1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

We're grownups, ESPN. Just tell us the words.

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by inthesuburbs, Apr 3, 2013.

  1. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    I'm with OP. Use the words when they are germane to a news story. At least spell them on the screen. It's so distracting to see m___f____. Yes, we all can figure out what it means, but it still takes more effort than it should. The idea of curse words as some third rail seems so antiquated to me. Are they impolite? I guess. But I wish we would just retire the idea of them entirely. And we can start with reporting them in news stories when they are relevant to the story.
     
  2. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    This is an adjunct to that earlier thread about publishing obscenities.

    While I understand the arguments in favor of publishing the words when the words are germane to the story, I also think there's a level of caution necessary here that goes beyond simple good manners.

    Does any parent want to be forced to explain the word "cocksucker" to their six-year-old daughter because it appeared in a quote on a general interest website like ESPN?
     
  3. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    There's also the matter of, many people would prefer us to remain a polite society that has standards for this sort of thing. I can curse with the best of 'em, but I don't do it if I don't know the crowd. That's what this is doing, being cautious because you don't know the crowd.

    The argument "we all know the words anyway" is equally compelling for not publishing the words as it is for publishing them.
     
  4. inthesuburbs

    inthesuburbs Member

    Here are 8,000 times where the word "faggots" appears on ESPN's website. And ESPN can't use the word in a story that is about the topic, nothing but the topic, of the coach calling his players that word, because -- because it doesn't know the crowd? because we need to maintain a polite society? because it's being respectful of its readers? Please.

    https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aespn.go.com+%22faggots%22&aq=f&oq=site%3Aespn.go.com+%22faggots%22&aqs=chrome.0.57j58.8592j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

    And 8,850 more for "faggot."

    https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aespn.go.com+%22faggots%22&aq=f&oq=site%3Aespn.go.com+%22faggots%22&aqs=chrome.0.57j58.8592j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=site:espn.go.com+%22faggot%22&oq=site:espn.go.com+%22faggot%22&gs_l=serp.3...304160.304160.0.304801.1.1.0.0.0.0.74.74.1.1.0...0.0...1c.1.8.psy-ab.trPooBlODXM&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44697112,d.dmQ&fp=d11a36d89eeedaab&biw=1066&bih=522

    And 8,230 for "pussies."

    https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aespn.go.com+%22faggots%22&aq=f&oq=site%3Aespn.go.com+%22faggots%22&aqs=chrome.0.57j58.8592j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=site:espn.go.com+%22pussies%22&oq=site:espn.go.com+%22pussies%22&gs_l=serp.3...66990.68695.1.68965.13.13.0.0.0.0.78.759.13.13.0...0.0...1c.1.8.psy-ab.W0aWKJTiMdM&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44697112,d.dmQ&fp=d11a36d89eeedaab&biw=1066&bih=522

    And even 1,370 for "cocksuckers."

    https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aespn.go.com+%22faggots%22&aq=f&oq=site%3Aespn.go.com+%22faggots%22&aqs=chrome.0.57j58.8592j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=site:espn.go.com+%22cocksuckers%22&oq=site:espn.go.com+%22cocksuckers%22&gs_l=serp.3...23668.27023.2.27553.18.18.0.0.0.3.118.1274.15j3.18.0...0.0...1c.1.8.psy-ab.Gzsf0NmuvUA&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44697112,d.dmQ&fp=d11a36d89eeedaab&biw=1066&bih=522

    Wait, they wouldn't dare, would they? Oh, they would.

    And 15,100 for "c--t" or "c---ts," a word this system won't let me type here, even in a URL.

    https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aespn.go.com+%22faggots%22&aq=f&oq=site%3Aespn.go.com+%22faggots%22&aqs=chrome.0.57j58.8592j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=site:espn.go.com+AND+(%22pussycats%22+OR+%22pussycat%22)&oq=site:espn.go.com+AND+(%22pussycats%22+OR+%22pussycat%22)&gs_l=serp.3...4132.14239.4.14603.17.17.0.0.0.0.77.887.17.17.0...0.0...1c.1.8.psy-ab.luxNPFxOIRk&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44697112,d.dmQ&fp=d11a36d89eeedaab&biw=1066&bih=522

    Many of those are in the names of fantasy league teams. So it's OK if ESPN is making money. I see. Sounds like a good public policy.
     
  5. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member


    Do you think those occurrences were in stories?

    Or in comments?
     
  6. inthesuburbs

    inthesuburbs Member

    See reply in modified comment above. Most of the instances were in fantasy league standings. ESPN makes money on those, right?

    Good thing no children use that part of the site.
     
  7. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

  8. Small Town Guy

    Small Town Guy Well-Known Member

    Burbs, I don't even necessarily disagree with your original point but if newspapers and websites had the same standards as the comments on their stories (and they're making money off people coming to the site to make those comments), every sports story would have to point out illegal immigrants were to blame for the defeat, that the dead drunk kids had it coming and that the reporter whose byline appears at the top of it is a fucking moron.
     
  9. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Strictly enforced, I'm sure.
     
  10. inthesuburbs

    inthesuburbs Member

    Azrael: Yes, that's the rule. You have to be 13. And the minimum age to read stories on NBC's website is 13, too. And the minimum age to use Facebook is also, wait for it, 13. I'm sure you're entirely correct: No children use those sites.

    One of the first lessons of history: If the sign says, NO PIGS SHALL RUN IN THE STREET, the historian should construe that pigs ran in the street.

    This exact stupidity was in the news today:

    http://jimromenesko.com/2013/04/03/absurd-terms-of-service-prohibit-minors-from-reading-news-sites/
     
  11. dooley_womack1

    dooley_womack1 Well-Known Member

    I'll reserve judgment until intheexurbs checks in.
     
  12. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    Facebook apparently investigates tips that a member is too young by doing a photo boob check. True fact.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page