The Editor's Blog - Latest Comments in Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

Re: Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

Okey Oyna — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:26:43 -0000

Very good, congratulations article

Re: Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

Sue — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:34:04 -0000

Hi - I'm new to this and wonder how to go about sending in a press releases for the Merrimack River Watershed Council for their Stream Team Project on the Merrimack River

Re: Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

A Wiltonian — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 14:39:43 -0000

The reply by Ray Guarino was on point. Cheers.

One has to wonder about how sincere the Telegraph is -- arguing that foul language is acceptable when it's "newsworthy" -- when it goes on to use "fart jokes" in a break page headline.

Re: Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

Susie — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:52:40 -0000

So you can print it in a story but it gets blocked by a blog monitor?

Re: Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

Bill — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 14:37:10 -0000

Most politicians are full of the product mentioned.

Re: Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

Mike — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 15:34:13 -0000

Let's keep it that way. Children may discover "adult language" in their own time, but let their parents control that (as best they can).

Re: Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

Ray Guarino — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 01:45:02 -0000

I believe that expletives and street language should not be used in the newspapers. Mainly because our acceptance of words in the language is based on usage. The more we use these types of words, the more they are accepted. That has been the history of the English language. The newspapers should not contriburte to the degredation of the language. They have a responsibility to the public. It's bad enough that text messaging is pressuring the lexicon with a whole new type of strange abbreviated vocabulary that sucks the blood from words. Word lovers, such as Emily Dickinson, are rolling over in their graves.

Re: Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

Danno Hynes — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 01:09:43 -0000

When I read this story last week I have to admit that Mr. Boghigian's colorful language did jump off the page but I think that was attributable more to the rarity of it than to it being offensive. It added some personality to the quote of a 90-year old man who is still an interested participant in the NH Primary....that should have been what readers took away from the story!! The Telegraph does a very good job minimizing offensive language in their stories and I believe, in this case they made the right decision to run with the quote as is. If you really want to be offended then listen to talk radio for a while or tuirn on the TV!

Re: Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

Marcel — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 01:03:21 -0000

In my opinion, and although I am guilty of using profanity at times, there is really no reason to put such words in print unless omitting them (with a phrase such as "explitive deleted") would significantly alter teh meaning of teh story.

Re: Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

Dan Pelletier — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:50:08 -0000

I've never met Mr. Boghigian so I don't know how he'd react to a request to change an offensive word to malarkey. I'd venture to guess that a high percentage of the sept-, oct- and nonagenarians I know would say "That's bulls**t!"

Besides asking to change what he said would be dishonest journalism in my view.

I think that if the decision is made to use a quote with "offensive" language, with or without the asterisks, any blame attaches to the speaker. Not to the reporter or the paper.

Re: Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

John Weber — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 13:04:14 -0000

I'm not personally offended by the use of profanity in this context, but I can see how its appearance in the paper could be considered in bad taste. I have some sympathy for the parent who is trying to teach his children verbal self-discipline while fighting the ever rising tide of public profanity. Perhaps the newspaper should take the high ground, try to preserve the value of tasteful language in public, and leave profanity to the Sopranos.

Re: Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

Lisa Eastland — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 12:06:38 -0000

I've always been told that the use of profanity proves a lazy mind. I try not to use it at home and I definitely don't want my newspaper using it, regardless if it is a quote or not. To say that there have only been three uses of profanity in the past 23 years is a bit misleading. The real numbers are that it has been used three times in the past 17 months. That averages one use every 5 months or so. Definitely an increase! I wonder if the reporter could have said to the gentleman in this particular story "Sir, I love your quote, but unfortunately I can't use that particular word. Do you have another one for me, or could I substitute malarky?" The guy was 90--he would have known what that word meant!

Bottom line--The Telegraph should have done a better job editing and omitted the word. Its use did not improve the story.

Re: Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

Holly Jamieson — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 11:35:32 -0000

I am definitely not offended by the newspaper quoting someone, and if that person swears, so be it.

I will admit that I don't want to see profanity throughout my newspaper, but when it is being used in a quote or in certain situations, it is fine.

Unfortunately, profanity is used regularly in a lot of homes! It is definitely not SHOCKING!

Re: Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

J. Bradford Seabury — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 11:31:56 -0000

I am inclined to agree with my fellow Hudsonite, as I do not see the need to include such words. I also agree that it is disagreeable to include the first and last letters of a word with the intervening characters being replaced by hyphens (colored by the fact that I sometimes cannot figure out what the missing word was, which leaves me wondering if this is a new term or if it is just an indication that the reporter cannot count). Yes, there are and always have been lots of words that we do not use in polite company, but I do not see the need for them in newspaper articles, and I would much rather not see them at all, including in my own vocabularay. I remember acknowledging to my mother, when discussing my first job as a teenager, that I heard and used terms that I would never say in her presence; she then asked me why I felt I needed to use such words at work, and I had no good answer, nor have I developed one since then.

Re: Reader Is Bull About The Word S—

Miriam Gillitt Winer — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 11:18:31 -0000

I tried to use the word :"you know what": in the title of my comment, it was blocked by your filter!

In any case, I think any child old enough to read the paper has certainly heard that word before, and if not, well, time to learn that a whole vocabulary of grown-up words exists. I don't advocate wholesale use of profanity, but a choice epithet now and then is perfectly fine with me.