I hear this increasingly often these days.

Problem:
The preposition “out” is unnecessary here.

Explanation:
I hear “distribute out” in sentences such as these:

• “I’ll distribute out the PowerPoint presentation tomorrow.”
• “Can you distribute out the notes from what you found?”
• “She would like for him to distribute out to us the notes from last Friday’s meeting.”

Here is yet another perfectly understandable verb — “distribute” — that has become seen by many speakers and writers of American English as requiring the preposition “out” after it. It doesn’t!

Look at the same example sentences with “out” removed:

• “I’ll distribute the PowerPoint presentation tomorrow.”
• “Can you distribute the notes from what you found?”
• “She would like for him to distribute to us the notes from last Friday’s meeting.”

We do not lose any clarity by removing “out” from each of the original sentences, Instead, we gain clarity because the listeners or readers are not wondering why “out” was added.

Solution:
“… distribute [something] …”

I seem to hear this increasingly often these days.

Problem:
The preposition “out” is unnecessary here.

Explanation:
I hear “communicate out” in sentences such as these:

• “I’ll communicate out the results of the poll tomorrow.”
• “Can you communicate out the meeting notes from today’s meeting?”
• “She would like for him to communicate out to us what he finds in his research.”

Arrgh!

I simply have to wonder how a perfectly understandable verb — “communicate” — has become seen by many speakers and writers of American English as requiring the preposition “out” after it.

It doesn’t!

Look at the same example sentences with “out” removed:

• “I’ll communicate the results of the poll tomorrow.”
• “Can you communicate the meeting notes from today’s meeting?”
• “She would like for him to communicate to us what he finds in his research.”

Did we lose any clarity by removing “out” from each of the original sentences? No!

Enough said.

Solution:
“… communicate [something] …”