Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Do the F*****g Asterisks Do Any Good?

VP JOE BIDEN dropped the f-bomb while whispering to the president yesterday ... in front of a live microphone. In the White House. As he was introducing the president. In front of reporters and cameras. Classic.

Today's Metro ran this cover, featuring asterisks rather than printing the actual word. Did they make the right decision?

If we all know what the asterisks represent, isn't it sort of pointless to use them?

Even children would probably get this one. So is the Metro at fault all-around - they essentially ran an obscenity on the cover of a widely distributed newspaper?

16 comments:

Tim Keller said...

Yeah seriously, what the f*ck do they do? I f*cking love Biden though. He's the f*cking man.

Check out my f*cking blog
http://everydaywithkeller.weebly.com/index.html

Sarah Sibel said...

I don't think there is necessarily a right or a wrong to this issue. As we discussed in class, it is not wrong to print the word without the asterisks, even though there are regulations to what can be said or not said on television according to the FCC. I think that one of the main reasons that the asterisks are used in the first place is use to show that the language is not proper or appropriate, and as to not promote the use of it, but rather just retell the story and direct quote as it originally was said. I feel that the asterisks are positive in trying to show the public, especially children that this language is not appropriate, and it is thrown around way too often. I am not a perfect person myself, and I would be hypocritical in saying that cursing is wrong and I never do such a thing, because those types of things do slip out, but to promote such behavior to the up and coming generations is not necessary either. So at the end of the day, it may seem pointless, but it more the meaning behind why we use them, rather than the fact that we are trying to hide what the word is, because clearly many people reading the article would already know.

Rebel With A Cause said...

I agree that there is not a right or wrong answer to this question. However, it does depend on the the guidelines that the newspaper may have established. If the newspaper has established that it will not print any cures words, then this is inherently wrong to print a cures word even if there are asterisk, because we as the public the consumers know what the asterisk as replacing.

Gillian Francella said...

I think the asterisks are better than the letters just because a giant bold "FUCKING" across a newspaper is a bit much, just like it is when I type it. This story makes me so mad because when you listen to the clip, the word is so quiet, but whatever Metro.

Jules G. said...

I don't understand why they didn't use asterisks for all of the letters. If you're not going to do that, print the whole fucking word.

Regardless of their choice, it was going to draw controversy (and attention - that copy of the Metro caught my eye everywhere I went today)

uhleesha said...

I think they made the right decision. Although I do use curse words, I would find it offending to see it a newspaper like that in big letters. Some children might get it but many won't and they people reading this article all understand what the asterisks mean so just leave it at that and save yourself the controversy.

Dan P. said...

What's the big deal anyway? Do people really think politicians don't curse? On the list of the flaws of politicians, I would think cursing is pretty damn low. I hope the article was only meant to be humorous because I'm sure more fault can be found with Biden than foul language, which is entirely subjective anyway. Just a few years ago, I would never have imagined you'd be able to say "pussy" on the radio. Apparently, it's acceptable now. Why did it suddenly become less vulgar and offensive? Simply because someone decided it was.

http://danpov.blogspot.com/

Geo said...

I just gasped when I read the p-word.

- George
(the teacher who is shocked, SHOCKED, by foul language)

Megan said...

I agree. It's not right or wrong by any guidelines other than your own morals and values. While I don't think the asterisks do anything, printing the actual word would be a little much (especially in big, bold letters on the front page.)

Brian Okum said...

Biden is fucking hilarious.

If it was my paper, I know I would spell out the word, but probably not make it a front page story then, ya know?

Ian Watson said...

You would think that, in an age with all the sex and violence floating around in the media, curse words would be left much left censored in the news.

I think Metro wimped out by using all those asterisks. We all know what Biden was saying. It was a (Vice) Presidential slip-up. Why not just call a spade a spade instead of calling it a s***e? (Answer: Because s***e = spade isn't as easy to figure out as f*****g = fucking.)


Though, all those asterisks do look pretty nifty...

-Ian

Theodore Wohlsen said...

I recently learned that our mind only reads the first and last letters of a word in order. For example: "I wnet to the prak." I'm not sure If this is a good example but the point still the same I find it interesting that they chose to take out all the letters except the first and the last. There at least seems to be some sort of conscious effort to censor this "bad" word which makes for a more respectable newspaper. If they didn't censor it especially since it is plastered in large font on the front page, I think it would be a little awkward and maybe make people a little uncomfortable. Because of the uncomfortableness I think less papers would get sold. People also from the cover might not understand that it was Biden who said it first because there are no quotation marks, or any other indicators, which is concerning.

Kaitlin Ziminski said...

It is a tricky situation and I do not think that there is a correct answer to this question. It is up to the journalist as well as the editors who are publishing the story. I think that when considering what to do, the journalist as well as the editors should keep in mind their audience and whether publishing a curse word with or without the asterisks would help get the point of their stories across better!

Berryman, A said...

I feel as if their is not really a right or wrong to using the asterisks n the cover of the Metro or not. I consider the asterisks to be a form of respect for those who read the paper, yes it is very obvious what this word is, but it is better than not having the word spelled out on the front of the Metro.

Heather Flanagan said...

I agree that they made the right decision, because printing it without the asterisks would be a bit much on the front page of a paper. What I don't understand is why this is such a big deal to be all over the news? We all use this word sometimes and yes that includes even the VP of the United States! As for what he was talking about, I think we all would agree it is a big deal!!!!

Shireea said...

Well I don't see a problem with using the asterisks especially because of kids knowing what they represent nowadays kids know everything. Kids are very advance and have access to the internet so I am sure most kids especially the kids of Philly have seen and heard way worse things in their lifetime. Plus when have you ever seen a children reading the newspaper. In my opinion the Metro was just showing the truth behind the issue. Now if the "F*****g" word was used outside of quotation as a means of expression that would be different.