Following on the thread of Doonesbury, 4/23- did your paper have the “bad language”, or the cutesy symbols?:
What did your paper have for **The Boondocks ** today? It was not until I saw this version of **The Boondocks ** on My Yahoo page that I realized that paper I subscribe to, the Boston Globe, had edited it.
The Globe apparently found “NAS" too offensive, and replaced it with "***”. Anyone else?
The Baltimore Sun had “N***AS.”
We also had the bad-word version of “Doonesbury.”
Washington Post has the ‘N***AS’ version.
St. Petersburg Times had the N***AS version. It also had the unedited version of Doonesbury. And they run this on the Comics page. IIRC the Cincinnati Enquirer runs Doonesbury with Editorial cartoons, and sometimes not at all. It’s also hardcore Republican territory, FWIW.
Newsday replaced the entire word with a dash.
LA Times had N***AS, and uncensored Doonesbury.
Savannah Morning News had the asterisk version, too.
Philadelphia Inquirer had uncensored Doonesbury, and the “N***AS” version of Boondocks.
My Akron(OH) Beacon Journal ran N***AS.
They whiffed on the Doonsbury.
I am so glad the editors at the Boston Globe are making sure that I don’t see something on the comics page that might offend my little sensibilities.
:rolleyes:
At least the comic makes more sense now. I really didn’t know what word was supposed to be there, OR that the comic had even been edited.
ucomics.com went with “N***AS”