or write from the first-person point of view, you need to engage in rhetorical analysis. You need to question whether your audience values and accepts the first person as a legitimate rhetorical stance. Source:Many times, high school students are told not to use first person (“I,” “we,” “my,” “us,” and so forth) in their essays. As a college student, you should realize that this is a rule that can and should be broken—at the right time, of course.

By now, you’ve probably written a personal essay, memoir, or narrative that used first person. After all, how could you write a personal essay about yourself, for instance, without using the dreaded “I” word?

However, academic essays differ from personal essays; they are typically researched and use a formal tone . Because of these differences, when students write an academic essay, they quickly shy away from first person because of what they have been told in high school or because they believe that first person feels too informal for an intellectual, researched text. While first person can definitely be overused in academic essays (which is likely why your teachers tell you not to use it), there are moments in a paper when it is not only appropriate, but also more effective and/or persuasive to use first person. The following are a few instances in which it is appropriate to use first person in an academic essay:

• Including a personal anecdote: You have more than likely been told that you need a strong “hook” to draw your readers in during an introduction. Sometimes, the best hook is a personal anecdote, or a short amusing story about yourself. In this situation, it would seem unnatural not to use first-person pronouns such as “I” and “myself.” Your readers will appreciate the personal touch and will want to keep reading! (For more information about incorporating personal anecdotes into your writing, see “ Employing Narrative in an Essay .”)
• Establishing your credibility ( ethos ): Ethos is a term stemming back to Ancient Greece that essentially means “character” in the sense of trustworthiness or credibility. A writer can establish her ethos by convincing the reader that she is trustworthy source. Oftentimes, the best way to do that is to get personal—tell the reader a little bit about yourself. (For more information about ethos, see “ Ethos .”)For instance, let’s say you are writing an essay arguing that dance is a sport. Using the occasional personal pronoun to let your audience know that you, in fact, are a classically trained dancer—and have the muscles and scars to prove it—goes a long way in establishing your credibility and proving your argument. And this use of first person will not distract or annoy your readers because it is purposeful.
• Clarifying passive constructions : Often, when writers try to avoid using first person in essays, they end up creating confusing, passive sentences . For instance, let’s say I am writing an essay about different word processing technologies, and I want to make the point that I am using Microsoft Word to write this essay. If I tried to avoid first-person pronouns, my sentence might read: “Right now, this essay is being written in Microsoft Word.” While this sentence is not wrong, it is what we call passive—the subject of the sentence is being acted upon because there is no one performing the action. To most people, this sentence sounds better: “Right now, I am writing this essay in Microsoft Word.” Do you see the difference? In this case, using first person makes your writing clearer.
• Stating your position in relation to others: Sometimes, especially in an argumentative essay, it is necessary to state your opinion on the topic . Readers want to know where you stand, and it is sometimes helpful to assert yourself by putting your own opinions into the essay. You can imagine the passive sentences (see above) that might occur if you try to state your argument without using the word “I.” The key here is to use first person sparingly. Use personal pronouns enough to get your point across clearly without inundating your readers with this language.

Now, the above list is certainly not exhaustive. The best thing to do is to use your good judgment, and you can always check with your instructor if you are unsure of his or her perspective on the issue. Ultimately, if you feel that using first person has a purpose or will have a strategic effect on your audience, then it is probably fine to use first-person pronouns. Just be sure not to overuse this language, at the risk of sounding narcissistic, self-centered, or unaware of others’ opinions on a topic.

Recommended Readings:

• A Synthesis of Professor Perspectives on Using First and Third Person in Academic Writing
• Finding the Bunny: How to Make a Personal Connection to Your Writing
• First-Person Point of View

Brevity – Say More with Less

Clarity (in Speech and Writing)

Coherence – How to Achieve Coherence in Writing

Flow – How to Create Flow in Writing

Inclusivity – Inclusive Language

The Elements of Style – The DNA of Powerful Writing

Suggested Edits

• Please select the purpose of your message. * - Corrections, Typos, or Edits Technical Support/Problems using the site Advertising with Writing Commons Copyright Issues I am contacting you about something else
• Your full name
• Your email address *
• Page URL needing edits *
• Name This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Featured Articles

Academic Writing – How to Write for the Academic Community

Professional Writing – How to Write for the Professional World

Credibility & Authority – How to Be Credible & Authoritative in Speech & Writing

We should use ‘I’ more in academic writing – there is benefit to first-person perspective

Lecturer in Critical Thinking; Curriculum Director, UQ Critical Thinking Project, The University of Queensland

Disclosure statement

Peter Ellerton is affiliated with the Centre for Critical and Creative Thinking. He is a Fellow of the Rationalist Society of Australia.

University of Queensland provides funding as a member of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

The use of the word “I” in academic writing, that is writing in the first person , has a troublesome history. Some say it makes writing too subjective, others that it’s essential for accuracy.

This is reflected in how students, particularly in secondary schools, are trained to write. Teachers I work with are often surprised that I advocate, at times, invoking the first person in essays or other assessment in their subject areas.

In academic writing the role of the author is to explain their argument dispassionately and objectively. The author’s personal opinion in such endeavours is neither here nor there.

As noted in Strunk and White’s highly influential Elements of Style – (first published in 1959) the writer is encouraged to place themselves in the background.

Write in a way that draws the reader’s attention to the sense and substance of the writing, rather than to the mood and temper of the author.

This all seems very reasonable and scholarly. The move towards including the first person perspective, however, is becoming more acceptable in academia.

There are times when invoking the first person is more meaningful and even rigorous than not. I will give three categories in which first person academic writing is more effective than using the third person.

1. Where an academic is offering their personal view or argument

Above, I could have said “there are three categories” rather than “I will give three categories”. The former makes a claim of discovering some objective fact. The latter, a more intellectually honest and accountable approach, is me offering my interpretation.

I could also say “three categories are apparent”, but that is ignoring the fact it is apparent to me . It would be an attempt to grant too much objectivity to a position than it deserves.

In a similar vein, statements such as “it can be argued” or “it was decided”, using the passive voice, avoid responsibility. It is much better to say “I will argue that” or “we decided that” and then go on to prosecute the argument or justify the decision.

Taking responsibility for our stances and reasoning is important culturally as well as academically. In a participatory democracy, we are expected to be accountable for our ideas and choices. It is also a stand against the kinds of anonymous assertions that easily proliferate via fake and unnamed social media accounts.

Read more: Post-truth politics and why the antidote isn't simply 'fact-checking' and truth

It’s worth noting that Nature – arguably one of the world’s best science journals – prefers authors to selectively avoid the passive voice. Its writing guidelines note:

Nature journals prefer authors to write in the active voice (“we performed the experiment…”) as experience has shown that readers find concepts and results to be conveyed more clearly if written directly.

2. Where the author’s perspective is part of the analysis

Some disciplines, such as anthropology , recognise that who is doing the research and why they are doing it ought to be overtly present in their presentation of it.

Removing the author’s presence can allow important cultural or other perspectives held by the author to remain unexamined. This can lead to the so-called crisis of representation , in which the interpretation of texts and other cultural artefacts is removed from any interpretive stance of the author.

This gives a false impression of objectivity. As the philosopher Thomas Nagel notes, there is no “ view from nowhere ”.

Philosophy commonly invokes the first person position, too. Rene Descartes famously inferred “I think therefore I am” ( cogito ergo sum ). But his use of the first person in Meditations on First Philosophy was not simply an account of his own introspection. It was also an invitation to the reader to think for themselves.

3. Where the author wants to show their reasoning

The third case is especially interesting in education.

I tell students of science, critical thinking and philosophy that a phrase guaranteed to raise my hackles is “I strongly believe …”. In terms of being rationally persuasive, this is not relevant unless they then go on tell me why they believe it. I want to know what and how they are thinking.

To make their thinking most clearly an object of my study, I need them to make themselves the subjects of their writing.

I prefer students to write something like “I am not convinced by Dawson’s argument because…” rather than “Dawson’s argument is opposed by DeVries, who says …”. I want to understand their thinking not just use the argument of DeVries.

Read more: Thinking about thinking helps kids learn. How can we teach critical thinking?

Of course I would hope they do engage with DeVries, but then I’d want them to say which argument they find more convincing and what their own reasons were for being convinced.

Just stating Devries’ objection is good analysis, but we also need students to evaluate and justify, and it is here that the first person position is most useful.

It is not always accurate to say a piece is written in the first or third person. There are reasons to invoke the first person position at times and reasons not to. An essay in which it is used once should not mean we think of the whole essay as from the first person perspective.

We need to be more nuanced about how we approach this issue and appreciate when authors should “place themselves in the background” and when their voice matters.

• Critical thinking
• First person
• Academic writing
• Essay writing

Senior Research Fellow - Women's Health Services

Data Manager

Research Support Officer

Director, Social Policy

Head, School of Psychology

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

III. Rhetorical Situation

3.10 The Use of “I” in Writing

Kathryn Crowther; Lauren Curtright; Nancy Gilbert; Barbara Hall; Tracienne Ravita; and Kirk Swenson

The use of “I “in writing is a topic of debate, and the acceptance of its usage varies from instructor to instructor. It is difficult to predict the preferences for all your present and future instructors, but consider the effects it can potentially have on your writing. Be mindful of the use of “I” in your writing because it can make your argument sound overly biased. There are two primary reasons:

• Excessive repetition of any word will eventually catch the reader’s attention–and usually not in a good way. The use of “I” is no different.
• The insertion of “I” into a sentence alters not only the way a sentence might sound but also the composition of the sentence itself. “I” is often the subject of a sentence. If the subject of the essay is supposed to be, say, smoking, then by inserting yourself into the sentence, you are effectively displacing the subject of the essay into a secondary position. In the following example, the subject of the sentence is underlined:

Smoking is bad.

I think smoking is bad.

In the first sentence, the rightful subject, smoking, is in the subject position in the sentence. In the second sentence, the insertion of “I” and “think” replaces smoking as the subject, which draws attention to “I” and away from the topic that is supposed to be discussed. Remember to keep the message (the subject) and the messenger (the writer) separate. Indeed, your argument will be stronger if you remove the “I think” and simply assert “Smoking is bad.”

Practice Activity

This section contains material from:

Crowther, Kathryn, Lauren Curtright, Nancy Gilbert, Barbara Hall, Tracienne Ravita, and Kirk Swenson. Successful College Composition . 2nd edition. Book 8. Georgia: English Open Textbooks, 2016. http://oer.galileo.usg.edu/english-textbooks/8 . Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License . Archival link: https://web.archive.org/web/20230711203012/https://oer.galileo.usg.edu/english-textbooks/8/

3.10 The Use of “I” in Writing Copyright © 2023 by Kathryn Crowther; Lauren Curtright; Nancy Gilbert; Barbara Hall; Tracienne Ravita; and Kirk Swenson is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

Can You Use I or We in a Research Paper?

4-minute read

• 11th July 2023

Writing in the first person, or using I and we pronouns, has traditionally been frowned upon in academic writing . But despite this long-standing norm, writing in the first person isn’t actually prohibited. In fact, it’s becoming more acceptable – even in research papers.

 If you’re wondering whether you can use I (or we ) in your research paper, you should check with your institution first and foremost. Many schools have rules regarding first-person use. If it’s up to you, though, we still recommend some guidelines. Check out our tips below!

When Is It Most Acceptable to Write in the First Person?

Certain sections of your paper are more conducive to writing in the first person. Typically, the first person makes sense in the abstract, introduction, discussion, and conclusion sections. You should still limit your use of I and we , though, or your essay may start to sound like a personal narrative .

 Using first-person pronouns is most useful and acceptable in the following circumstances.

When doing so removes the passive voice and adds flow

Sometimes, writers have to bend over backward just to avoid using the first person, often producing clunky sentences and a lot of passive voice constructions. The first person can remedy this. For example: 

Both sentences are fine, but the second one flows better and is easier to read.

When doing so differentiates between your research and other literature

When discussing literature from other researchers and authors, you might be comparing it with your own findings or hypotheses . Using the first person can help clarify that you are engaging in such a comparison. For example: 

 In the first sentence, using “the author” to avoid the first person creates ambiguity. The second sentence prevents misinterpretation.

When doing so allows you to express your interest in the subject

In some instances, you may need to provide background for why you’re researching your topic. This information may include your personal interest in or experience with the subject, both of which are easier to express using first-person pronouns. For example:

Expressing personal experiences and viewpoints isn’t always a good idea in research papers. When it’s appropriate to do so, though, just make sure you don’t overuse the first person.

When to Avoid Writing in the First Person

It’s usually a good idea to stick to the third person in the methods and results sections of your research paper. Additionally, be careful not to use the first person when:

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

●  It makes your findings seem like personal observations rather than factual results.

●  It removes objectivity and implies that the writing may be biased .

●  It appears in phrases such as I think or I believe , which can weaken your writing.

Keeping Your Writing Formal and Objective

Using the first person while maintaining a formal tone can be tricky, but keeping a few tips in mind can help you strike a balance. The important thing is to make sure the tone isn’t too conversational.

 To achieve this, avoid referring to the readers, such as with the second-person you . Use we and us only when referring to yourself and the other authors/researchers involved in the paper, not the audience.

It’s becoming more acceptable in the academic world to use first-person pronouns such as we and I in research papers. But make sure you check with your instructor or institution first because they may have strict rules regarding this practice.

 If you do decide to use the first person, make sure you do so effectively by following the tips we’ve laid out in this guide. And once you’ve written a draft, send us a copy! Our expert proofreaders and editors will be happy to check your grammar, spelling, word choice, references, tone, and more. Submit a 500-word sample today!

Is it ever acceptable to use I or we in a research paper?

In some instances, using first-person pronouns can help you to establish credibility, add clarity, and make the writing easier to read.

How can I avoid using I in my writing?

Writing in the passive voice can help you to avoid using the first person.

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

How to Ace Slack Messaging for Contractors and Freelancers

Effective professional communication is an important skill for contractors and freelancers navigating remote work environments....

3-minute read

How to Insert a Text Box in a Google Doc

Google Docs is a powerful collaborative tool, and mastering its features can significantly enhance your...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

• Have your assignments done by seasoned writers. 24/7
• Contact us:
• +1 (213) 221-0069
• [email protected]

How to Replace I in Essays: Alternative 3rd Person Pronouns

replacing I in essays

Learning how to write an essay without using ‘I,’ ‘We,’ or ‘You,’ and other personal languages can be challenging for students. The best writing skills recommend not to use such pronouns. This guide explores how to replace ‘I,’ ‘We,’ or ‘You’ in an essay and the methods to avoid them.

For those of us who have been able to overcome this, you will agree that there was a time when you experienced a challenge when finding alternatives to clauses such as “I will argue” or “I think.”

The good thing is that there are several methods of communicating your point and writing an essay without using ‘I’ or related personal language.

Let us Write your Essays! No Plagiarism

Get an expert writer to score an A in your next essay assignment. Place your order today, and you will enjoy it.

Why Avoid Using Pronouns in Formal Writing

Before identifying the communication methods without using personal language like “I,” it is best to know why we should avoid such language while writing essays.

The most important reason for avoiding such language is because it is not suitable for formal writing such as essays. Appropriate professional English should not include any form of personal pronouns or language.

The second and equally important reason to avoid using personal language while writing an essay is to sound impersonal, functional, and objective.

In formal English, personal pronouns conflict with the idea of being impersonal, functional, and objective because they make redundant references to the writer and other people.

Personal pronouns will make an essay seem to contain only the writer’s perspectives and others they have deliberately selected. Again, they will make the work appear subjective.

Another reason to avoid personal language while coming up with an essay is to avoid sounding as if you have an urgent need to impress the reader through wording.

Personal pronouns like “you” and “I” tend to suggest something important that is away from what the writing is all about.

By continually using “I,” “we,” or “you,” you are taking the reader’s attention from the essay to other personal issues. The essay becomes all about the writer. 

That being said, let’s explore how to replace “I” in an essay.

Custom Essay Writing Service by vetted writers

Ways of avoiding pronouns “i,” “you,” and “we” in an essay.

You can replace the pronouns ‘I’, ‘You’, and ‘We’ by replacing them with acceptable wording, applying passive voice instead of pronouns, Using a third-person perspective, adopting an objective language, and including strong verbs and adjectives.

In our other guide, we explained the best practices to avoid using ‘you’ in essay writing and use academically sound words. Let us explore each of these strategies in detail.

1. Replacing it with an Acceptable Wording

This is a very good strategy for replacing “I” in an essay. The problem is that it is often difficult to find the right word to replace the personal pronoun. Though this is the case, “I” has some alternatives.

For example, if the verb that follows it revolves around writing and research, such as “…will present” or “…have described”, it is best to replace “I” with text-referencing nouns such as “the essay.”

If you wanted to say “I will present” or “I have described”, then the alternative will be “the essay will present,” or “as described in the essay.”

Another method of replacing “I” in an essay is using appropriate wording like “this writer” if the verb’s action is not within the text.

While this is sometimes acceptable, it is often advised to have no words here by using passive verbs or their equivalents.

A wording that may also be used but rarely suitable is “the researcher”. This alternative can only be used when your actions as a writer are completely detached from the writing.

2. Using Passive voice Instead of Pronouns

Another way to replace “I” and other personal pronouns in an essay is to use passive voice. This is achieved by transforming an active verb passive.

Though this is the case, the strategy is often difficult, and it may create sentence structures that are not acceptable in formal writing and language.

The sentences in which “I” can be successfully changed using this strategy is when an active verb describing an object is transformed into its passive form. 

3. Using a Third-Person Perspective

This is a very important and applicable strategy when replacing “I” in an essay. This is where you avoid using first-person and second-person perspectives.

When referring to the subject matter, refer directly to them using the third person. For example, if you were to write, “I think regular exercise is good for mind and body”, you can replace it with “Regular exercise is good for mind and body”.

4. Use of Objective Language

Objective language is lost when a person uses informal expressions like colloquialisms, slang, contractions, and clichés. It is the reason why we discourage the use of contractions in essay writing so that you can keep things formal.

While informal language can be applicable in casual writing and speeches, it is not acceptable when writing essays. This is because you will be tempted to use a first-person perspective to convey your message.

5. Being Specific and using Strong Verbs and Adjectives

In most cases, essays that have been written using a lot of personal pronouns tend to be imprecise. When you want to avoid using “I” in your essay, try to be exact and straight to the point.

Personal pronouns tend to convey a subjective message, and it is up to the writer to explain their perspectives through writing.

Here, a writer will use a lot of “I think…” or “I believe…” to express their opinion. By doing so, the writer will end up wasting a lot of time explaining a concept.

Instead of doing that, it is best to look for appropriate verbs and adjectives to explain the points. Also, use objective language. Refer to the suggestions given by credible evidence instead of basing your arguments on what you think.

Get an essay written by a Team

Our team avoids plagiarism and ensures checks to guarantee a quality and ORIGINAL paper

Words to use Instead of Personal Pronouns like “You” and “I”

As noted, it is important to avoid using personal pronouns such as “You” and “I” when writing an essay.

By eliminating them or finding alternatives to them, your essay will be formal and objective. You can decide to eliminate them in a sentence.

For example, you could be having a sentence like “I think the author makes a valid point concerning capitalism.”

In this example, you can eliminate the personal language and write, “The author makes a valid point concerning capitalism.”

The second sentence goes straight to the point and is objective.

Other words to use instead of personal pronouns, like “You” and “I,” can be created when personal judgment words are avoided.

Instead, it is best to replace those words with those that refer to the evidence.

Examples of Ways to Replace Personal Pronouns

Below are examples of how personal judgment words can be replaced by words referring to the evidence.

• I feel – In light of the evidence
• From I think – According to the findings
• I agree – It is evident from the data that
• I am convinced – Considering the results
• You can see that – From the results, it is evident that

Using the third-person or “it” constructions can be used to replace personal pronouns like “You” and “I.” Such words also help to reduce the word count of your essay and make it short and precise.

For example, if you write “I conclude that, “replace those words with “it could be concluded that. ” Here, “it” constructions are helping replace personal pronouns to make the sentence more objective and precise.

To be more specific, words to replace personal pronouns like “I” include “one,” the viewer,” “the author,” “the reader,” “readers,” or something similar.

However, avoid overusing those words because your essay will seem stiff and awkward. For example, if you write, “I can perceive the plot’s confusion,” you can replace “I” by writing, “Readers can perceive the plot’s confusion.”

Words that can be used instead of personal pronouns like “You” include “one,” “the viewer,” reader,” “readers,” or any other similar phrases. It is similar to words that replace first-person pronouns.

For example, if you write “you can see that the poet’s tone is serious and urgent,” you can replace “You” by writing “readers/one can see that the poet’s tone is serious and urgent.”

Words to use Instead of “My” in an Essay

Since “My” demonstrates the possessiveness of something, in this case, the contents or thoughts within an essay, it makes the writing subjective. According to experts, writing should take an objective language . To do this, it is important to replace it.

You can replace the word “My” with “the”. For example, if you write, “My final thoughts concerning the issue are”, you can write, “The final thoughts concerning the issues are”.

In this case, the article “The” makes the sentence formal and objective.

Another method is eliminating the word “My” from the sentence to make it more objective and straight to the point.

In the same example above, if you write “My final thoughts concerning the issue are”, you can write “Final thoughts concerning the issue are”.

The major difference here is that the word “my” in the first example makes it subjective, and eliminating it from the sentence makes it sound formal and objective.

Final Advice

Therefore, when writing an essay, it is important to avoid personal pronouns like “You”, “I,” and “My.” Not all papers use third-person language. Different types of essays are formatted differently, a 5-paragraph essay is different from a 4-page paper , but all use third-person tones.

This is because an essay should be written in formal language, and using personal pronouns makes it appear and sound informal. Therefore, writing an essay without using ‘I’ is good.

Formal language makes your essay sound objective and precise. However, do not remove the first-person language when writing personal experiences in an essay or a paper. This is because it is acceptable and formal that way.

Order an Excellent Essay today!

Let us help you get that A in your next assignment. Place your order today, and you will enjoy the benefits.

With over 10 years in academia and academic assistance, Alicia Smart is the epitome of excellence in the writing industry. She is our managing editor and is in charge of the writing operations at Grade Bees.

Related posts

essay writing problems

10 Essay Writing Problems and their Easy Solutions

writing essay on your phone

How to Write an Essay or paper on your Phone: 3 Easy Ways

essay writing is important

7 reasons why Writing is Important in College & in Life

How to Replace 'I' in essays and formal writing

You have probably written personal essays, admission essays, memoirs, or narrative essays that call for using first-person pronouns. Writing such personal essays without using "I," "we," "my," "us," and "you," among others, is practically impossible and sometimes very challenging. Nevertheless, when writing academic essays that require research, critical thinking, and a formal tone, the use of a first-person perspective becomes taboo.

For many college students, confusion looms because first-person pronouns are technically prohibited when writing middle and high school essays. Therefore, we can say this early that although you can use first-person pronouns in academic essays, you have to restrict it only to some types of essays and writing perspectives, as discussed widely in this guide.

Using personal experience or person pronouns does not mean you have weak writing skills. We explore everything you need to know about using first-person pronouns in academic essays, when to and when not to use them, and alternatives to utilize instead of "I," "we," and "you."

We will also answer areas surrounding giving opinions or introducing arguments using "I think/believe/forecast/hold" and "I argue/opine/contend," respectively.

Why is using Person Pronouns a Taboo in Formal Writing?

Using person pronouns "I," "we," and "you" in an essay is discouraged in formal writing unless necessary because it makes an essay sound subjective, personal, unofficial, or informal, and not critical.

More often than not, academic essays that use personal pronouns are subjective in that the writer's perspective reigns over what experts or scholars in the field have discovered or advised.

Again, using personal pronouns also makes your readers get bored easily. As the writer is at the center of every argument, the flow of ideas is lacking in such essays.

At the same time, the tone of such essays is show-off or bragging, especially if you are too subjective and blind to scholarly findings. Citing essays written in a personal perspective or tone is also not easy.

It is easy to plagiarize other people"s ideas when writing an essay in the first person. There are also high chances of repetition and redundancy, making reading and marking such essays difficult.

Deciding when to use "I" based on academic field conventions

As you may have rightfully discovered, some academic fields outrightly permit using the first person when writing essays.

The rules about the use of first-person pronouns change continuously. Therefore, students must consult their instructor on whether to use the first-person perspective. However, the following guidelines can also assist you in deciding when to use "I."

The use of "I" in humanities essays will depend on the view of your instructor. Humanity subjects essays often offer personal language analysis, artwork, or ideas.

Writers in this discipline tend to emphasize agency and value assertiveness. Therefore, the first person is used appropriately in many instances. 

In many cases, writers may apply the first person less effectively, following assertion phrases such as "I believe," "I feel," and "I think" to manifest real argument defense. Though your audience is interested in your view about the field, they expect you to support, argue, and elaborate your assertions fully.

Personal suggestions do not support your view; you require concrete evidence to convince the audience. Technically, this means blending in some scholars' concepts, facts, and opinions and citing them altogether.

Social sciences

Generally, several social scientists shun the use of the first person, probably because scientists also ignore it. It leads to a subjective perspective or tone and conflicts with the ideals of scientific writing . However, using the first person is persistently accepted in social sciences, especially when describing a personal perspective or project. You can use the first person when writing an internship report, reflection essay, and other papers if allowed to do so by your instructor.

Scientific writers eschewed the application of "I" in the past because they considered the first person affects the impersonality and objectivity impression they intend to create. However, conventions seem to transform over time. For example, when you describe a particular project you are working on or link the project with the existing research topic. In this case, you must check with your instructor to determine whether you can use the first person.

Other writings

Several writing situations apply first person. For example, speech writing uses the first and second person to create a desirable relationship between the listener and the speaker. However, when writing a resume, you should ignore the use of the first person and describe your education. Skills and experience without employing personal pronouns.

Instances that permit the use of the first person in an academic essay

You are allowed to write your essay in the first person. However, that has a limit beyond which punitive measures will apply. You might lose a good grade because you did not follow instructions.

Again, always read your prompt before planning and writing an essay. It helps clarify various conventions to be observed and those to be bypassed.

After all, the main audience of your essay is your tutor, professor, or instructor, so their say matters more.

Clarification of passive constructions

As a writer, when you ignore the use of the first person in academic essays, you may create confusing and passive sentences. Using the first person is sometimes critical in making your essay clearer.

For example, when writing an essay about word processing automation, you want to elaborate on the point that you are employing Microsoft Word to write your paper. If you try to ignore first-person pronouns, the sentences might read, "Right now, this paper is being written in Microsoft Word."

Even though this statement is correct, it is passive in nature- the subject is acted upon, and there is no action in the sentence. However, the sentence "Right now, I am writing this paper in Microsoft Word "sounds better to many people.

When you analyze the two sentences, you will find that the second sentence is clearer, and this is due to the application of the first-person pronouns. Generally, the use of the first person is vital in improving the clarity of the sentence.

Defining your view about other positions

Argumentative essays sometimes provide you with an opportunity to define your opinion concerning the topic. This dimension is critical in informing your audience about your stand. Therefore, it is sometimes vital to put your personal opinion in the essay.

As stated in the point above, as an essay writer, you can imagine the clarity of your sentence in case you omit the first-person pronoun. So an important hint here is applying personal pronouns to clear and sounding sentences that make your points clear.

Developing your credibility

Credibility is defined by ethos is an ancient Greece word that means character in the sense of credibility.

A writer can create ethos by convincing the reader that he or she is a credible source. The best way to create ethos is to become personal to a certain extent- inform the reader about yourself.

For example, when you are writing an argumentative essay about dance as a sport. Using personal pronouns occasionally to inform your audience that you are a skilled dancer and that you have scars and muscles to prove it will establish your ethos and prove your argument.

Generally, the use of the first person will not annoy or distract your audience because it is reasonable.

Incorporating personal anecdote

An anecdote refers to a strong hook that is used in an essay to attract the reader's attention in your essay introduction . The best hook involves an existing story about yourself or a personal anecdote in many cases.

Therefore, in this case, using the personal pronoun is unnatural; your audience will be excited with your personal touch that can convince them to explore your essay. Using the first-person pronoun in creating anecdotes in an essay introduction is one of the ideal instances in academic essay writing.

The instances that we listed above are not exhaustive. We recommend that you use personal judgment and consult your instructor when you agree not certain about their perspective concerning using the first-person pronoun.

Ultimately, it is fine to use the first person when you feel it will serve a purpose or convey strategic influence on your readers. However, it is important not to overuse the first person because it may lead to a self-centered essay.

How to avoid using "I" in an essay

Sometimes your instructor may be categorical on the use of personal pronouns like "I," "we," and "You" in your essay. Many students have been asking how to avoid using "I" in an essay.

Writing without using the first person can be cumbersome for some students. In addition, it is sometimes challenging to get alternatives to personal clauses. Nonetheless, there are numerous ways to avoid this problem in your essay writing, especially when instructed not to use a personal pronoun.

Practicing the following methods will introduce you to the guidelines of formal academic writing and assist you in producing an exemplary essay.

1. Follow General Rules

Below are some suggestions on avoiding the deliberate use of first-person pronouns in formal writing.

• Apply third-person perspective. It is formal to use the third-person point of view to limit the use of the first-person point of view. Additionally, you should also ignore the use of a second person. It is critical to write the content matter of your essay in the third person point.
• Use objective language rather than informal expressions: Informal expressions involve colloquialisms, contractions, clinches, and slang. The use of objective language is fundamental in eradicating informal expression. For example, when referring to evidence, you can say: As per X and Y", "Given the evidence," considering the findings", From the findings of the study," X asserts that, "X opines that," etc.
• Be specific : Personal language is imprecise, while formal writing is exact and clear. Being specific will assist you as a writer avoid using the first person in your essay.
• Think about strong verbs and adjectives: as a writer, refrain from using personal language. Instead, you should develop solid adjectives that relate to facts and are free from personal opinions. Then, you can use the thesaurus to make references to find the word that conveys your point formally.

2.  Get an alternative to the first-person point of view

• Put your claims directly: Sometimes, you require to avoid the use of the first person. Putting your claims directly will guarantee the elimination of personal pronouns in your essay. Undertake your research to garner concrete evidence that can ensure direct claims in your essay. as a writer, you should maintain an authoritative tone throughout your essay and avoid using personal pronouns that can affect your stance. Also, comparing the examples will help you as a writer to consider the direct claim that is free from the first-person point of view.
• Refer to the supporting evidence rather than personal thoughts: Many students are tempted to use personal claims when writing an essay, thinking that they make the claims stronger. However, this is not true; to make your claims stronger, you should refer to the evidence provided by secondary sources. Mentioning an authoritative source is vital in making your claims credible.
• Outline your essay without employing personal pronouns: As an academic essay writer, it is crucial to ignore personal pronouns when you develop the structure of your paper. However, you can make adjustments if you cannot delete personal pronouns from your outline.
• Utilize the passive voice to stress an action without stating yourself: You can apply passive voice sparingly to describe a procedure and map your argument. However, as an academic writer, we recommend the extensive use of active voice where possible to make the essay formal.

Personal Pronouns in Academic Writing

Personal pronouns can be employed to replace places, people, or things to make the sentences shorter and clearer.

Personal pronouns comprise I, it, we, she, he, you, and they.

Your personal pronoun preference predicts whether your paper is in the third person or the first person.

Second Person (You)

The second person pronoun is least used in academic writing, and it addresses the audience directly. In many cases, it is regarded as chatty and, therefore, commonly avoided in academic writing. However, the second person is used in writing presentations where the readers are addressed directly.

When are you required to use the second person?

This is one of the questions that many students have asked. The second person is used to offer advice, explain, or give directions. It permits the author to connect with the readers by concentrating on the audience directly. It includes pronouns such as "you," "yours," and "your."

When should you avoid the use of the second person?

This is one of the questions that many students ask. Unfortunately, writing your essay in second person perspective can lead to ineffective arguments and research papers.

Using second papers can make the essay sound like the writer is persuading or advising the audience. consequently, the use of second-person perspective is avoided in many academic essay writings except when ideal guidelines are provided by your instructor that allows its use.

As a writer, you should avoid using the second person to ensure compelling arguments and research papers rather than persuasive and advising papers.

How to avoid using second person

One common guideline for writing academic papers is avoiding the second person. This is because formal academic papers are not intended to address the audience directly. However, many students find s it challenging to write an essay without the inclusion of the second person pronouns because the second person is one of the main components of speech. There are numerous ways of refraining from using the second person without interfering with the meaning of your text. The following are some of the tips that can assist you in overcoming this challenge.

Apply the word "one."

The word "one" can be used to replace you in many sentences without sacrificing the meaning of the sentence. For example:

• Second person : you can perceive danger from a distance.
• Revision : one can perceive danger from a distance.

Use somebody or someone

Somebody or someone is a third-person perspective that can be used to replace the second person without interfering with the meaning of the sentence. For example:

• Second person : You may feel sad about the decision.
• Revision : Someone may feel sad about the decision.

Replace You with the word people

In many cases, the use of the word people serves to replace the second person better without changing the meaning of the sentence in your essay. For example:

• Second person : you know the consequences of heavy rains.
• Revision : people know the consequences of heavy rains.

Reconstruct the sentence

in some instances, it is possible to rearrange your sentence to eliminate the second person without affecting the meaning of the sentence. For example:

• Second person: after reading the script, you will be ready to do the experiment.
• Revision: this script describes how the experiment was conducted.

Eliminate the unnecessary second person

Unnecessary use of a second person is common in most academic essays. This makes the sentence sound vague and advising in nature. Therefore, it is vital to peruse through your work and eliminate the unnecessary second person. For example:

• Second person : you should initially make sure all issues are addressed.
• Revision : Initially, make sure all issues are addressed.

We as a personal pronoun is commonly used in instances where co-authors write the paper. In most cases, students use we to refer to all historians, humankind, historians. However, this should be avoided as possible because it makes the audience guess your reference. It is recommended to use a noun instead of a pronoun in this perspective. Also, you can switch to third person   

Third-person (she, he, her, it, her, its)

The third-person point of view is applied in scientific writings. It involves the use of indefinite pronouns to refer to the subject. 

However, the rule is not n stringent, and there are several exceptions. For example, employing the first person in introductions, discussions, conclusions, and abstracts is acceptable. However, the use of "I" in this case is still not allowed, and as a writer, you should use "we" to describe the group of researchers who took part in the study.

The third person is used to write results and methods sections. As a writer, it is crucial to maintain consistency, and switching from one point to another within the parts of your text can be discouraging and distracting.

It is always the best idea to check your assignment guidelines to make sure your piece is free from nanny grammatical errors that might result from inappropriate third-person pronouns.

Avoiding personal pronouns in academic writing

Students, in many instances, are advised to avoid using personal pronouns when writing academic essays. However, this rule is not permanent, and it depends on the supervisor's preference.

When you write your essay, you should make sure that you withdraw the reader's attention rather than yourself. Generally, when you are writing an academic essay, you should be professional. Using personal pronouns makes your essay sound personal, making it more informal. The following strategies can help you avoid using the personal pronoun in your essay writing.

Use passive voice to replace pronouns

As we stated earlier, the use of personal pronouns such as "I," "You," and "We" can make your essay sound informal in most instances.

Employing passive voice in place of these pronouns may deem your essay formal. Therefore, as a student, you should avoid these pronouns as possible and instead employ passive voice.

Employ third-person perspective

The third person is an ideal perspective that you can use to replace the first-person and second-person points of view. In addition, the use of the third person is significant in elevating the formality of your essay.

When to use personal pronouns in formal academic writing

Formal academic writing demonstrates impression and knowledge of the topic to the audience. It incorporates information that displays the writer's respect to the audience and indicates the seriousness of the writer concerning the topic.

The use of the personal pronoun in formal academic writing is not common. However, they are allowed in tasks that require the inclusion of personal information.

First-person pronouns

It is advisable not to use first-person pronouns in your formal essay because they can make your paper wordy. In addition, this reveals that the writer is less confident in expressing the ideas, resulting in an informal tone in the essay.

Moreover, the use of the first person will discourage your readers, making them speculate that you are using your thoughts. Therefore, in this context, you should avoid expressions such as I believe, in my opinion, or I think.

Second person pronoun

Using the second person in your essay affects the formality of your essay. It can bring false assumptions to an essay. To ensure your essay is formal, you can replace the second person with third-person perspectives.

Third-person pronouns

Third-person pronouns are the best choice in most college or academic writing. However, they can be sued in writing research reports and formal essays. Therefore, they are used to replace the first and second-person points of view.

Essays involve evaluating the topic, and I rely on the writer's experience and ideas rather than researched information. The second person does not imply because the essay entails the writer's thoughts and not the audience's thoughts. Using the second person indicates the reader's thoughts, especially when the reader is your instructor.

Additionally, using the first person is unnecessary because the reader can easily speculate that the points addressed in the essay are the writer's perspectives. After all, the writer's name is indicated in writing.

Research reports

Research report involves writers" analysis of other sources. When writing research reports, the use of the third person is critical in providing concrete evidence to the paper. The use of the third person in writing research reports assists the writer to credit other people"s perspectives concerning the topic. For example:

• James suggested that the formation of a peace club is essential in solving wars
• Records of the past show that the formation of a peace club is essential in solving wars (James)

In instances where the source is not accredited, the reader may assume that those are the writer's thoughts without the use of the first-person pronoun. Generally, the use of third-person pronouns is vital in ensuring the formality of academic writing.

Related Read: How to write a perfect narrative essay.

How to express the personal experience in your academic writing

The role of personal experience in academic writing depends on your paper's purpose and context. 

Papers that seek to evaluate data or objective principles as in anthropology reduce the use of personal experience because they may distract the writer from the purpose of the paper.

Nonetheless, you may need to explain your stand as a researcher based on your topic in some cases.

Personal experiences can be used to explain how theory or idea is applied or apply the experience as a proof or demonstration of a certain principle.

Overall, personal experience plays a legitimate role in academic writing. Applying personal experience effectively means presenting your argument rather than making it the end of your paper.

Additionally, it is critical to keep your hypothetical stories concise. However, they can support arguments required for vitality and concrete illustrations.

Below are some different ways to use personal experience as part of your academic writing:

• Anecdotes: as we stated before, incorporating anecdotes is the best way to include your personal experience in the introduction part of your essay. for example, writers use real hypothetical experiences to explain principles and ideas in philosophical arguments.
• Most specific writing conditions like application essays require the inclusion of personal experience as part of the discussion.
• Making references to personal experience is significant in developing your authority about a certain subject. This applies when writing internship reports, practicum reports, reflection essays , and narrative essays , among others.
• When writing a research proposal for a thesis, dissertation, term paper, or research paper

Discipline-Specific Suggestions on Incorporating personal experience in your academic writing

Let"s explore how different disciplines allow you to incorporate personal experiences when writing a formal paper.

Religion permits the use of personal experience in most cases. Nevertheless, many religion courses involve a textual, historical, or cultural approach that requires impersonality and objectivity.

Therefore, despite possessing powerful experiences or strong beliefs in this discipline, they could not support scholarly analysis.

But it would help if you asked your instructor to confirm whether you can include personal experiences, especially in response papers

Women"s studies

Women"s studies are taught from feminist perspectives. This perspective is interested in the manner in which women perceive gender roles.

In this case, personal experience can be used as evidence for argumentative and analytical papers in this discipline.

Also, in this field, you can be asked to maintain writing that necessitates the application of theoretical concepts derived from your experiences.

As we explained earlier, science as a discipline involves the study of fixed principles and data objectively. Therefore, including personal experiences is minimized as possible in this type of writing.

When you write lab reports, you must primarily describe observations so that the audience can redo the experiment.

Consequently, providing minimal information is effective. However, when you are working on case studies in social sciences, including people's personal experiences may be the fundamental part of these writings.

The analysis of the historical period does not require the inclusion of personal experience because it is less likely to advance your intended objectivity.

But some historical scholarship presumes the investigation of individual histories. Therefore, though you may not reference your individual experience, you may as well discuss the illustrations of people's historical experiences.

Literature, fine arts, Film, and Music

In most cases, including personal experience is vital in writing projects in this field. For example, personal experience is vital in response paper or any assignment that enquires about your experience as a viewer or reader.

Many literature and film scholars are concerned with how their audience perceives their literary work. Therefore, the discussion about the viewers, or audience's personal experience is appropriate.

Also, personal experience plays an integral part in this field because it provides the writers with hints on how to improve and make the changes that conform to the reader's requirements.

Philosophical writings involve evaluating and constructing existing arguments or developing personal arguments. In most instances, doing this efficiently incorporates the presentation of hypothetical illustrations or examples.

In this scenario, you may find that recounting or inventing your experience can assist in the demonstration of your point.

Personal experience may play an integral role in philosophical papers as much as you consistently explain to the audience the relationship between your experience and your argument.

As a student, your decisions on the use of personal experience will be controlled by the type of discipline that your paper belongs to. Moreover, the instructor's choice is also very fundamental in writing a particular paper. Therefore, it is critical to check with your instructor to be sure whether to include a personal experience or not.  

Which personal pronouns to use? Third (it) or First (I)

Generally, your choice of the type of personal pronoun to use in your academic writing depends on your discipline or the nature of your assignment.

• Discipline . As stated earlier, fields such as social sciences or sciences recommend the third person. However, some components of humanities demand to be addressed in the first person. This still relies on the assignment. Consequently, it is vital to refer to your handbooks, module or speak with your instructor to confirm.
• Nature of your assignment. A s a student, you must write your academic assignment using the third person. However, the major exception is when you are required to write reflexively, where you link your thoughts with experiences. In this case, the use of the first person is appropriate.

Final Remarks

As you set out to write your essay, you are likely to wonder when to use and when to avoid using personal pronouns like "I," "You," and "My" in an essay. Although using personal pronouns is allowed in formal academic writing conventions, there is a limit.

Although there are different types of essays, each formatted differently, they mostly use a third-person tone. It is a preferred way of doing things in the scholarly realm to make it objective, reasonable, and credible. Using the first person can increase concreteness and authority in your essay, which might be impersonal and vague .

We have discussed, at length, alternatives to use instead of personal pronouns, when to use personal pronouns, and how to weave in personal perspective when writing an essay or other academic papers, and we are confident your questions are answered.

Thus far, we advise that you maintain a formal tone and language when writing academic essays. Most importantly, consult with your instructor or professor before writing an essay, which is great if you read the prompt and are still confused.

Gradecrest is a professional writing service that provides original model papers. We offer personalized services along with research materials for assistance purposes only. All the materials from our website should be used with proper references. See our Terms of Use Page for proper details.

Using You in Academic Writing

Using You in Academic Writing Podcast

Using you in academic writing transcript.

This is Kurtis Clements with another effective writing podcast. In this episode, I am going to talk about using the second person, you and your, in academic writing.

Many folks are confused when it comes to using the second person pronouns “you” and “your” in their academic writing, in large part because such pronouns are used often in other kinds of writing, so it seems natural to use such words in academic writing.

What is “academic writing”? Academic writing is writing that is generally formal; by and large, it’s the kind of writing produced in school when you are writing a report or an essay. Academic writing usually does not contain contractions or slang, nor does academic writing use emoticons or exclamation points. Academic writing sticks to a fairly objective point of view and avoids personal pronouns such as “I, we, us, our, you,” and “your,” for example. Now this is not to say that academic writing will never use such pronouns, but as a guiding general principle such pronouns are not used often in academic writing.

I don’t want to confuse you, but not all writing produced in school is “academic.” For example, if you were taking a creative writing course, while you may write essays that require a formal approach to writing, you will also be writing “creatively”—short stories and poems and other genres that would not require you to use “academic writing.”

Imagine a poem like Gwendolyn Brook’s “We Real Cool” in which the speaker, a thug without much of a future, says, “We real cool. We left school. We lurk late” written in formal academic writing like this: “They were indifferent to the conventional values of society. They left school. They lurked late at night.” Big difference, right? Of course. Academic writing is not the kind of writing to use when writing creatively.

Ok, so back to our discussion of second person. Second person is the use of the pronouns “you” and “your” in writing. In this podcast, I sometimes relate what I am talking about to my audience—to you folks listening right now—so I will make statements like “I don’t want to confuse you, but…” In my podcast, which is not a formal writing situation, it’s fine to use the pronouns “you” and “your.”

As a guiding principle, the second person pronouns “you” and “your” should not be used in academic writing. Using “you and your” is informal and lacks the kind of professional tone found in academic writing. “You” may work fine in some situations (like this podcast, for example), but in academic writing, such usage can be downright confusing. When I use “you” in my podcast, it’s clear that I am addressing my listeners.

But let’s say you were reading a paper about recycling, something that you already do. What would your reaction be if every now and then the writer included a sentence like “All you would need to do is set up a few extra bins in your home for glass, paper, metal, and plastic, and then put each item into its respective bin.” What would your response be? You would likely be confused, right? After all, you already recycle. And imagine other instances of the writer referring to “you” in a sentence. Every time you read “you,” you stop in your tracks and think, “Me?”

Let’s say the recycling paper’s purpose is to persuade and thus the logical audience would be folks who don’t recycle. Would “you” be appropriate then? No. While there would clearly be less confusion on the part of readers, writing of a more formal nature should be as objective as possible and not refer directly to readers.

Imagine reading a formal academic essay that is arguing for greater individual effort to recycle, and throughout the paper the writer uses the objective third person point of view, making such statements as “Individuals have a responsibility to future generations to do what they can to cut down on waste” and “Individuals must be proactive in recycling at home and work,” and then all of a sudden, out of the blue, the writing shifts to second person and makes a statement like “You might be busy, but if you make recycling a top priority then you would probably be successful.”

Whoa, right?

Where did that sentence come from? As a reader, you were engaged in the persuasive but objective discussion of the need to recycle, when all of a sudden the writing shifts to second person, and it seems like the writer is pointing a finger at you.

The use of second person can be confusing, awkward, and off-putting in academic writing, so it’s best to avoid the pronouns “you” and “your.”

A good way to ensure such pronouns don’t appear in your paper is to read your work slowly aloud. Mark each “you” or “your” you find and revise accordingly. With a little practice, keeping the second person out of your writing will come naturally.

Thanks for listening, everyone. Happy writing.

Share this:

• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)

Follow Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive email notifications of new posts.

Email Address

• RSS - Posts
• RSS - Comments
• COLLEGE WRITING
• USING SOURCES & APA STYLE
• EFFECTIVE WRITING PODCASTS
• LEARNING FOR SUCCESS
• PLAGIARISM INFORMATION
• FACULTY RESOURCES
• Student Webinar Calendar
• Academic Success Center
• Writing Center
• About the ASC Tutors
• DIVERSITY TRAINING
• PG Peer Tutors
• PG Student Access

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

• College Writing
• Using Sources & APA Style
• Learning for Success
• Effective Writing Podcasts
• Plagiarism Information
• Faculty Resources
• Tutor Training

Twitter feed

164 Phrases and words You Should Never Use in an Essay—and the Powerful Alternatives you Should

This list of words you should never use in an essay will help you write compelling, succinct, and effective essays that impress your professor.

Writing an essay can be a time-consuming and laborious process that seems to take forever.

But how often do you put your all into your paper only to achieve a lame grade?

You may be left scratching your head, wondering where it all went wrong.

Chances are, like many students, you were guilty of using words that completely undermined your credibility and the effectiveness of your argument.

Our professional essay editors have seen it time and time again: The use of commonplace, seemingly innocent, words and phrases that weaken the power of essays and turn the reader off.

But can changing a few words here and there really make a difference to your grades?

Absolutely.

If you’re serious about improving your essay scores, you must ensure you make the most of every single word and phrase you use in your paper and avoid any that rob your essay of its power (check out our guide to editing an essay for more details).

Here is our list of words and phrases you should ditch, together with some alternatives that will be so much more impressive. For some further inspiration, check out our AI essay writer .

Vague and Weak Words

What are vague words and phrases.

Vague language consists of words and phrases that aren’t exact or precise. They can be interpreted in multiple ways and, as such, can confuse the reader.

Essays that contain vague language lack substance and are typically devoid of any concrete language. As such, you should keep your eyes peeled for unclear words when proofreading your essay .

Why You Shouldn’t Use VAGUE Words in Essays

Professors detest vagueness.

In addition to being ambiguous, vague words and phrases can render a good piece of research absolutely useless.

Let’s say you have researched the link between drinking soda and obesity. You present the findings of your literature review as follows:

“Existing studies have found that drinking soda leads to weight gain.”

Your professor will ask:

What research specifically? What/who did it involve? Chimpanzees? Children? OAPs? Who conducted the research? What source have you used?

And the pat on the back you deserve for researching the topic will never transpire.

Academic essays should present the facts in a straightforward, unambiguous manner that leaves no doubt in the mind of the reader.

Key takeaway: Be very specific in terms of what happened, when, where, and to whom.

VAGUE Words and Phrases You Shouldn’t Use in an Essay

Flabby words and expressions, what are flabby expressions.

Flabby expressions and words are wasted phrases. They don’t add any value to your writing but do take up the word count and the reader’s headspace.

Flabby expressions frequently contain clichéd, misused words that don’t communicate anything specific to the reader. For example, if someone asks you how you are feeling and you reply, “I’m fine,” you’re using a flabby expression that leaves the inquirer none the wiser as to how you truly are.

Why Should Flabby Words be Removed from an Essay?

Flabby words are fine in everyday conversation and even blog posts like this.

However, they are enemies of clear and direct essays. They slow down the pace and dilute the argument.

When grading your essay, your professor wants to see the primary information communicated clearly and succinctly.

Removing the examples of flabby words and expressions listed below from your paper will automatically help you to take your essay to a higher level.

Key takeaway: When it comes to essays, brevity is best.

Flabby Words and Expressions You Shouldn’t Use in an Essay

Words to avoid in an essay: redundant words, what are redundant words.

Redundant words and phrases don’t serve any purpose.

In this context, redundant means unnecessary.

Many everyday phrases contain redundant vocabulary; for example, add up, as a matter of fact, current trends, etc.

We have become so accustomed to using them in everyday speech that we don’t stop to question their place in formal writing.

Why You Shouldn’t Use Redundant Words in Essays

Redundant words suck the life out of your essay.

They can be great for adding emphasis in a conversational blog article like this, but they do not belong in formal academic writing.

Redundant words should be avoided for three main reasons:

• They interrupt the flow of the essay and unnecessarily distract the reader.
• They can undermine the main point you are trying to make in your paper.
• They can make you look uneducated.

The most effective essays are those that are concise, meaningful, and astute. If you use words and phrases that carry no meaning, you’ll lose the reader and undermine your credibility.

Key takeaway: Remove any words that don’t serve a purpose.

Redundant Words and Phrases You Shouldn’t Use in an Essay

Colloquial expressions and grammar expletives, what are colloquial expressions.

A colloquial expression is best described as a phrase that replicates the way one would speak.

The use of colloquial language represents an informal, slang style of English that is not suitable for formal and academic documents.

For example:

Colloquial language: “The findings of the study appear to be above board.”

Suitable academic alternative: “The findings of the study are legitimate.”

What are Grammar Expletives?

Grammar expletives are sentences that start with  here ,  there,  or  it .

We frequently use constructions like these when communicating in both spoken and written language.

But did you know they have a distinct grammatical classification?

They do; the expletive.

Grammar expletives (not to be confused with cuss words) are used to introduce clauses and delay the subject of the sentence. However, unlike verbs and nouns, which play a specific role in expression, expletives do not add any tangible meaning. Rather, they act as filler words that enable the writer to shift the emphasis of the argument. As such, grammar expletives are frequently referred to as “empty words.”

Removing them from your writing can help to make it tighter and more succinct. For example:

Sentence with expletive there : There are numerous reasons why it was important to write this essay. Sentence without expletive: It was important to write this essay for numerous reasons.

Why Should Colloquial Expressions and Grammar Expletives be Removed from an Essay?

While colloquial expressions and grammar expletives are commonplace in everyday speech and are completely acceptable in informal emails and chatroom exchanges, they can significantly reduce the quality of formal essays.

Essays and other academic papers represent formal documents. Frequent use of slang and colloquial expressions will undermine your credibility, make your writing unclear, and confuse the reader. In addition, they do not provide the exactness required in an academic setting.

Make sure you screen your essay for any type of conversational language; for example, figures of speech, idioms, and clichés.

Key takeaway: Grammar expletives use unnecessary words and make your word count higher while making your prose weaker.

Words and Phrases You Shouldn’t Use in an Essay

Nominalization, what is normalization.

A normalized sentence is one that is structured such that the abstract nouns do the talking.

For example, a noun, such as solution , can be structured to exploit its hidden verb, solve .

The act of transforming a word from a verb into a noun is known as normalization.

Should normalization be Removed from an Essay?

This is no universal agreement as to whether normalization should be removed from an essay. Some scholars argue that normalization is important in scientific and technical writing because abstract prose is more objective. Others highlight how normalizations can make essays more difficult to understand .

The truth is this: In the majority of essays, it isn’t possible to present an entirely objective communication; an element of persuasion is inherently incorporated. Furthermore, even the most objective academic paper will be devoid of meaning unless your professor can read it and make sense of it. As such, readability is more important than normalization.

You will need to take a pragmatic approach, but most of the time, your writing will be clearer and more direct if you rely on verbs as opposed to abstract nouns that were formed from verbs. As such, where possible, you should revise your sentences to make the verbs do the majority of the work.

For example,

Use: “This essay analyses and solves the pollution problem.”

Not: “This essay presents an evaluation of the pollution issue and presents a solution.”

While normalized sentences are grammatically sound, they can be vague.

In addition, humans tend to prefer vivid descriptions, and verbs are more vivid, informative, and powerful than nouns.

Key takeaway: Normalization can serve a purpose, but only use it if that purpose is clear.

normalization You Shouldn’t Use in an Essay

That’s a lot to take in.

You may be wondering why you should care?

Cutting the fat helps you present more ideas and a deeper analysis.

Don’t be tempted to write an essay that is stuffed with pompous, complex language: It is possible to be smart and simple.

Bookmark this list now and return to it when you are editing your essays. Keep an eye out for the words you shouldn’t use in an essay, and you’ll write academic papers that are more concise, powerful, and readable.

10 Better Ways To Write “In This Essay, I Will…”

“In this essay, I will” is a common way for people to talk about what they will write in their essays. However, it’s often overused, which is why it might be wise to look into a few available alternatives. This article will share the best ones with you.

What Can I Write Instead Of “In This Essay, I Will…”?

There are plenty of other ways to write this phrase. We’ll take you through the following to show you how they’re effective:

• You will learn about
• You will find out about
• I find… really interesting…
• This essay demonstrates
• This essay will discuss
• In this essay, you will learn
• I will show both sides of the argument
• This essay will analyze
• I strongly agree/disagree, and this essay will explore why
• This paper will explore

The preferred versions do not reference the “essay” at all. Instead, the best options are “you will learn about” and “you will find out about.” These work well because they save time and words in the essay, and they don’t seem like wasted space for the reader.

You Will Learn About

“You will learn about” works well because it shows the reader straight away what they will learn. We do not have to use the phrase “In this essay” or anything similar because they’re already aware that they are reading an essay.

The biggest problem with writing “in this essay” is that it’s a waste of time and words. Anyone reading your essay is typically evaluating it, so they do not need to be reminded what they are reading.

Instead, you should try to impress them with the contents of your essay and the points you want to highlight. The quicker you can explain the basic points you will touch on, the more engaged your examiner will be throughout the written piece.

Here are a few examples that will help you make the most of it:

• You will learn about my beliefs here, and I will make sure to elaborate on why I think it’s important to change the current rule system.
• You will learn about how it helps to practice these things before you undertake them.
• You will learn about what makes elephants such captivating creatures, and I’ll be sure to convince you by the end.

You Will Find Out About

“You will find out about” works in much the same way. We still do not mention the “essay.” It helps us show what we will be demonstrating. It only needs to be a sentence or two, but it’s a great way to explore our main idea without any other unnecessary bits.

Check out some of these examples to see how it works:

• You will find out about what makes them tick and how you can decide whether they’re right for you and your lifestyle.
• You will find out about many things from this piece, and I’ll make sure that your mind will be blown by the end of it.
• You will find out about the inhabitants of this fine city, as I will demonstrate going forward.

I Find… Really Interesting…

“I find… really interesting…” is a two-part phrase. We typically include the subject of the essay after “find” and then go on to explain why we find that subject “really interesting.” It’s a great way to avoid using “essay” in the introduction for no reason.

We can use this phrase with great success in many cases. It helps us to evaluate the overall tone and message behind our essay before we’ve even begun. Many readers and examiners look forward to reading essays set up in this way.

You can see how it works in the following examples:

• I find the people’s beliefs really interesting because they do not back down from them even when challenged.
• I find the current state of things really interesting because they’re nowhere near as glamorous as they would have been five decades ago.
• I find the things we talk about really interesting, and I will explain to you what it takes to become the best teacher you can be.

This Essay Demonstrates

“This essay demonstrates” is a good phrase to start an essay if you want to include the phrase. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with starting essays with a phrase like this; it mostly depends on personal choice and writing style.

Some examiners do not like reading things starting with “in this essay” or “this essay does this.” In those cases, you might be better suited to try to remove it. It’s also good practice to get you used to start your essays in more exciting ways.

However, if you like the style of including “this essay” and similar phrases, there are no reasons why you shouldn’t be able to do that!

• This essay demonstrates my vital opinion on the matter and what we can do about it.
• This essay demonstrates everything you need to know about how to fix the issue.
• This essay demonstrates why it is crucial that we start making strides to fix the current global situation.

This Essay Will Discuss

“This essay will discuss” is another way to share the overall point of your essay. The sooner we can convey the overall meaning, the more interested the reader will be. It helps them to know what they are reading about before they begin.

Here are a few examples to show you how it works:

• This essay will discuss all of the most important things you need to consider.
• This essay will discuss what it takes to make it in today’s climate.
• This essay will discuss the importance of making sure you care for your family no matter what.

In This Essay, You Will Learn

“In this essay, you will learn” helps to show a bit more confidence in your writing skills. If you say “you will learn,” it sounds like an order, which is a great way to show that you are confident enough to explain things correctly. It’s the mark of a strong and capable writer.

Check out some examples of how it might work:

• In this essay, you will learn a lot about what needs to be done to correct the path you’re going down.
• In this essay, you will learn all the psychological benefits of doing physical exercise daily.
• In this essay, you will learn how to manage your stress much better.

I Will Show Both Sides Of The Argument

“I will show both sides of the argument” helps you to evaluate the question of the essay. This works because it does not outright state you are writing an “essay” (saving time). It also shows that you want to cover both sides to remain unbiased as best you can.

Here are some examples of how it works:

• I will show both sides of the argument before the end of this paper.
• I will make sure to show both sides of the argument and try to convince you to agree with my view.
• I will show both sides of the argument and come to an ultimate decision by the end.

This Essay Will Analyze

“This essay will analyze” is another great way to start an essay with the words “essay” and “will.” It helps to sound confident when using phrases like this, and it goes over the things that the essay is likely to cover.

Some examples will help you to understand it better:

• This essay will analyze the effects on children of being surrounded by troublesome youths.
• This essay will analyze the findings from my previous experiment.
• This essay will analyze common social interactions and why they exist.

I Strongly Agree/Disagree, And This Essay Will Explore Why

This phrase works well to either agree or disagree with the question. Most essays ask a question that you are supposed to ponder. Starting an essay with your direct opinion is a good way to engage the reader early on.

The sooner you can keep the reader engaged, the better off you’ll be. It’ll make your writing sound much more professional and should score you higher marks in the long run.

Check out these examples for more help:

• I strongly agree with this question, and this essay will explore my reasons why.
• I strongly disagree with the quote above, and this essay will explore why.
• I strongly agree with this, and this essay will explore why I think that this is the best move for everyone.

This Paper Will Explore

“This paper will explore” is the last alternative we want to cover. It’s possible to replace “essay” in all cases with “paper,” and many readers prefer to see this because it does not sound as wasteful or as obvious.

The idea behind both “this essay” and “this paper” is the same. However, it’s up to you which one you think looks best on the page.

Here are some examples:

• This paper will explore the benefits of outreach for smaller companies .
• This paper will explore how to keep member retention much higher than in previous calendar years.
• This paper will explore the effects of mental illnesses.

Martin holds a Master’s degree in Finance and International Business. He has six years of experience in professional communication with clients, executives, and colleagues. Furthermore, he has teaching experience from Aarhus University. Martin has been featured as an expert in communication and teaching on Forbes and Shopify. Read more about Martin here .

• “Strongly Recommend” vs. “Highly Recommend” (Difference Explained)
• 10 Other Ways to Say “I Am” in an Essay
• 11 Other Idioms for “Two Sides of the Same Coin”
• 11 Other Ways To Say “I Think” And “I Believe” In An Essay

Secret History

Why This Is The Worst Scene In SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME | Video Essay

Posted: May 29, 2024 | Last updated: May 29, 2024

#videoessay #spiderman #nowayhomeUse my code TOMASSO to get $5 off your delicious, healthy Magic Spoon cereal by clicking this link: <a href="https://magicspoon.thld.co/tomasso_0322In">https://magicspoon.thld.co/tomasso_0322In</a> this video we dive into Spider-Man No Way Home and an issue that has bothered me since the first time I watched. It's the editing. A lot people are criticizing the cinematography, which is fine, but I really think the wasted performances from Willem Dafoe, Andrew Garfield, and Tobey Maguire are an even bigger issue. In this essay we breakdown the editing in Spider-Man No Way Home and compare it Sam Raimi's Spider-Man and Mission Impossible: Fallout. I like Jon Watts a lot but I just wish he would hold the frame. Subscribe to my 2nd channel: <a href="https://youtu.be/XaNQdhlmE8ATwitter:">https://youtu.be/XaNQdhlmE8ATwitter:</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/impatricktSign">https://twitter.com/impatricktSign</a> up for MUSICBED: <a href="http://share.mscbd.fm/impatrickt">http://share.mscbd.fm/impatrickt</a> Use my coupon code IMPATRICKT22 at checkout to get your first month free when you purchase an annual subscription.Fuji X100: <a href="https://geni.us/fujifilmx100pt">https://geni.us/fujifilmx100pt</a> (affiliate link)SONY A7iv: <a href="https://geni.us/ptsonya7iv">https://geni.us/ptsonya7iv</a> (affiliate link)Lumix S5: <a href="https://geni.us/ptS5kit">https://geni.us/ptS5kit</a> (affiliate) 35mm F1.8 Lens: <a href="https://geni.us/pt35mmsony">https://geni.us/pt35mmsony</a> (affiliate link)Voiceover Mic: <a href="https://geni.us/ptvideomicII">https://geni.us/ptvideomicII</a> (affiliate link)Dialogue Mic: <a href="https://geni.us/ptvideomicntg">https://geni.us/ptvideomicntg</a> (affiliate link)Best desk accessories: <a href="https://ugmonk.com/impatrickt">https://ugmonk.com/impatrickt</a> - Use the code "impatrickt" for 10% off your order. (affiliate link)00:00 - Intro00:33 - The Scene In Question01:11 - Editing Breakdown 101:36 - What went wrong?02:40 - How Sam Raimi Edits03:06 - How To Edit Plot Heavy Monologues03:44 - Editing Breakdown 305:45 - Is it coverage?06:14 - Not just villains.06:53 - Thesis

More for You

"Mr. Miyagi" From 'Karate Kid': Pat Morita's Tragic Death

Letitia James Celebrates Legal Win

The richest comedian in the world isn't Leno or Letterman, based on data. Here are the top 20.

Here’s when people think old age begins — and why experts think it’s starting later

14 Code Words You Never Want to Hear on Cruise Ships

Social Security: You Could Qualify for An Extra $900 per Month in Benefits. Here's Who Is Eligible

What polls say about Trump’s conviction and the 2024 presidential race

Blood types fuel global conspiracy theories about alien life on Earth

How to grill filet mignon on a gas grill: Advice from an expert

‘I feel so sorry for young kids’: Florida man in his 50s says the 90s were easier for young people than present day. Is he right? We look at the numbers

Mike Tyson vs. Jake Paul boxing match postponed

Aaron Judge finishes off torrid May by breaking a Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig Yankees record

Home Hacks Just as Brilliant Today as They Were 100 Years Ago

Texas Independence Referendum Moves One Step Closer

Speaker Johnson says the Supreme Court should step in

Ageless Beauty: Old Hollywood’s Most Iconic Women

Here’s what being ‘super wealthy’ in retirement really means — plus how does your nest egg stack up against the top 1%, 5% and 10% of retirees?

Netflix reveals its 3 most watched titles ever

Cybertruck owner says he's stuck with a vehicle that's too big for his parking spot, and Tesla won't let him return or resell it

Costco’s new CFO makes announcement about $1.50 hot dog combo

'ZDNET Recommends': What exactly does it mean?

ZDNET's recommendations are based on many hours of testing, research, and comparison shopping. We gather data from the best available sources, including vendor and retailer listings as well as other relevant and independent reviews sites. And we pore over customer reviews to find out what matters to real people who already own and use the products and services we’re assessing.

When you click through from our site to a retailer and buy a product or service, we may earn affiliate commissions. This helps support our work, but does not affect what we cover or how, and it does not affect the price you pay. Neither ZDNET nor the author are compensated for these independent reviews. Indeed, we follow strict guidelines that ensure our editorial content is never influenced by advertisers.

ZDNET's editorial team writes on behalf of you, our reader. Our goal is to deliver the most accurate information and the most knowledgeable advice possible in order to help you make smarter buying decisions on tech gear and a wide array of products and services. Our editors thoroughly review and fact-check every article to ensure that our content meets the highest standards. If we have made an error or published misleading information, we will correct or clarify the article. If you see inaccuracies in our content, please report the mistake via this form .

What is ChatGPT and why does it matter? Here's what you need to know

What is ChatGPT?

ChatGPT is an AI chatbot with natural language processing (NLP) that allows you to have human-like conversations to complete various tasks. The  generative AI  tool can answer questions and assist you with tasks such as composing emails, essays, code, and more.

Also :  How to use ChatGPT: What you need to know now

It's currently  open to use for free . A paid subscription version called ChatGPT Plus launched in February 2023 with access to priority access to OpenAI's latest models and updates.

Who made ChatGPT?

AI startup OpenAI launched ChatGPT on November 30, 2022. OpenAI has also developed  DALL-E 2  and DALL-E 3 , popular  AI image generators , and Whisper, an automatic speech recognition system. 

Who owns ChatGPT currently?

OpenAI owns ChatGPT. Microsoft is a major investor in OpenAI thanks to multiyear, multi-billion dollar  investments. Elon Musk was an investor when OpenAI was first founded in 2015, but has since completely severed ties with the startup and created his own AI chatbot, Grok .

How can you access ChatGPT?

On April 1, 2024, OpenAI stopped requiring you to log in to use ChatGPT. Now, you can access ChatGPT simply by visiting  chat.openai.com . You can also access ChatGPT  via an app on your iPhone  or  Android  device.

Once you visit the site, you can start chatting away with ChatGPT. A great way to get started is by asking a question, similar to what you would do with Google. You can ask as many questions as you'd like.

Also: ChatGPT no longer requires a login, but you might want one anyway. Here's why

There are still some perks to creating an OpenAI account, such saving and reviewing your chat history and accessing custom instructions. Creating an OpenAI account is entirely free and easy. You can even log in with your Google account.

For step-by-step instructions, check out ZDNET's guide on  how to start using ChatGPT . 

Is there a ChatGPT app?

Yes, an official ChatGPT app is available for both iPhone and Android users. 

Also: ChatGPT dropped a free app for iPhones. Does it live up to the hype?

Make sure to download OpenAI's app, as there are a plethora of copycat fake apps listed on Apple's App Store and the Google Play Store that are not affiliated with the startup.

Is ChatGPT available for free?

ChatGPT is free to use, regardless of what you use it for, including writing, coding, and much more. 

There is a subscription option , ChatGPT Plus, that users can take advantage of that costs $20/month. The paid subscription model guarantees users extra perks, such as priority access to GPT-4o and the latest upgrades. 

Also: ChatGPT vs ChatGPT Plus: Is it worth the subscription fee?

Although the subscription price may seem steep, it is the same amount as Microsoft Copilot Pro and Google One AI, Microsoft's and Google's premium AI offerings. 

The free version is still a solid option as it can access the same model and most of the same perks. One major exception: only subscribers get guaranteed access to GPT-4o when the model is at capacity. 

I tried using ChatGPT and it says it's at capacity. What does that mean?

The ChatGPT website operates using servers. When too many people hop onto these servers, they may overload and can't process your request. If this happens to you, you can visit the site later when fewer people are trying to access the tool. You can also keep the tab open and refresh it periodically. 

Also: The best AI chatbots

If you want to skip the wait and have reliable access, you can subscribe to  ChatGPT Plus  for general access during peak times, faster response times, and priority access to new features and improvements, including priority access to GPT-4o.

You can also try using Bing's AI chatbot, Copilot . This chatbot is free to use, runs on GPT-4, has no wait times, and can access the internet for more accurate information.

What is ChatGPT used for?

ChatGPT has many functions in addition to answering simple questions. ChatGPT can compose essays , have philosophical conversations, do math, and even code for you . 

The tasks ChatGPT can help with also don't have to be so ambitious. For example, my favorite use of ChatGPT is for help creating basic lists for chores, such as packing and grocery shopping, and to-do lists that make my daily life more productive. The possibilities are endless. 

ZDNET has published many ChatGPT how-to guides. Below are some of the most popular ones. 

Use ChatGPT to: 

• Write an essay
• Create an app
• Build your resume
• Write Excel formulas
• Summarize content
• Write a cover letter
• Start an Etsy business
• Create charts and tables
• Write Adruino drivers

Can ChatGPT generate images?

Yes, ChatGPT can generate images, but only for ChatGPT Plus subscribers. Since OpenAI discontinued DALL-E 2 in February 2024, the only way to access its most advanced AI image generator, DALL-E 3, through OpenAI's offerings is via its chatbot and ChatGPT Plus subscription.

Also: DALL-E adds new ways to edit and create AI-generated images. Learn how to use it

Microsoft's Copilot offers image generation, which is also powered by DALL-E 3, in its chatbot for free. This is a great alternative if you don't want to shell out the money for ChatGPT Plus.

How does ChatGPT work?

ChatGPT runs on a large language model (LLM) architecture created by OpenAI called the  Generative Pre-trained Transformer  (GPT). Since its launch, the free version of ChatGPT ran on a fine-tuned model in the GPT-3.5 series until May 2024, when the startup upgraded the model to GPT-4o. 

Also:   Here's a deep dive into how ChatGPT works  

With a subscription to ChatGPT Plus , you can access GPT-3.5, GPT-4, or  GPT-4o . Plus, users also have the added perk of priority access to GPT-4o, even when it is at capacity, while free users get booted down to GPT-3.5. 

Generative AI models of this type are trained on vast amounts of information from the internet, including websites, books, news articles, and more.

What does ChatGPT stand for?

As mentioned above, the last three letters in ChatGPT's namesake stand for Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT), a family of large language models created by OpenAI that uses deep learning to generate human-like, conversational text. 

Also: What does GPT stand for? Understanding GPT 3.5, GPT 4, GPT-4 Turbo, and more

The "Chat" part of the name is simply a callout to its chatting capabilities. 

Is ChatGPT better than a search engine?

ChatGPT is a language model created to converse with the end user. A search engine indexes web pages on the internet to help users find information. One is not better than the other, as each suit different purposes. 

When searching for as much up-to-date, accurate information as you can access, your best bet is a search engine. It will provide you with pages upon pages of sources you can peruse. 

Also: The best AI search engines of 2024: Google, Perplexity, and more

As of May, the free version of ChatGPT can get responses from both the GPT-4o model and the web. It will only pull its answer from, and ultimately list, a handful of sources, as opposed to showing nearly endless search results.

For example, I used GPT-4o to answer, "What is the weather today in San Francisco?" The response told me it searched four sites and provided links to them. 

If you are looking for a platform that can explain complex topics in an easy-to-understand manner, then ChatGPT might be what you want. If you want the best of both worlds, there are plenty of AI search engines on the market that combine both.

What are ChatGPT's limitations?

Despite its impressive capabilities, ChatGPT still has limitations. Users sometimes need to reword questions multiple times for ChatGPT to understand their intent. A bigger limitation is a lack of quality in responses, which can sometimes be plausible-sounding but are verbose or make no practical sense. 

Instead of asking for clarification on ambiguous questions, the model guesses what your question means, which can lead to poor responses. Generative AI models are also subject to hallucinations, which can result in inaccurate responses.

Does ChatGPT give wrong answers?

As mentioned above, ChatGPT, like all language models, has  limitations  and can give nonsensical answers and incorrect information, so it's important to double-check the data it gives you.

Also: 8 ways to reduce ChatGPT hallucinations

OpenAI recommends that you provide feedback on what ChatGPT generates by using the thumbs-up and thumbs-down buttons to improve its underlying model. You can even join the startup's Bug Bounty program , which offers up to $20,000 for reporting security bugs and safety issues.

Can ChatGPT refuse to answer my prompts?

AI systems like ChatGPT can and do reject  inappropriate requests . The AI assistant can identify inappropriate submissions to prevent the generation of unsafe content.

Also:  6 things ChatGPT can't do (and another 20 it refuses to do)

These submissions include questions that violate someone's rights, are offensive, are discriminatory, or involve illegal activities. The ChatGPT model can also challenge incorrect premises, answer follow-up questions, and even admit mistakes when you point them out.

These guardrails are important. AI models can generate advanced, realistic content that can be exploited by bad actors for harm, such as spreading misinformation about public figures and influencing elections .

Can I chat with ChatGPT?

Although some people use ChatGPT for elaborate functions, such as writing code or even malware , you can use ChatGPT for more mundane activities, such as having a friendly conversation. 

Also:  Do you like asking ChatGPT questions? You could get paid (a lot) for it

Some conversation starters could be as simple as, "I am hungry, what food should I get?" or as elaborate as, "What do you think happens in the afterlife?" Either way, ChatGPT is sure to have an answer for you. 

Is ChatGPT safe?

People are expressing concerns about AI chatbots replacing or atrophying human intelligence. For example, a chatbot can write an article on any topic efficiently (though not necessarily accurately) within seconds, potentially eliminating the need for human writers.

Chatbots can also write an entire essay within seconds, making it easier for students to cheat or avoid learning how to write properly. This even led  some school districts to block access  when ChatGPT initially launched. 

Also:  Generative AI can be the academic assistant an underserved student needs

Now, not only have many of those schools decided to unblock the technology, but some higher education institutions have been  catering their academic offerings  to AI-related coursework. 

Another concern with AI chatbots is the possible spread of misinformation. ChatGPT itself says: "My responses are not intended to be taken as fact, and I always encourage people to verify any information they receive from me or any other source." OpenAI also notes that ChatGPT sometimes writes "plausible-sounding but incorrect or nonsensical answers."

Also:  Microsoft and OpenAI detect and disrupt nation-state cyber threats that use AI, report shows

Lastly, there are ethical concerns regarding the information ChatGPT was trained on, since the startup scraped the internet to train the chatbot. 

It also automatically uses people's interactions with the free version of the chatbot to further train its models, raising privacy concerns. OpenAI lets you turn off training in ChatGPT's settings.

Does ChatGPT plagiarize?

Yes, sort of. OpenAI scraped the internet to train ChatGPT. Therefore, the technology's knowledge is influenced by other people's work. Since there is no guarantee that when OpenAI outputs its answers it is entirely original, the chatbot may regurgitate someone else's work in your answer, which is considered plagiarism. 

Is there a ChatGPT detector?

Concerns about students using AI to cheat mean the need for a ChatGPT text detector is becoming more evident. 

In January 2023, OpenAI released a free tool to target this problem. Unfortunately, OpenAI's "classifier" tool could only correctly identify 26% of AI-written text with a "likely AI-written" designation. Furthermore, it provided false positives 9% of the time, incorrectly identifying human-written work as AI-produced. 

The tool performed so poorly  that, six months after being released, OpenAI it shut down "due to its low rate of accuracy." Despite the tool's failure, the startup claims to be researching more effective techniques for AI text identification.

Also: OpenAI unveils text-to-video model and the results are astonishing

Other AI detectors exist on the market, including GPT-2 Output Detector ,  Writer AI Content Detector , and Content at Scale's AI Content Detection  tool. ZDNET put these tools to the test, and the results were underwhelming: all three were found to be unreliable sources for spotting AI, repeatedly giving false negatives. Here are  ZDNET's full test results .

What are the common signs something was written by ChatGPT?

Although tools aren't sufficient for detecting ChatGPT-generated writing, a  study  shows that humans could detect AI-written text by looking for politeness. The study's results indicate that  ChatGPT's writing style is extremely polite . And unlike humans, it cannot produce responses that include metaphors, irony, or sarcasm.

Will my conversations with ChatGPT be used for training?

One of the major risks when using generative AI models is that they become more intelligent by being trained on user inputs. Therefore, when familiarizing yourself with how to use ChatGPT, you might wonder if your specific conversations will be used for training and, if so, who can view your chats.

Also:  This ChatGPT update fixed one of my biggest productivity issues with the AI chatbot

OpenAI will use your conversations with the free chatbot to automatically training data to refine its models. You can opt out of the startup using your data for model training by clicking on the question mark in the bottom left-hand corner, Settings, and turning off "Improve the model for everyone."

What is GPT-4?

GPT-4 is OpenAI's language model that is much more advanced than its predecessor, GPT-3.5. Users can access GPT-4 by subscribing to ChatGPT Plus for $20 per month or using Microsoft's Copilot.

Also: What does GPT stand for? Understanding GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and more

GPT-4 has advanced intellectual capabilities, meaning it outperforms GPT-3.5 in a series of simulated benchmark exams. The newer model also supposedly produces fewer hallucinations. 

What is GPT-4o?

GPT-4o is OpenAI's latest, fastest, and most advanced flagship model. As the name implies, it has the same intelligence as GPT-4. However, the "o" in the title stands for "omni," referring to its multimodal capabilities, which allow it to understand text, audio, image, and video inputs and output text, audio, and image outputs. 

Also:  6 ways OpenAI just supercharged ChatGPT for free users

The model is 50% cheaper in the API than GPT-4 Turbo while still matching its English and coding capabilities and outperforming it in non-English languages, vision, and audio understanding -- a big win for developers.

Are there alternatives to ChatGPT worth considering?

Although ChatGPT gets the most buzz, other options are just as good -- and might even be better suited to your needs. ZDNET has created a list of the best chatbots, which have all been tested by us and show which tool is best for your requirements. 

Also: 4 things Claude AI can do that ChatGPT can't

Despite ChatGPT's extensive abilities, there are major downsides to the AI chatbot. If you want to try the technology, there are plenty of other options: Copilot , Claude , Perplexity ,  Jasper , and more.  

Is ChatGPT smart enough to pass benchmark exams?

Yes, ChatGPT is capable of passing a series of benchmark exams. A professor at Wharton, the University of Pennsylvania's business school, used ChatGPT to take an MBA exam and the results were quite impressive. 

ChatGPT not only passed the exam, but the tool scored between a B- and a B. The professor, Christian Terwiesch, was impressed at its basic operations management, process analysis questions, and explanations.

OpenAI also tested the chatbot's ability to pass benchmark exams. Although ChatGPT could pass many of these benchmark exams, its scores were usually in the lower percentile. However, with GPT-4, ChatGPT can score much higher.

For example, ChatGPT using GPT-3.5 scored in the lower 10th percentile of a simulated Bar Exam, while GPT-4 scored in the top 10th percentile. You can see more examples from OpenAI in the chart below.

Can ChatGPT be used for job application assistance?

Yes, ChatGPT is a great resource to help with job applications. Undertaking a job search can be tedious and difficult, and ChatGPT can help you lighten the load. ChatGPT can build your resume  and write a cover letter .

Also :  How to use ChatGPT to write an essay

If your application has any written supplements, you can use ChatGPT to help you write those essays or personal statements . 

What are the most common ChatGPT plugins, and how do I use them?

Plugins allowed ChatGPT to connect to third-party applications, including access to real-time information on the web. The plugins expanded ChatGPT's abilities , allowing it to assist with many more activities, such as planning a trip or finding a place to eat. 

Also:  My two favorite ChatGPT Plus features and the remarkable things I can do with them

On March 19, 2024, however, OpenAI stopped allowing users to install new plugins or start new conversations with existing ones. Instead, OpenAI replaced plugins with GPTs , which are easier for developers to build. 

Users can find 3 million ChatGPT chatbots, also known as GPTs, on the GPT store. Unfortunately, there is also a lot of spam in the GPT store.

What is Microsoft's involvement with ChatGPT?

Microsoft was an early investor in OpenAI, the AI startup behind ChatGPT, long before ChatGPT was released to the public. Microsoft's first involvement with OpenAI was in 2019, when the company invested $1 billion, and then another $2 billion in the years after. In January 2023, Microsoft extended its partnership with OpenAI through a multiyear, multi-billion dollar investment .

Also: ChatGPT vs. Copilot: Which AI chatbot is better for you?

 Neither company disclosed the investment value, but unnamed sources told Bloomberg that it could total $10 billion over multiple years. In return, OpenAI's exclusive cloud-computing provider is Microsoft Azure, powering all OpenAI workloads across research, products, and API services.

Microsoft has also used its OpenAI partnership to revamp its Bing search engine and improve its browser. 

On February 7, 2023, Microsoft unveiled a new Bing tool , now known as Copilot, that runs on OpenAI's GPT-4, customized specifically for search.

What does Copilot (formerly Bing Chat) have to do with ChatGPT?

In February 2023,  Microsoft unveiled  a new version of Bing -- and its standout feature was its integration with ChatGPT. When it was announced, Microsoft shared that Bing Chat, now Copilot, was powered by a next-generation version of OpenAI's large language model, making it "more powerful than ChatGPT." Five weeks after the launch, Microsoft revealed that Copilot had been running on GPT-4 before the model had even launched. 

How does Copilot compare to ChatGPT?

Copilot uses OpenAI's GPT-4, which means that since its launch, it has been more efficient and capable than the standard, free version of ChatGPT. At the time, Copilot boasted several other features over ChatGPT, such as access to the internet, knowledge of current information, and footnotes.

In May 2024, however, OpenAI supercharged the free version of its chatbot with GPT-4o. The upgrade gave users GPT-4 level intelligence, the ability to get responses from the web via ChatGPT Browse with Bing, analyze data, chat about photos and documents, use GPTs, access the GPT Store, and Voice Mode. Therefore, after the upgrade, ChatGPT reclaimed its crown as the best AI chatbot. 

What is Gemini and how does it relate to ChatGPT?

Gemini is Google's AI chat service, a rival to ChatGPT. On February 6, 2023, Google introduced its experimental AI chat service, which was then called Google Bard. Over a month after the announcement, Google began rolling out  access to Bard first via a waitlist . Now, it is available to the general public. 

Artificial Intelligence

Chatgpt vs. copilot: which ai chatbot is better for you, what does gpt stand for understanding gpt-3.5, gpt-4, gpt-4o, and more, what is copilot (formerly bing chat) here's everything you need to know.

A style expert shares fresh Target finds to help you kick off summer — from $10

• Share this —

• Watch Full Episodes
• Read With Jenna
• Inspirational
• Relationships
• TODAY Table
• Newsletters
• Start TODAY
• Shop TODAY Awards
• Citi Concert Series
• Listen All Day

Follow today

More Brands

• On The Show
• TODAY Plaza

While some companies market ‘natural’ MSG, my restaurant will stick with the original

Chinese restaurants are my family’s thing. It’s a very common immigrant story; it was the starter kit for Ronald Reagan’s American dream.

Though it’s long gone, I can remember my family’s second restaurant near perfectly: two guardian lion statues with obvious signs of weathering flanked the door, there was a green makeshift cabinet for the valet’s car keys propped against the one on the right, and a small patch of flowers adorned their feet. The flowers could have used more love. They were perhaps symbolic of the push and pull between my parents, one invested in design touches, the other spartan with the finances.

Shining blue fluorescence over all this frontage was a big neon sign: “We Do Not Use MSG.”

The monosodium glutamate scare felt rather fervent in the ’90s, and I had a front row seat as I played with action figures at the bar. Long Islanders wanted assurance from my mother that we didn’t have MSG in the building. It would make them feel terrible later, they said. Headache, tachycardia, sweating, bloating, fatigue, diarrhea: a dismal grocery list of possible side effects. Most of the time it was an awkward, polite interaction. Sometimes, it turned hostile.

Given how many polysyllabic additives existed on the back of a box of cereal, I had a hard time believing monosodium glutamate was any more lethal than any branded-mascot kibble we ate. And science proved my hypothesis correct: There is no verifiable, peer-reviewed, reproducible research that can link MSG to the amorphous amalgamation of symptoms known as “Chinese Restaurant Syndrome.”

On the one hand, speaking as a lifetime member of the service industry, I respect your choices. You don’t have to put anything in your body you don’t want to, you shouldn’t have to explain yourself, and you should trust that a restaurant will honor that.

However, as a minority in the U.S. who went to enough of his college classes to know who Edward Said is, it’s hard not to see this whole thing as reeking of yellow perilism and Orientalism.

It’s a pervasive and sticky myth that was used to torment me throughout my childhood. Along with the implication that our restaurant served alley cats and netted ducks at the local pond because our food was so cheap, my classmates parroted their parents and accused us of serving poison. So, my mother put up a sign .

This childhood experience serves as context for a recent triggering episode. While scrolling Instagram, I saw Noma Projects (the food lab off-shoot of the fine-dining restaurant in Denmark) going on about the “ naturally occurring ” MSG it harvests in its mushroom garum ($25 for 250 milliliters). My eye twitched. Now that I own my own restaurant, I simply tell people “too bad” when they protest the flavor enhancement . But this sight brought back old feelings of being othered and shamed.

I respect the work Noma Projects does in Copenhagen. Regardless of your feelings about fine dining and 5,000 kroner, six-hour meals, Noma is an undeniable paradigm shifter of gastronomy.

It has inspired generations of chefs and trained some of the industry’s most influential visionaries, and that cultural runoff hits you in your grocery store shelves whether you realize it or not — and, perhaps more importantly, whether you like it or not.

But this was a level of disingenuousness I could not abide.

It’s subtle, but using the term “naturally occurring” implies there is some cheap, synthetic, abundant alternative. It insinuates Noma’s MSG is different, better. It suggests its version won’t make you feel bad the way MSG is positioned to. It evokes buzzwords like organic, free-range, biodynamic and cruelty-free (if you don’t consider a world-famous restaurant brand built off unpaid labor as a form of cruelty ).

Monosodium glutamate was originally discovered by boiling down vast quantities of kelp to create a savory extract. Modern MSG production uses a far more efficient process of harnessing bacteria that produce glutamic acid from digesting the glucose in fast-growing crops such as corn, sugar cane or cassava. The glutamic acid is then neutralized to create water and monosodium glutamate. It’s the same idea of utilizing bacteria to our benefit to make yogurt, and the same principle by which Noma Project’s mushroom garum is made. They use some sort of fermentation, whether it be bacterial or yeast-driven, to digest the glucose in mushrooms. Glucose and glutamic acid are in all living things. Your body is utilizing glutamic acid to read this essay.

Due to a global pandemic, millions of Asian American business owners suffered greatly in December 2019 and in the months — and years — following. My own family’s restaurant lost half its business in the month that matters most to us, the month that makes or breaks the fiscal year for many operators. It was a devastating blow to a business run by a single mother who still works seven days a week in her 70s. And why did this happen? Not because we all huddled inside to keep each other safe — at least not yet. This happened because of xenophobia, racism and prejudice. No one dared to eat at a Chinese restaurant . The reservation book emptied.

New York’s Chinatown was devastated by 9/11 and it never recovered . The neighborhood receded to the east while Italian restaurants and New American bistros claimed the west.

Then, during COVID, restaurant operators who were aging out but still selling six dumplings for $3 couldn’t match rent hikes thanks to real estate developers and rampant inflation. Many didn’t survive a bad December. Those that did didn’t survive the disastrous spring that followed. Chinatown is now a disjointed collection of businesses and grandmas that go unrepresented in zoning law discussions . The sexy newcomer microneighborhood “ Dimes Square ” has shoved Chinatown out of the Lower East Side.

And this is in no small part due to the misinformation and fear coloring the Chinese American diaspora since we were building your railroads . (Though you abandoned all that hard-wrought infrastructure, America — no backsies.)

There isn’t enough space on the page to go through the history of it all, but misinformation regarding MSG is closely related. It sounds like something trivial but it affects real people’s lives. It impacts our livelihoods. So when I read about Noma Projects’ “naturally occurring” MSG, it was hard not to raise my hackles.

It is furthering misinformation and profiting off a depressingly low level of scientific literacy. It is hurting Chinese restaurateurs across the globe by adding fuel to the flames of fear and ignorance. It is contributing to pushing an entire people — and the cuisine we are so heavily identified by — down into the realm of lunch specials: $8.99, choice of egg roll or wonton soup. It is differentiating, otherizing and gatekeeping us, given its platform as an authoritative voice on food science.

We’ve had a challenging few decades; we don’t need any more saboteurs. So, if Noma claims to be an ally to the disenfranchised and disadvantaged, it must do better.

But we have grown cynical about expecting anyone from outside the community to advocate for us. So I’ll just say, at my restaurant, we buy MSG by the 50-pound barrel — and that’s never going to change.

Editor’s note: Noma Projects declined to comment when reached by TODAY.com, but a representative did wish to clarify that any mention of naturally occurring MSG in relation to the brand’s Mushroom Garum refers to the naturally occurring level of glutamate in the product. The brand does not intend to criticize the use of MSG in other products or kitchens. They say they are sorry to learn that the work they have shared from the Noma Projects lab has been interpreted in some way other than as a source of inspiration.

Eric Huang is the chef and founder of Pecking House, a fried chicken joint in Brooklyn best described as a Sichuan-Nashville style mashup.

How both Black and Vietnamese women have shaped American nail salons

What is the true history of the California roll? The sushi has a fishy origin story

Jet Tila sometimes felt ‘confused’ about his Asian identity as a kid. Food helped him embrace it

Virginia mom says white students told her Asian American son to sit at ‘segregated’ table

Indian food in America: How chefs are expanding the perception of the cuisine

6 Asian American dietitians share their favorite healthy foods from their cultures

Diet & fitness.

What is the true story behind ‘Sight’? Movie details life of immigrant and surgeon Dr. Ming Wang

A beginner's guide to K-drama romances and thrillers available on streaming

100 Japanese baby names for boys

100 Japanese baby names for girls

• world affairs

A Modi Win Will Only Mean More Trouble for Indian Muslims

M ore than two years have passed since a picture of me, picked up from my personal social media handles, was put up with a price tag for auction on the internet. It was part of a website called Bulli Bai , a religious slur used for Muslim women in India. 

Why was I targeted? Likely because of my reporting. The perpetrators wanted to shame and humiliate a journalist who was determined to expose the failures of the ruling Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party’s gender, caste, and religion-based violence. But more importantly, they wanted to shut up a Muslim woman who had dared to be vocal in Modi’s India.

When the photo was posted, I wondered how the main perpetrator , a 21-year-old student from Assam, who created Bulli Bai could be so consumed by his hatred that he felt compelled to auction Muslim women online for their outspoken criticism of the BJP—journalists, social workers, actors, and politicians. A recent meeting with my lawyer about my case against the Bulli Bai creators, who are still being investigated by the Delhi police, was a painful reminder of the targeted harassment faced by outspoken Muslim voices critical of the ruling BJP. 

As the ongoing election in India is set to finish on June 1, it has once again offered deeper insight into how political dialogue is fueling this culture of hate. 

Particularly, the political campaign of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s BJP has leaned into anti-Muslim sentiment, progressively making Islamophobia one of the defining features of this election.

It was most prominently on display when Modi, in a thinly veiled reference to Muslims, referred to the 200 million Indian Muslim population as “infiltrators” at a BJP campaign rally while addressing voters in the Western state of Rajasthan on April 21. The Prime Minister also accused the opposition Congress party of planning to distribute the country’s wealth to Muslims.

Modi, in his speech, asked, “Earlier, when his [ former Prime Minister and Congress Party member Manmohan Singh’s] government was in power , he had said that Muslims have the first right on the country’s property, which means who they will collect this property and distribute it to—those who have more children, will distribute it to the infiltrators. Will the money of your hard work be given to the infiltrators? Do you approve of this?”

Read More: How India’s Hindu Nationalists Are Weaponizing History Against Muslims

This 2006 statement by former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh emphasizing that minorities, particularly Muslims , should have the first claim on resources to help uplift their socio-economic status, has been often quoted out of context in political rhetoric, distorting its original intent to uplift marginalized communities.

The reemergence of conspiracy theories like “Love Jihad,” alleging a covert agenda by Muslim men to ensnare and convert Hindu women, by Modi, has surged back into public attention, prominently surfacing at an election rally on May 28, days before the seventh and last phase of the ongoing elections, in the Eastern state of Jharkhand . 

The alarming rhetoric about Muslim population growth too have dominated the election discourse, fueled by the BJP's top leader, Modi, who has been criticized for his Islamophobic remarks, evoking memories of Gujarat's 2002 riots. While he later denied singling out Muslims in an interview with an Indian news channel, his history of linking them to population growth fuels a Hindu-majoritarian conspiracy theory.

Following the 2002 anti-Muslim riots in Gujarat during his tenure as chief minister, Modi faced scrutiny regarding his administration's lack of assistance to relief camps, predominantly established by non-profit organizations and Muslim communities. During a campaign rally, Modi then insinuated that these camps might transform into "baby factories," implying that Muslims could potentially have families as large as 25 children.

In his Jharkhand rally in May of this year, Modi spoke of "unseen enemies" working to divide society and claimed that the opposition parties were playing into the hands of “infiltrators”. He warned against "Zalim (cruel) love," alluding to Love Jihad. 

As the elections progressed, Modi’s speeches transformed slowly from issues such as “development” to anti-Muslim rhetoric. Unlike previous elections, Modi's campaign strategy this time has shifted towards overt Hindu-Muslim politics, drawing attention to his past record and raising concerns among Indian Muslims, as evidenced by the Election Commission's intervention in a campaign video by the BJP inciting hatred against Muslims. 

The video, shared by BJP Karnataka wing with a cautionary message in Kannada, depicted a cartoon version of Congress’s Rahul Gandhi placing an egg marked "Muslims" into a nest alongside smaller eggs labeled with categories such as "Scheduled Castes," "Scheduled Tribes," and "Other Backward Castes.” The narrative unfolds as the "Muslim" hatchling is shown being nourished with financial resources, eventually growing larger and displacing the other hatchlings from the nest—implying that a Congress government will give away all resources to Muslims. 

This came days after another animated video shared by the BJP’s official Instagram handle was removed on May 1 after a large number of users of the platform reported the video for “false information” and “hate speech.” The video repeats the BJP’s rhetoric on the Congress party, who they allege are“empowering people who belong to the very same community [of] invaders, terrorists, robbers and thieves [who] used to loot all our treasures” while the voice-over says, “If Congress comes to power, it will snatch all the money and wealth from non-Muslims and distribute them among Muslims, their favorite community.” 

Despite its controversial content, the video amassed over 100 thousand likes before being removed.

Both videos come after claims by Modi during his campaign speeches that Congress was planning to “steal” reservations in educational institutes and government jobs among other benefits from Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Other Backward Castes and redistribute them to Muslims.

Modi may be the foremost leader, but he's not alone in setting the tone; other top-tier BJP leaders are also walking in his footsteps. Home Affairs Minister Amit Shah's remarks linking voting for the Congress party to "jihad" in the South Indian state of Telangana have also stirred controversy.

Read More: The Modi-fication of India Is Almost Complete

The India Hate Lab, a Washington D.C.-based group that documents hate speech against India’s religious minorities, in its report of 2023 paints a grim picture of rising hate speech incidents against Muslims, totaling 668 documented cases. 

These incidents, often featuring calls for violence and spreading divisive theories, were predominantly concentrated in regions governed by the BJP, particularly during key election periods like in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Telangana, and Chhattisgarh. Additionally, the report highlighted stark differences in hate speech content between BJP and non-BJP-governed areas, with BJP leaders more frequently involved in non-BJP territories as they strive to expand political footholds.

When leaders resort to fear-mongering, it legitimizes the dehumanization of minorities, creating a fertile ground for extremists. This often isn’t just about one app or incident. It’s about the pervasive atmosphere of intolerance that such rhetoric by the BJP leaders breeds. And those who oppose this type of hate speech want to ensure that no one—regardless of their faith, gender, or caste—has to live in fear of being targeted for who they are. 

Modi’s statement received widespread criticism from the opposition, the intelligentsia community including authors, writers, scholars, academics, and the minority Muslim population of India. The Congress party even filed a complaint with the Election Commission, alleging that Modi's remarks violate electoral laws that prohibit appeals to religious sentiments. Despite public outcry and demands from activists and citizens for action, the Election Commission has so far taken no appropriate action. 

Modi's Islamophobic statements, which have fueled fears over and over again among India's Muslim population, must be viewed within the broader context of his party's strategies—which often invoke religious and communal sentiments to galvanize their voter base. And this time, the aim is to break all previous records by securing 400 plus seats in the 543 seat parliament.

If the BJP is able to secure such a huge majority in the parliament, Hindu majoritarianism will remain unchecked. The hostility towards the minorities could escalate even more, and opposition parties may bear the brunt of state agencies and crackdowns if they ask questions. 

During Modi’s previous terms, Muslims have seen an increased marginalization and discrimination fueled by Hindu nationalist agendas—ranging from difficulty in securing a rented accommodation in urban cities, erasure of Muslim names from roads, cities and railway stations, to the underrepresentation in government jobs and discrimination and vandalism of shops of small Muslim vendors. 

Today, India, a country which once took pride in its ganga-jamuni tehzeeb —a term used to refer to the fusion of Hindu-Muslim cultures—has become a global epicenter of divisive politics. While elections will come and go, the impact of the irresponsible words of Modi and the BJP will stay with the 200 million plus Muslims in the country.

These words have real and dangerous implications for the safety and security of India's Muslim population. Muslims in India currently face increased social ostracism, economic boycotts, and even physical violence. And another victory with an overwhelming majority will only mean more trouble.

More Must-Reads from TIME

• How Selena Gomez Is Revolutionizing the Celebrity Beauty Business
• TIME100 Most Influential Companies 2024
• Javier Milei’s Radical Plan to Transform Argentina
• How Private Donors Shape Birth-Control Choices
• The Deadly Digital Frontiers at the Border
• What's the Best Measure of Fitness? 
• The 31 Most Anticipated Movies of Summer 2024
• Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time

Contact us at [email protected]

• Newsletters
• Account Activating this button will toggle the display of additional content Account Sign out

The Donald Trump I Saw on The Apprentice

For 20 years, i couldn’t say what i watched the former president do on the set of the show that changed everything. now i can..

On Jan. 8, 2004, just more than 20 years ago, the first episode of The Apprentice aired. It was called “Meet the Billionaire,” and 18 million people watched. The episodes that followed climbed to roughly 20 million each week. A staggering 28 million viewers tuned in to watch the first season finale. The series won an Emmy nomination for Outstanding Reality-Competition Program, and the Television Critics Association called it one of the best TV shows of the year, alongside The Sopranos and Arrested Development . The series—alongside its bawdy sibling, The Celebrity Apprentice —appeared on NBC in coveted prime-time slots for more than a decade.

The Apprentice was an instant success in another way too. It elevated Donald J. Trump from sleazy New York tabloid hustler to respectable household name. In the show, he appeared to demonstrate impeccable business instincts and unparalleled wealth, even though his businesses had barely survived multiple bankruptcies and faced yet another when he was cast. By carefully misleading viewers about Trump—his wealth, his stature, his character, and his intent—the competition reality show set about an American fraud that would balloon beyond its creators’ wildest imaginations.

I should know. I was one of four producers involved in the first two seasons. During that time, I signed an expansive nondisclosure agreement that promised a fine of $5 million and even jail time if I were to ever divulge what actually happened. It expired this year.

No one involved in The Apprentice —from the production company or the network, to the cast and crew—was involved in a con with malicious intent. It was a TV show , and it was made for entertainment . I still believe that. But we played fast and loose with the facts, particularly regarding Trump, and if you were one of the 28 million who tuned in, chances are you were conned.

As Trump answers for another of his alleged deception schemes in New York and gears up to try to persuade Americans to elect him again, in part thanks to the myth we created, I can finally tell you what making Trump into what he is today looked like from my side. Most days were revealing. Some still haunt me, two decades later.

Nearly everything I ever learned about deception I learned from my friend Apollo Robbins. He’s been called a professional pickpocket, but he’s actually a “perceptions expert.” Apollo has spent his life studying the psychology of how we distort other people’s perceptions of reality and has done so by picking pockets onstage for the entertainment of others. He is a master of deception, a skill that made him, back in the day, the so-called best-kept secret in Las Vegas. After “fanning” his marks with casual, unobtrusive touch designed to make them feel safe or at ease, Apollo determines where the items reside—the wallet inside a breast pocket, the Rolex fastened to a wrist—and he removes these items without detection. He’ll even tell you what he intends to steal before he does it. He does this not to hurt people or bewilder them with a puzzle but to challenge their maps of reality. The results are marvelous. A lot of magic is designed to appeal to people visually, but what he’s trying to affect is your mind, your moods, your perceptions.

As a producer working in unscripted, or “reality,” television, I have the same goal. Like Apollo, I want to entertain, make people joyful, maybe even challenge their ways of thinking. But because I often lack the cinematic power of a movie, with its visual pyrotechnics or rehearsed dialogue, I rely on shaping the perceptions of viewers, manipulating their maps of reality toward something I want them to think or feel.

The presumption is that reality TV is scripted. What actually happens is the illusion of reality by staging situations against an authentic backdrop. The more authentic it is to, say, have a 40-foot wave bearing down on a crab boat in the Bering Sea for Deadliest Catch , the more we can trick you into thinking a malevolent Russian trawler is out there messing with the crabber’s bait. There is a trick to it, and when it works, you feel as if you’re watching a scripted show. Although very few programs are out-and-out fake, there is deception at play in every single reality program. The producers and editors are ostensibly con artists, distracting you with grand notions while we steal from you your precious time.

But the real con that drove The Apprentice is far older than television. The “pig in the poke” comes from an idiom dating to 1555: “I’ll never buy a pig in a poke / There’s many a foul pig in a fair cloak.” It refers to the time-honored scam of selling a suckling pig at market but handing over a bag (the poke) to the purchaser, who never looks inside it. Eventually, he discovers he’s purchased something quite different.

Our show became a 21 st -century version. It’s a long con played out over a decade of watching Trump dominate prime time by shouting orders, appearing to lead, and confidently firing some of the most capable people on television, all before awarding one eligible person a job. Audiences responded to Trump’s arrogance, his perceived abilities and prescience, but mostly his confidence . The centerpiece to any confidence game is precisely that— confidence .

As I walk into my interview for The Apprentice , I inadvertently learn how important it is for every one of us involved to demonstrate confidence above all else.

I sit down with Jay Bienstock, the showrunner, who has one last producer position to fill and needs somebody capable and hardworking. His office is sparse, and the desk is strategically placed directly across from the couch, with a noticeable angle downward from his desk to whomever is seated across from him. (I’m recalling all of the quoted conversations here to the best of my ability; they are not verbatim.)

He is smiling and even laughing throughout the interview, but from the steep angle at which he gazes down on me, there is no mistaking who is in charge. He seems to like what he hears and offers to follow up with my agent. “But I have to check your references before I can hire you,” he says. “You’d be crazy not to,” I reply. He laughs, claps his hands together, and grins. “ THAT’S what I’m talking about,” he says. “That’s the confidence this show needs!”

I sit there, several inches below eyeline, and ponder what just happened. What, I wonder, is so “confident” about suggesting he’d be crazy to not check my references? Then it dawns on me. He thinks I meant “You’d be crazy not to hire me.” The signal to noise begins.

Listen to Bill Pruitt discuss this story on What Next , Slate’s daily news podcast:

Before I leave, I have to ask: Why Trump? Bienstock discovers that we both lived in New York for a time. Knowing what we know about Trump, selling the idea that intelligent people would compete to land a job working for him will be a challenge.

“The idea is to have a new and different billionaire every season—just like there’s a new and different island on Survivor . We reached out to Spielberg, Katzenberg, Geffen, among others,” he says. “Trump is the only one who agreed to sign on.” (Bienstock didn’t respond to a request for comment.)

“We’ll make it work,” Bienstock says confidently. I rise, shake his hand, and leave, and head over to Dutton’s bookstore to pick up a used copy of Trump’s The Art of the Deal . It is filled with takeaways about branding and strategizing but conveniently omits Trump bluffing his way through meetings with contractors, stiffing them when it is convenient to do so, and betraying his most trusted colleagues to get what he wants. (The book’s ghostwriter, Tony Schwartz, has since tried to get the bestseller recategorized in the Library of Congress as a work of fiction.)

Another show of confidence is the budget the series commands. It’s not as expensive as a scripted series, but for a reality show, the price is high. Never have I worked on a series with this level of funding, but the cost is justified. This needs to feel real.

New York City is the perfect—though expensive—backdrop. Trump’s actual offices are, however, less than telegenic. They are cramped, and a lot of the wood furniture is chipped or peeling. None of it is suitable to appear on camera. We need what grifters call the Big Store: a fake but authentic-looking establishment in which the con goes down. Trump Tower, at the time, is mostly condos and some offices situated in the high-rise. The mezzanine comprises vacant and overpriced retail space, all of it unfinished. Trump offers the space to the production—at a premium, naturally—and it is inside this location that we create our own “reception area” with doors leading to a fake, dimly lit, and appropriately ominous-feeling “boardroom.”

Next door, there’s the “suite” where the contestants will live, which is made to look like a trendy loft-style apartment they all share. The lodgings are made up of partitions surrounding tiny, hard bunks upon which the candidates sleep; the illusion comes from elegantly appointed common areas, where most of the interplay will go down.

During a tour of the set, I have my first encounter with Trump. I leave the suite and enter the gear room, the only vacant retail space that will remain unfinished. It is filled with equipment and crew members milling about. In walks a trio of men. In the middle is Trump, in a navy blue suit and scarlet tie. He’s surprisingly tall, and not just because of the hair. He is flanked by two even taller men. Bienstock makes introductions, and I watch as Trump shakes hands with everyone. I’d been told he would never do this, something about fearing unwanted germs. When it is my turn, I decide on the convivial two-hander and place my right hand into his and my left onto his wrist as we shake. His eye contact is limited but thorough. He is sizing me up. He looks like a wolf about to rip my throat out before turning away, offering me my first glimpse at the superstructure—his hairstyle—buttressed atop his head with what must be gallons of Aqua Net.

I watch as Trump saunters around the room, snatches up a fistful of M&Ms from the craft service table set aside for the crew, and shoves them into his mouth. Then he is gone, ushered away toward some important meeting he must attend, as if to say, to one and all present, This is unimportant .

Eventually, it’s time to roll cameras. When Trump is called to perform, we are filming the first scene of the first episode on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange, and he is about to deliver the first task. Filming inside this beacon of capitalism and wealth gives the series the legitimacy it needs. A con artist would call staging the scam inside a legitimate institution “playing a man against the wall.”

From the balcony overlooking the famed trading room floor, Trump will set up the entire premise of the show on camera and engage in a little banter with the other participants. This includes introducing his advisers, George Ross, an older, grouchy attorney devoted to Trump’s legal affairs, and Carolyn Kepcher, a perpetual skeptic who runs his hospitality units and one of his golf clubs. (They might be called “the shills,” others in on the con who will act as Trump’s eyes and ears.)

The contestants are there, lined up and zeroed in on by camera operators getting reaction shots to whatever it is Trump says. Although they mostly just stand and wait, they patiently go along with the proceedings. They are not in on the con. They act as “the little blind mice,” who, in fraudster terms, convey a sense of authenticity by reacting to the goings-on, like lab rats caught in a maze.

Nothing is scripted—except for what Trump needs to say. Cue cards are present, but mostly it is Bienstock running up, coaching Trump, tossing out suggestions from the script he has written for the man. The feeling is that while doing a fair job of repeating the necessary words verbatim, Trump also appears to be inadvertently shouting at the contestants. His hands shuttle back and forth as if holding an invisible accordion, a gesture now famous in memes .

Each episode is filmed over three days. For the first episode, the two teams of contestants, divided by gender, take to the streets to carry out the initial task of trying to sell lemonade for the most money. The women pulverize the men.

Having won, the women are invited upstairs for a direct look at Trump’s very own apartment in Trump Tower, a reward designed specifically to introduce viewers to the gaudy but elevated world of Donald Trump at home. The men, who lost, go back to the loft to await their fate at the hands of Trump. He will be sending one of them home.

Inside the now-empty boardroom set, a meeting with the producers is called for the first briefing of Trump before the anticipated firing. With Trump are his cronies, Ross and Kepcher. Trump is “too busy,” so they have each observed both teams in the field and make an assessment of who prevailed and who fell behind.

Now, this is important. The Apprentice is a game show regulated by the Federal Communications Commission. In the 1950s, scandals arose when producers of quiz shows fed answers to likable, ratings-generating contestants while withholding those answers from unlikable but truly knowledgeable players. Any of us involved in The Apprentice swinging the outcome of prize money by telling Trump whom to fire is forbidden.

Considering this, Bienstock wisely chooses to record these off-camera briefings in case the FCC ever rolls up on us. Rather than blurt out who they think should get canned, the two producers of that week’s episode—each following one team—are coached to equitably share with Trump the virtues and deficiencies of each member of the losing team. This renders a balanced depiction of how and why they lost. There are obvious choices of whom to fire, but we want it to be something of a horse race, to sustain the drama and keep people watching.

Satisfied he has what he needs, Trump dismisses the prefiring discussion with the wave of a hand, claiming he has places to be, let’s get on with it, etc. We proceed to set up for what will be our first boardroom.

The producers retreat to the adjacent control room to watch the event unfold. Per the show’s format, the losing team is summoned in anticipation of one of its members being sent home. Leaving their luggage in the reception area, the men walk into the boardroom, where Trump is flanked by Ross and Kepcher, waiting for them solemnly. Trump just frowns from a gigantic red leather chair, his eyeline noticeably well above those sitting across from him.

The men proceed to verbally go after one another like gladiators jousting before the emperor. Trump takes the conversation into potentially dangerous terrain, asking one contestant, who is Jewish, whether he believes in “the genetic pool.” The contestant’s retort is swift and resolute: He tells Trump that he does, in fact, have the genes, “just like you got from your father, Fred Trump, and your mother, Mary Trump.” It pours out of him. It is dramatic. It is good reality TV.

The project manager must then choose two of the men to come back to the boardroom with him while everyone else is dismissed. An off-camera prefiring consultation with Trump takes place (and is recorded), right before the three men are brought back for the eventual firing. We film Trump, Ross, and Kepcher deliberating and giving the pluses and minuses of each, remarking on how risky it was for one of the contestants to stand up for himself the way that he did. Trump turns back and forth to each, listening. His cronies stick to their stories and give added deferential treatment toward Trump, with Ross strategically reminding him, “You’ve been taking risks your entire life.”

Trump summons the three men back into the boardroom for final judging. Trump grills one and says, “I will let you stay.” ( Wow! we think. A benevolent leader. ) When he turns his attention to the other man—the one he asked about genetics—it looks clear. He is doomed. So much so that the man stands when Trump tells him, “It seems unanimous.” Trump then offhandedly tells him to sit down, calling him “a wild card,” echoing Ross’ earlier observation of the boss, Trump.

After this comes an unwieldy moment when, at the behest of Bienstock, Trump fumbles through a given line. “We have an elevator,” he says to the remaining contestant, named David, “that goes up to the suite and an elevator that goes down”—he pauses to recall the exact wording—“to the street. And, David, I’m going to ask you to take the down elevator.”

The men react and awkwardly rise. It is an unsatisfactory conclusion, given all the preceding drama.

From the control room, we all watch as the three men depart the boardroom. A quick huddle takes place between the producers and the executive from NBC. We bolt from the control room out into the boardroom and confer with Trump, telling him we will need him to say something more direct to conclude the moment when David is let go.

“Well, I’d probably just fire him,” Trump says. “Why not just say that?” Bienstock asks. “Fine,” Trump says.

We return to the control room. The three men from the losing team are brought back into the boardroom, and Trump repeats his line about the elevator, then turns to David, who already knows his fate, and adds, “David, you’re fired.”

The line insertion happened in a perilously scripted way, but it is deemed satisfactory. “You’re fired” becomes the expression we will stick with. It works. Trump comes off as decisive and to the point.

Later, Trump will try to trademark “You’re fired.” He is not successful.

Trump’s appearances make up so little of our shooting schedule that whenever he shows up to film, it isn’t just the wild-card on-camera moments we both hope for and are terrified of that put everyone on edge. It is the way he, the star (and half owner) of the show, targets people on the crew with the gaze of a hungry lion.

While leering at a female camera assistant or assessing the physical attributes of a female contestant for whoever is listening, he orders a female camera operator off an elevator on which she is about to film him. “She’s too heavy,” I hear him say.

Another female camera operator, who happens to have blond hair and blue eyes, draws from Trump comparisons to his own Ivanka Trump. “There’s a beautiful woman behind that camera,” he says toward a line of 10 different operators set up in the foyer of Trump Tower one day. “That’s all I want to look at.”

Trump corners a female producer and asks her whom he should fire. She demurs, saying something about how one of the contestants blamed another for their team losing. Trump then raises his hands, cupping them to his chest: “You mean the one with the …?” He doesn’t know the contestant’s name. Trump eventually fires her.

(In response to detailed questions about this and other incidents reported in this article, Steven Cheung, a spokesman for the Trump 2024 campaign, wrote, “This is a completely fabricated and bullshit story that was already peddled in 2016.” He said that it is surfacing now because Democrats are “desperate.”)

Trump goes about knocking off every one of the contestants in the boardroom until only two remain. The finalists are Kwame Jackson, a Black broker from Goldman Sachs, and Bill Rancic, a white entrepreneur from Chicago who runs his own cigar business. Trump assigns them each a task devoted to one of his crown-jewel properties. Jackson will oversee a Jessica Simpson benefit concert at Trump Taj Mahal Casino in Atlantic City, while Rancic will oversee a celebrity golf tournament at Trump National Golf Club in Briarcliff Manor, New York.

Viewers need to believe that whatever Trump touches turns to gold. These properties that bear his name are supposed to glitter and gleam. All thanks to him.

Reality is another matter altogether. The lights in the casino’s sign are out. Hong Kong investors actually own the place—Trump merely lends his name. The carpet stinks, and the surroundings for Simpson’s concert are ramshackle at best. We shoot around all that.

Both Rancic and Jackson do a round-robin recruitment of former contestants, and Jackson makes the fateful decision to team up with the notorious Omarosa, among others, to help him carry out his final challenge.

With her tenure on the series nearly over, Omarosa launches several simultaneous attacks on her fellow teammates in support of her “brother” Kwame. For the fame-seeking beauty queen, it is a do-or-die play for some much-coveted screen time. As on previous tasks, Ross and Kepcher will observe both events.

Over at Trump National Golf Club, where I am stationed, it is sunny and bright, set against luscious fall colors. I am driven up to the golf club from Manhattan to scout. With me are the other producers, all of whom are men. We meet Trump at one of the homes he keeps for himself on the grounds of the club.

“Melania doesn’t even know about this place,” he says out loud to us, snickering, implying that the home’s function is as his personal lair for his sexual exploits, all of which are unknown to his then-fiancée Melania Knauss.

We are taken around the rest of the club’s property and told what to feature on camera and what to stay away from. The clubhouse is a particularly necessary inclusion, and it is inside these luxurious confines where I have the privilege of meeting the architect. Finding myself alone with him, I make a point of commending him for what I feel is a remarkable building. The place is genuinely spectacular. He thanks me.

“It’s bittersweet,” he tells me. “I’m very proud of this place, but …” He hesitates. “I wasn’t paid what was promised,” he says. I just listen. “Trump pays half upfront,” he says, “but he’ll stiff you for the rest once the project is completed.”

“He stiffed you?”

“If I tried to sue, the legal bills would be more than what I was owed. He knew that. He basically said Take what I’m offering ,” and I see how heavy this is for the man, all these years later. “So, we sent the invoice. He didn’t even pay that,” he says. None of this will be in the show. Not Trump’s suggested infidelities, nor his aversion toward paying those who work for him.

When the tasks are over, we are back in the boardroom, having our conference with Trump about how the two finalists compare—a conversation that I know to be recorded. We huddle around him and set up the last moments of the candidates, Jackson and Rancic.

Trump will make his decision live on camera months later, so what we are about to film is the setup to that reveal. The race between Jackson and Rancic should seem close, and that’s how we’ll edit the footage. Since we don’t know who’ll be chosen, it must appear close, even if it’s not.

We lay out the virtues and deficiencies of each finalist to Trump in a fair and balanced way, but sensing the moment at hand, Kepcher sort of comes out of herself. She expresses how she observed Jackson at the casino overcoming more obstacles than Rancic, particularly with the way he managed the troublesome Omarosa. Jackson, Kepcher maintains, handled the calamity with grace.

“I think Kwame would be a great addition to the organization,” Kepcher says to Trump, who winces while his head bobs around in reaction to what he is hearing and clearly resisting.

“Why didn’t he just fire her?” Trump asks, referring to Omarosa. It’s a reasonable question. Given that this the first time we’ve ever been in this situation, none of this is something we expected.

“That’s not his job,” Bienstock says to Trump. “That’s yours.” Trump’s head continues to bob.

“I don’t think he knew he had the ability to do that,” Kepcher says. Trump winces again.

“Yeah,” he says to no one in particular, “but, I mean, would America buy a n— winning?”

Kepcher’s pale skin goes bright red. I turn my gaze toward Trump. He continues to wince. He is serious, and he is adamant about not hiring Jackson.

Bienstock does a half cough, half laugh, and swiftly changes the topic or throws to Ross for his assessment. What happens next I don’t entirely recall. I am still processing what I have just heard. We all are. Only Bienstock knows well enough to keep the train moving. None of us thinks to walk out the door and never return. I still wish I had. (Bienstock and Kepcher didn’t respond to requests for comment.)

Afterward, we film the final meeting in the boardroom, where Jackson and Rancic are scrutinized by Trump, who, we already know, favors Rancic. Then we wrap production, pack up, and head home. There is no discussion about what Trump said in the boardroom, about how the damning evidence was caught on tape. Nothing happens.

We go home and face the next phase of our assignment, the editing. In stitching the footage together, the swindle we are now involved in ascends to new levels.

Editing in a reality TV show is what script writing is to a narrative series. A lot of effort goes into the storytelling because, basically, in every single unscripted series—whether it’s a daytime talk show, an adventure documentary, or a shiny floor dance-off—there are three versions: There’s what happens, there’s what gets filmed, and there’s what gets cut down into 43 minutes squeezed between commercial breaks. Especially for a competition series, it’s important that the third version represent the first as much as possible. A defeated contestant could show up in the press and cry foul if they’re misrepresented. Best to let people fail of their own accord. That said, we look after our prized possessions in how we edit the series, and some people fare better than others.

We attend to our thesis that only the best and brightest deserve a job working for Donald Trump. Luckily, the winner, Bill Rancic, and his rival, Kwame Jackson, come off as capable and confident throughout the season. If for some reason they had not, we would have conveniently left their shortcomings on the cutting room floor. In actuality, both men did deserve to win.

Without a doubt, the hardest decisions we faced in postproduction were how to edit together sequences involving Trump. We needed him to sound sharp, dignified, and clear on what he was looking for and not as if he was yelling at people. You see him today: When he reads from a teleprompter, he comes off as loud and stoic. Go to one of his rallies and he’s the off-the-cuff rambler rousing his followers into a frenzy. While filming, he struggled to convey even the most basic items. But as he became more comfortable with filming, Trump made raucous comments he found funny or amusing—some of them misogynistic as well as racist. We cut those comments. Go to one of his rallies today and you can hear many of them.

If you listen carefully, especially to that first episode, you will notice clearly altered dialogue from Trump in both the task delivery and the boardroom. Trump was overwhelmed with remembering the contestants’ names, the way they would ride the elevator back upstairs or down to the street, the mechanics of what he needed to convey. Bienstock instigated additional dialogue recording that came late in the edit phase. We set Trump up in the soundproof boardroom set and fed him lines he would read into a microphone with Bienstock on the phone, directing from L.A. And suddenly Trump knows the names of every one of the contestants and says them while the camera cuts to each of their faces. Wow , you think, how does he remember everyone’s name? While on location, he could barely put a sentence together regarding how a task would work. Listen now, and he speaks directly to what needs to happen while the camera conveniently cuts away to the contestants, who are listening and nodding. He sounds articulate and concise through some editing sleight of hand.

Then comes the note from NBC about the fact that after Trump delivers the task assignment to the contestants, he disappears from the episode after the first act and doesn’t show up again until the next-to-last. That’s too long for the (high-priced) star of the show to be absent.

There is a convenient solution. At the top of the second act, right after the task has been assigned but right before the teams embark on their assignment, we insert a sequence with Trump, seated inside his gilded apartment, dispensing a carefully crafted bit of wisdom. He speaks to whatever the theme of each episode is—why someone gets fired or what would lead to a win. The net effect is not only that Trump appears once more in each episode but that he also now seems prophetic in how he just knows the way things will go right or wrong with each individual task. He comes off as all-seeing and all-knowing. We are led to believe that Donald Trump is a natural-born leader.

Through the editorial nudge we provide him, Trump prevails. So much so that NBC asks for more time in the boardroom to appear at the end of all the remaining episodes. (NBC declined to comment for this article.)

When it comes to the long con, the cherry on top is the prologue to the premiere. It’s a five-minute-long soliloquy delivered by Trump at the beginning of the first episode, the one titled “Meet the Billionaire.” Over a rousing score, it features Trump pulling out all the stops, calling New York “ my city” and confessing to crawling out from under “billions of dollars in debt.” There’s Trump in the back of limousines. Trump arriving before throngs of cheering crowds outside Trump Tower. Trump in his very own helicopter as it banks over midtown—the same helicopter with the Trump logo that, just like the airplane, is actually for sale to the highest bidder. The truth is, almost nothing was how we made it seem.

So, we scammed. We swindled. Nobody heard the racist and misogynistic comments or saw the alleged cheating, the bluffing, or his hair taking off in the wind. Those tapes, I’ve come to believe, will never be found.

No one lost their retirement fund or fell on hard times from watching The Apprentice . But Trump rose in stature to the point where he could finally eye a run for the White House, something he had intended to do all the way back in 1998. Along the way, he could now feed his appetite for defrauding the public with various shady practices.

In 2005 thousands of students enrolled in what was called Trump University, hoping to gain insight from the Donald and his “handpicked” professors. Each paid as much as $35,000 to listen to some huckster trade on Trump’s name. In a sworn affidavit, salesman Ronald Schnackenberg testified that Trump University was “fraudulent.” The scam swiftly went from online videoconferencing courses to live events held by high-pressure sales professionals whose only job was to persuade attendees to sign up for the course. The sales were for the course “tuition” and had nothing whatsoever to do with real estate investments. A class action suit was filed against Trump.

That same year, Trump was caught bragging to Access Hollywood co-host Billy Bush that he likes to grab married women “by the pussy,” adding, “When you’re a star, they let you do it.” He later tried to recruit porn actor Stormy Daniels for The Apprentice despite her profession and, according to Daniels, had sex with her right after his last son was born. (His alleged attempt to pay off Daniels is, of course, the subject of his recent trial.)

In October 2016—a month before the election—the Access Hollywood tapes were released and written off as “locker room banter.” Trump paid Daniels to keep silent about their alleged affair. He paid $25 million to settle the Trump University lawsuit and make it go away.

He went on to become the first elected president to possess neither public service nor military experience. And although he lost the popular vote, Trump beat out Hillary Clinton in the Electoral College, winning in the Rust Belt by just 80,000 votes.

Trump has been called the “reality TV president,” and not just because of The Apprentice . The Situation Room, where top advisers gathered, became a place for photo-ops, a bigger, better boardroom. Trump swaggered and cajoled, just as he had on the show. Whom would he listen to? Whom would he fire? Stay tuned. Trump even has his own spinoff, called the House of Representatives, where women hurl racist taunts and body-shame one another with impunity. The State of the Union is basically a cage fight. The demands of public office now include blowhard buffoonery.

I reached out to Apollo, the Vegas perceptions expert, to discuss all of this. He reminded me how if a person wants to manipulate the signal, they simply turn up the noise. “In a world that is so uncertain,” he said, “a confidence man comes along and fills in the blanks. The more confident they are, the more we’re inclined to go along with what they suggest.”

A reality TV show gave rise to an avaricious hustler, and a deal was made: Subvert the facts, look past the deficiencies, deceive where necessary, and prevail in the name of television ratings and good, clean fun.

Trump is making another run at the White House and is leading in certain polls. People I know enthusiastically support him and expect he’ll return to office. It’s not just hats, sneakers, a fragrance, or Bibles. Donald Trump is selling his vision of the world, and people are buying it.

Knowing all they know, how could these people still think he’s capable of being president of the United States?

Perhaps they watched our show and were conned by the pig in the poke.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

How Trump’s Team Blew It

By Renato Mariotti

Mr. Mariotti, a partner at Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner in Chicago, is a former federal prosecutor.

The criminal trial of Donald Trump didn’t have to end this way.

The prosecution’s case had flaws that couldn’t be wallpapered over even with weeks of testimony, over 200 exhibits and a polished and persuasive presentation by Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, and his team. If Mr. Trump’s lawyers had played their cards right, they most likely would have ended up with a hung jury or a misdemeanor conviction.

The defense lost a winnable case by adopting an ill-advised strategy that was right out of Mr. Trump’s playbook. For years, he denied everything and attacked anyone who dared to take him on. It worked — until this case.

I have practiced criminal law for over 20 years, and I have tried and won cases as both a federal prosecutor and criminal defense attorney. I’ve almost never seen the defense win without a compelling counternarrative. Jurors often want to side with prosecutors, who have the advantage of writing the indictment, marshaling the witnesses and telling the story.

The defense needs its own story, and in my experience, the side that tells the simpler story at trial usually wins.

Instead of telling a simple story, Mr. Trump’s defense was a haphazard cacophony of denials and personal attacks. That may work for a Trump rally or a segment on Fox News, but it doesn’t work in a courtroom. Perhaps Mr. Trump’s team was also pursuing a political or press strategy, but it certainly wasn’t a good legal strategy. The powerful defense available to Mr. Trump’s attorneys was lost amid all the clutter.

At the beginning of the trial, Mr. Trump’s team had a clear path to victory. He was charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records related to the cover-up of a $130,000 hush-money payment that was made to the porn star Stormy Daniels. Yet the only direct evidence of Mr. Trump’s knowledge was the testimony of Michael Cohen — who has pleaded guilty to lying to Congress and charges of bank fraud, tax evasion and campaign finance violation — who hates Mr. Trump and makes money off his public commentary on Mr. Trump’s legal woes.

You don’t need to be a lawyer to see how this could be a powerful legal defense. The prosecution had to prove that Mr. Trump knew about and caused — or at least was an accomplice in creating — the false business records. But at the time the records were created, Mr. Trump was in the White House. The defense could argue that Mr. Cohen and Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Organization’s chief financial officer, who has pleaded guilty to lying under oath and tax fraud, came up with that scheme on their own. Mr. Trump, his lawyers could argue, was focused on his role as president.

Mr. Trump’s team did say something similar at various points in the trial, including during Todd Blanche’s roughly three-hour closing argument. The problem is that the defense made so many other points, and fought so many other things, that it failed to focus the jury on the weaknesses in the prosecution’s case and instead tried to fight everything and everyone, even when it gained little by doing so.

Although the prosecution’s evidence of Mr. Trump’s personal approval of the falsification of business records was thin, the evidence for most of the other relevant facts was rock solid. Yet the defense destroyed its own credibility by denying the undeniable, as in its laughable claim that the large lump-sum payments to Mr. Cohen really were payments for legal services, including the amount that he embezzled from Mr. Trump.

The trial dragged on for weeks largely because of Mr. Trump’s “deny everything” approach. A savvy defense counsel would have stipulated that Mr. Trump had an intimate affair with Ms. Daniels. Instead, the defense forced the prosecution to prove that the affair occurred and proceeded to aggressively attack Ms. Daniels, whom some of the jury likely found sympathetic in her testimony. That attack gained no ground legally for the defense — little turned on whether Mr. Trump had a sexual encounter with her — but distracted from his actual defense.

Similarly, the cross-examination of Mr. Cohen dragged on for days because the defense sought to confront him with every lie it could identify, seemingly every misdeed he ever committed and every potential line of attack it could come up with.

Because the defense denied everything and attacked Mr. Cohen on every point, prosecutors were able to focus on the many points where Mr. Cohen’s testimony was corroborated by documents, phone records, text messages and a recording. If the defense had narrowly focused on the key points on which that testimony was not corroborated, it could have undermined the prosecution’s advantage.

It may be that a not-guilty verdict was always a long shot. But if the defense had been more effective, one of the two lawyers on the jury might have voted to acquit, all that is needed for a hung jury. Or perhaps the jury would have compromised and rendered a verdict that Mr. Trump committed only a misdemeanor, which most defense attorneys would view as a win, given the circumstances.

But Mr. Trump’s team went for broke, deciding not to seek a jury instruction that would have permitted jurors to find that Mr. Trump committed a misdemeanor rather than a felony. It’s unclear whether that decision to deny the jury an option that would have given the defense a win was an act of hubris or a refusal to compromise, but both are characteristics of Mr. Trump that don’t translate well into a criminal trial.

Mr. Trump’s team was a reflection of its client, always attacking and never backing down. That playbook has worked for Mr. Trump again and again. For this trial and in a Manhattan courtroom, the attitude and strategy backfired.

Renato Mariotti, a partner at Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner in Chicago, is a former federal prosecutor and a co-host with Asha Rangappa of the “It’s Complicated” podcast .

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .