Who to Contact or Whom to Contact? The Complete Grammar Guide

Who to Contact or Whom to Contact guides your grammar choice at work when confusion hits across formal and professional contexts in a casual email or a polished note. In my experience, the challenge begins while deciding between who and whom; the difference looks tiny yet affects communication and credibility.

A careful editor checks the rules, your voice, and the reader view, even the title and question a line reflects. The trick lies in knowing origins and usage in a sentence—is it the subject or object? That rule holds through modern English with its flexibility in spoken talk.

Read the context, scan the clause in its syntactic construction, avoid mistakes, choose what’s appropriate for the referent, and fit the correct form for emails, executives, and academic writing so respect and comprehension rise.Language often feels intuitive until you hit the phrase “contact,” then ask when; even seasoned writers pause.

I’ve typed the same question into a search engine before sending an important email because I didn’t want to sound careless; that two-word choice sparks uncertainty for countless people. A solid guide breaks the debate into clear sections with examples, case studies, tables, and linguistic insights so you learn exactly how to use who and whom and make smart choices for both casual and formal moments.

Table of Contents

Why “Who to Contact or Whom to Contact” Still Confuses People

Everyday English leans toward simplicity. Yet, grammar rules linger from older forms of the language, and those remnants create friction. The confusion isn’t a sign of poor writing. It’s a natural result of a language that evolves faster than textbooks.

People hesitate because:

Both versions regularly appear online.
Some writers insist “whom” is the only correct form.
Others view “whom” as outdated or overly formal.
Many readers don’t understand or care about the technical distinction.

You can see why this topic refuses to fade.

A useful way to frame the issue is simple. You’re choosing between sounding natural and sounding proper. That’s where nuance matters.

Who to Contact or Whom to Contact? The Direct Answer

Let’s begin with the answer most readers come for.

In formal English, the grammatically correct choice is:

“Whom to contact.”

In modern everyday English, the widely accepted and more natural choice is:

“Who to contact.”

You’ll see “who to contact” in emails, websites, social posts, internal memos, business chats, and marketing copy. You’ll likely see “whom to contact” in legal documents, grant proposals, academic writing, and traditional corporate communication.

Both forms appear everywhere because both forms serve different tonal purposes.

This detailed guide helps you choose the right one for your exact situation.

Understanding the Difference Between “Who” and “Whom”

You don’t need a linguistics degree to sort this out. Think of the difference in functional terms.

Who → The Subject

“Who” plays the role of doer of the action.

Whom → The Object

“Whom” receives the action.

The easiest trick known to writers is the he/him substitution test.

If “he” fits, use who.
If “him” fits, use whom.

Example:
“Contact him.” → “Whom to contact.”
“Him” works, so “whom” is grammatically correct.

The test never fails because English pronouns align the same way:

Pronoun Type	Subject	Object
Masculine	he	him
Feminine	she	her
Neutral	they	them
Interrogative	who	whom

This small table alone solves almost every case.

Why Prepositions Complicate the Issue

The phrase “to contact” carries a preposition, which makes “whom” the object of that preposition. That’s why old-school grammarians insist on “whom to contact.”

But English evolves. The language doesn’t always treat prepositional objects the way textbooks prescribe. Conversation ignores complexity for convenience. That’s where overlapping meanings appear and cause confusion for writers who want to sound clear without sounding stiff.

Traditional Grammar Rules: What Older Textbooks Teach

For most of the twentieth century, strict grammar instruction dominated English classrooms. Students learned:

“Who” is always a subject pronoun.
“Whom” is always an object pronoun.
The object of a preposition must be “whom.”

Writers followed those rules because clarity mattered in print. Editors enforced them. Teachers graded them. Publications standardized them.

These rules once served a clear purpose. They created uniformity in professional writing. Readers grew to expect the distinction. Older manuals like The Elements of Style treated “whom” as indispensable in formal prose.

However language didn’t freeze in place.

Why These Rules Mattered Historically

Language teachers believed that precise grammar reflected education and credibility. Formal speech required rigid structure and adherence to rules that mimicked Latin-based grammar. Because Latin used strict case systems, earlier English grammarians imported that logic into English even though English evolved differently.

Curiosity fuels creativity. People began to question the need for an object form when context already made meaning clear. That’s when the modern shift began.

Modern English Trends: Why Usage Changed

You live in a digital world that prioritizes readability. That reality reshaped language. Although “whom” remains technically correct in many situations, it gradually lost steam.

Here’s why:

It sounds formal, almost ceremonial.
It slows reading.
Most people rarely use it in conversation.
Clarity doesn’t usually depend on the distinction.
It’s difficult for many people to apply correctly.

Language evolves based on efficiency. The more a form complicates communication, the faster it disappears from everyday vocabulary.

Why “Whom” Is Falling Out of Favor

A quick scan of emails or social media proves the trend. Writers select words that readers process quickly. “Who” feels conversational. “Whom” feels rigid. That’s why only specific fields still use “whom” consistently.

Below is a clear comparison:

Where “Whom” Declines

Blogs
Web articles
Corporate chats
Internal memos
Text messages
Advertising copy
Nonfiction with conversational tone

Where “Whom” Persists

Legal writing
Academic research
Government forms
High-formality corporate communication
Instructional manuals
Technical writing

Trends show these fields hold onto “whom” because precision outweighs casual tone.

The Role of Formality in Choosing Between “Who” and “Whom”

Formality drives the decision more than grammar does. You’re making a style choice as much as a grammatical one.

Here’s a simple rule:

If you want to sound warm, approachable, and modern, use “who to contact.”
If you want to sound authoritative, traditional, or unmistakably correct, use “whom to contact.”

Think of tone as a sliding scale. You adjust it depending on the reader and the context.

Examples of Formal vs Informal Situations

You can spot the tonal difference instantly when you compare real-life scenarios.

Formal Situations

Use: Whom to contact
Examples:

A university page listing departmental staff
A scholarship application instruction form
A legal notice or compliance document
An official company announcement
A government information portal

Sample sentence:
“For assistance with contractual issues, please review the list below to determine whom to contact.”

Informal Situations

Use: Who to contact
Examples:

Workplace Slack messages
Customer service webpages
Marketing landing pages
Internal company newsletters
Everyday emails

Sample sentence:
“If you need help with onboarding, here’s who to contact.”

Small differences shift the reader’s perception instantly.

When You Should Use “Who”

You’ll use “who” far more often than “whom.” Modern readers expect it in almost every casual environment.

Use “who” when:

You want your writing to sound conversational.
You’re writing for general audiences.
You’re crafting social media content.
You’re communicating inside your organization.
You’re writing guides, blogs, or marketing copy.

Here are everyday examples:

“Here’s who to contact if the website glitches.”
“Do you know who to contact for event details?”
“Our support page outlines who to contact for each issue.”

These feel natural because “who” matches modern speech patterns.

When You Should Use “Whom”

Choose “whom” when precision or formality is necessary. You’ll use it less often but still encounter situations where it improves clarity.

Use “whom” when:

Following a preposition directly
Writing legal or academic documents
Communicating with institutions
Publishing formal reports or handbooks
The context explicitly calls for traditional correctness

Examples:

“Determine whom to contact regarding this inquiry.”
“Applicants must identify whom to contact in their designated region.”

This preserves credibility where formality matters.

Side-by-Side Table: Who vs Whom in Practical Use

Situation	Recommended Form	Example	Reason
Informal email	who	“Here’s who to contact about scheduling.”	Conversational tone
Corporate memo	who	“Below is who to contact for each project.”	Modern corporate communication prefers simplicity
Legal document	whom	“Refer to the directory to find whom to contact.”	Formal precision required
Academic paper	whom	“Identify whom to contact for departmental approvals.”	Traditional grammar
Website FAQ	who	“Find out who to contact for support.”	Readability and speed
Government form	whom	“Select the representative whom to contact.”	Adherence to formal rules

This table works as a quick-reference guide when you’re unsure which form fits.

Object Pronouns, Verbs, and Why the Grammar Matters

Understanding the grammatical structure behind the phrase helps you make consistent choices. “Contact” is a verb that requires an object. That object can be a person, group, or entity.

Diagram: Sentence Structure Behind the Phrase

You need to know [whom] to contact.

| | |

Subject Object Verb

Because the pronoun plays the role of an object, “whom” remains technically correct in strict grammar.

Yet, English often prioritizes fluidity over function. That’s why “who” rises in popularity even when it isn’t the textbook choice.

Is “Whom” Still Necessary?

The answer depends on your goal.

According to Modern Style Guides

Associated Press (AP Stylebook):
Encourages conversational writing and considers “whom” optional unless clarity requires it.

Chicago Manual of Style:
Maintains traditional rules but acknowledges the decline of “whom” in everyday usage.

MLA Handbook:
Recommends preserving the distinction in academic writing.

So yes, “whom” still holds value in specific circles. It signals precision. It demonstrates adherence to formal linguistic structure. Yet it’s rarely needed for comprehension.

Think of it this way. The more formal the material, the more likely “whom” remains appropriate.

Who or Whom in Digital Communication: Does It Matter?

Digital content thrives on clarity and speed. That’s why “who to contact” dominates the digital landscape.

Below are factors that influence this trend:

Readers scan content quickly.
Longer or stiff wording interrupts flow.
Conversational tone improves engagement.
Algorithms favor readable content.
Brand voice guidelines often emphasize accessibility.

Even professional websites prioritize “who” unless legal specificity demands otherwise.

Example:
A customer support page will nearly always say “See who to contact for support issues.”

A court filing will almost always say “Identify whom to contact for case-related questions.”

The domain dictates the choice.

Case Study: How One Company Chose Between Who and Whom

A mid-sized software company redesigned its onboarding portal. During testing, users complained that the phrase “whom to contact” sounded cold and bureaucratic. The company changed it to “who to contact” across all internal materials.

The results:

Employee satisfaction with documentation increased
Time spent searching for information decreased
Feedback described the tone as “approachable”

This small lexical shift improved usability because tone influences experience.

A second case study from a compliance firm showed the opposite. They replaced “whom” with “who” in a regulatory handbook. Reviewers flagged the change as incorrect. They reverted to “whom,” reinforcing its necessity in formal environments.

These contrasting stories reveal a simple truth. Audience matters more than rules.

Digital Impact: Why Technology Accelerates Change

Technology reshapes how, when, and why you write.

Email replaced letters.
Messaging apps replaced memos.
Social platforms replaced newsletters.
Web content replaced technical manuals.

Each medium favors brevity. The more time people spend reading on screens, the more they expect fast, friendly language.

That environment naturally pushes “whom” out of daily use.

Final Answer: Which One Should You Use?

Here’s the rule of thumb you can follow every time without hesitation:

Use “who to contact” unless the situation is explicitly formal.

If you answer yes to any of these questions, choose “whom”:

Is the document legal or compliance-related?
Is the writing academic or research-based?
Is strict grammatical correctness expected?
Is the context highly professional or ceremonial?

If not, “who to contact” is the safer, more modern, more readable choice.

Quick Reference Table: Who vs Whom for Every Situation

Context	Best Choice	Why
Everyday writing	who to contact	Natural modern speech
Email to coworkers	who to contact	Friendly tone
Corporate website	who to contact	Improves user experience
Legal material	whom to contact	Formality + precision
Academic writing	whom to contact	Style standard
Customer support page	who to contact	Clear, fast, simple
Instruction manual	whom to contact	Traditional correctness
Marketing content	who to contact	Conversational tone

Conclusion

Choosing between who and whom doesn’t have to feel like a grammar maze. When you remember the simple rule—who acts, whom receives the action—you gain confidence in emails, reports, and everyday messages. Over time, this small habit sharpens your writing. It makes your tone clearer and more professional. Most of all, it helps you avoid second-guessing and write with ease, whether you’re messaging a friend or drafting for work.