News-Record.com

did i miss the point of this post?

Got me. There has been some discussion about how to use/characterize the president's choice of language. I was just explaining. I almost compared it as being similar to not publishing the Danish cartoons, but believing that readers got the picture, but I pulled that punch. :)

Maybe you can tell us if when the Clinton/Lewinsky news broke if you used the words blow job? If you used that term, which of course refrences an oral sex act, then by all means you should print the President's profanity, which is slang for fecel matter. I mean the right had their panties in a wad when Clinton got Lewinskied and supposedly lied about it. Shouldn't the left have their uproar as well?

The N&R should stop walking on eggshells just because a handful of uptight folks complain.

Jay, I think it is fair to say that a lot more than a few "handful of uptight folks" would get quite upset if the N&R printed the whole word.

The paper would never hear from most of those who became upset, they would just quietly cancel the subsriptions.

john, the reason i asked is, well, i guess i wouldn't have thought twice about it if you ran with s**t, as opposed to... well, i don't want to reduce your circulation.

my point is that the decision would've quietly flown under the radar of most left-leaning people, because we really don't give a s**t about matters of inconsequence... making your editorial intentions known on this topic just seemed to be a waste of a post.

but i know all about wasting posts. ;)

I understand David. For those who want to see this mysterious word that might end the world if printed, please feel free to visit my site. Link is in the right hand column under links of interest. I still think it's weak.

Nah, we didn't use any of the common vulgarities during the good old days of Bill and Monica, although I think there may have been some fun made of cigars on the editorial pages.

Jay, I've got nothing against offending reader sensibilities when the issue is substantive and important. This one doesn't leap that hurdle.
In a way, it's a matter of respect. To Sean's point, to many people using the word doesn't matter a whit. To others it represents the decline of civilization. In this case, I don't gain anything by using it but I do lose something.
Not only do I lose the readers who'd prefer they and their kids not read that word, but I also lose the higher ground in standing for civility in discourse and in language. As someone who believes that you can communicate quite clearly without using 99 percent of the common curse words -- and yes, I called upon that other one percent my fair share of the time -- there's little reason for me to have a different standard for the paper.

Sean, my experience is that whenever we DON'T publish something or edit something transparently people ask questions. The president's language got so much publicity yesterday, it seemed a natural to head off discussion. As for it being a waste of a post, I'd ask, have you read this blog for long? :)

I'm going to come down on JR's 'side' on this one - there's a line that good folks should not cross if we're still going to consider ourselves in any way proper. It's an imaginary line that gets pushed around a lot and I really hated it when the Vice President used the "f" word on the floor of the Senate because that's supposed to be one of the last refuges of gentle society - and I have trouble defending not using the "s" word in the paper when Mr. Cheney can use it in a personal sense in the Senate.

Obviously, the "f" word is worse than the "s" word but not as bad as the "n" word and we've developed a new langauge, haven't we? The N&R is a family paper and profanity doesn't belong there. Especially when the President had no intention of it being published; an open mike mistake (that I'm glad he made) is still mistake.

I think I just defended the President. It must be the ocean air :)

Like Sean, I think this is a no-brainer. That we still have propriety somewhere makes me feel good and it's another thing I like about Greensboro.

The news is conveyed withought spelling the word. However, I'm puzzled by the defense that the N&R is a "family newspaper." I'm not sure what this means. It is certainly no Weekly Reader. It reports on adult subjects all the time -- all sorts of grusome and abhorent events, as it should. How does a "family newspaper" standard fit into full and accurate reporting of subjects not suitable for children?

Roch,

If you pay any attention to the letters page, I think you'll see there is quite a number of people who regularly right in to report their shock and indignation to see certain subjects reported about in the newspaper. Just recently, quite a few were raging about the possible consequences of little children being exposed to the horrors of beer through reports of "Thirsty Thursday" at the ball park and another group who said the newspaper endorsed drunken driving simply by reporting that a person had referred to that act in a profile that made the subjects of the story look like total nitwits.

Of course, these letter writers never write about children reading tales of death and dismemberment in the paper. They only seem worried about bad words, beer, dancing and other types of premarital fun.

Roch, I know what you mean. Our experience is that readers expect to read the news, almost regardless of how tough the subject matter might be.

But we also know from experience that, among other things, many of them see little value in reading profanity that they wouldn't say in their own homes, feel no great need to see a grisly photo that can be described well enough in words or, say, need to see revealing photos of men or women.

The bottom line on "family" is really whether it is something that you would comfortably show a child. We can justify topics under the auspices of news. Does a curse word uttered by the president qualify? I'd say no. But as indicated by the link in this post, other editors disagreed.

Yes, Mr. Robinson, subscribers do want to read the NEWS. So why may I ask was this non-pertinent, non-significant, nonsense even in the paper? Dear Lord, this is on the par of that Kindley charade last week. If this is all that is of any importance that people can find to discuss then they need to get a life and become aware of the life going on around them and in the world. And, the N&R needs to grow up and start puslishing a paper for thinking adults.

Let me just say first, to Sean, this doesn't seem to be a waste of a post.

Brenda, if we can find a place for comics, the horoscope, the news from Brangelina, I think we can get the news of the president cursing in the paper. If nothing else, it may be something his base and all his constituents want to know about him. Was it on the front page? No. Did we sensationalize it? I don't think so. Is it worth noting? Yes. Is it on par with the comments of the Guilford chairman of the Republican Party? Your call, but I'm afraid both of their comments -- because they are at the least out of the ordinary and offensive to many -- are news.

It's a "family" newspaper because Greensboro is a "family" town. I had no more behind it than that.

A family town, Sue? Are you sure? As Emery noted above, there is dancing.

But Roch, "dancing" doesn't rhyme with "P" and it doesn't stand for pool. And there's no "k" in it, so it's not funny. (We saw some old movies this week.)

Did any MSM publish the full word?