(no subject)

Jan 05, 2011 08:22

Here's something I find offensive: the media's failure to report clearly about stories involving vulgar language.  Often they don't even mention vulgar/offensive words in articles, they just leave the words out of reports.   Surely people can distinguish between actually using a vulgarity and spelling out what a particular vulgarity is.  Saying, "Joe called Fred a fucking asshole" is entirely different than calling someone a fucking asshole, in the first case one is merely quoting, in the latter, they're actually using the term.  Similarly, mentioning terms vs. using them, e.g., saying "'nigger' is a very offensive term" is not an an offensive statement, i.e., nothing like using the word to describe someone and yet people are forever using "n-word" or some silliness in place of the actual term even when merely mentioning it.

In any event, here's a recent example of this silliness: a report on the firing of Ron Franklin.  Apparently it was at least in part over some derogatory term that he used but they won't tell us what it was.  Instead they write: "'Why don't you leave this to the boys, sweet baby?' Franklin allegedly said. When Edwards objected to the derogatory language, Franklin responded, 'okay then, [expletive].' "  I can guess, but why don't they just tell us so that we actually have the facts to help determine how offensive what he said actually was?  This report is a bit less circumspect, they report that he called her an "a-hole", although, again, because people drop letters when reporting these things we're not entirely sure if he said "a-hole" literally or "asshole".

language_use

Previous post Next post
Up