Here’s something I’ve not seen before.
While reporting about a Senator dropping the F-bomb, the article drops the F-bomb.
“Senator Ruth just advised the NGOs to ‘shut the fuck up’ and let the maternal-health issue play itself out,” Kelly Crichton, who represents the group At the Table, said in an email.
From here: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100503/national/senator_f_bomb_1
I’m a bit surprised to see that on a Yahoo page, but I’m not unhappy about it. I think most censoring in the media is a bit silly, and I really hate it when a news article goes so far out of its way to avoid offense that I can’t even tell what the original quote was. I’ll see something like, “The Congresswoman then called him a ---- ------, at which point, he burst into tears and ran home to his mommy.” Did she call him a cock sucker? A fuck monkey? A Dope poster? Too many offensive options to choose from!
That being said, I wonder if Yahoo Canada has different censorship policies than Yahoo in the US.
Agreed. I think it’s moronic when some paper or web site runs a story about some politician or entertain using a (gasp!) insensitive term and then avoids the term. It’s like they’re writing for five-year-olds.
I’ve never seen that. Usually you see creative rewriting of the epithet, like “Sen. Jones described the president using a barnyard epithet and described the assembled crowd of eminent theologians using a derogatory term for homosexuals.”
Well, censorship in general is different in Canada than in the U.S. It’s not totally uncommon to hear “fuck” on broadcast TV, after prime time, that is.
I understand the ban on expletives less and less as time goes on. The idea used to be that censors were protecting children from understanding adult things, but that’s out the window. I saw a TV show recently where a character said something like: “He wants to put his penis in your vagina.” What the fuck?
South Park?