 | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
|
« Nobody's Perfect | Main | The Ongoing Evolution of the Blogosphere » March 1, 2007The Left's Love Affair With Carlin's Seven Dirty WordsIf you have ever spent much time on the Left side of the political blogosphere, especially among the bigger Lefty blogs, you probably came away with the same impression I did: those folks are very foul-mouthed. Now there is data to prove it: The News Buckit ran searches on the 18 largest Lefty blogs and the 22 largest Righty blogs for occurences of any of George Carlin's infamous "seven dirty words" you can't say on television (News Buckit has a link to the list of the words - warning: offensive) The results: Those words appear on the top Lefty blogs 18 times more often than on Righty blogs. And if you have ever spent much time on the Left side of the political blogosphere you know that their bloggers and commenters are very creative writers who often use a variety of words and pseudo-words that are foul but not on Carlin's list. Incidentally, I ran the search on my site and found one or more of Carlin's seven words just 19 times, all of them in comments by readers. That's 19 times after five years of blogging, 7,267 blog entries and 12,491 reader comments. My comments policy forbids such language but some do slip through and there have been a small number of occasions that I have deliberately allowed such language in a comment in order to expose the utter lack of class on the part of the commenter. Memo to the Lefty bloggers: People will take your arguments more seriously if you talk like grown adults of character rather than little potty-mouthed kids. Posted in Blogging
Comments
South Park Conservatism, we hardly knew ye. Posted by: scarshapedstar at March 1, 2007 10:52 AMAlthough I've only dropped it three times, sometimes the f bomb just enables me to emphasize a point. I do think some sites use it far too much, but seriously, I don't see what the big effing deal is. People in my generation just use "curse" words a lot more than previous generations. I don't think there are a lot of kids reading these blogs, and if they are, they probably have heard the F or S words before, and it won't burn their eyes. Having said that, I do agree that some sites should tone it down a few notches and use the words sparingly. Posted by: Sean Braisted at March 1, 2007 11:59 AMI can't ever recall dropping the F-bomb on my blog. I have said s**t a couple of times. I may have dropped it a few times in comments and I own that but it was at places that sort of had that rule. Not wanting to be a hypocrite, so yeah, it's happened. Also my publisher checks in on occasion so I try to keep it clean although I do drop the d**m word some. And yeah, I'm in my 40's and I still don't want the dad to chase me about with a bar of soap. Just thinking it through on your comments. Sorry about the hijack. Posted by: newscoma at March 1, 2007 12:42 PMMaybe they should take a cue from Freepers and substitue terms such as "traitor" and "Democraps" and "Hitlery." Posted by: clarkstooksbury at March 1, 2007 1:23 PMHow times have changed. Two of the seven are now regularly heard on TV. Posted by: "John Galt" at March 1, 2007 1:25 PMI suspect I made the naughty list... I'll usually modify the d*mn comments though so they are at least a little less offensive.
When I was growing up as a po' Southern girl with some raisin', we kids were sent out to cut a switch if we used cuss words or certain other words, such as "fool," or derogatory terms such as the "n" word. I think many of those words are low vibration. They lower the vibration. I don't know if you get what I'm saying, but it's an effect of actual substance. Posted by: Donna Locke at March 1, 2007 4:13 PMBill, "Phillip Perry, Treasous F****r". Just doesn't lend any credibility to Maher's writing ability. Other than he is well versed with the use of vulgarity. Posted by: Rick Forman at March 1, 2007 6:22 PM"Now there is data to prove it:"??? Data? Prove? As a neurochemist-turned-attorney I do not take such words lightly. Obviously, this clearly a critique of form rather than substance - an all too familiar tactic employed by those of little substance. But rather than wasting my time on explaining the serious methodological flaws in the design of this study, let us walk thru one example: find the "data" comparing Joshua Micah Marshall and Glenn Reynolds. I suspect you will be shocked by "the utter lack of class on the part of the" Ole Professor. Or let us try another rhetorical hypothetical: which is the more egregious example of "poor form"? Shorter Reynolds: let's unlawfully kill some Iranian civilians. Reynolds: very serious libertarian [but not really] right leaning "pundit." Final suggestion: go look at the "data" using racist, bigoted, and otherwise intolerant speech (ahem . . ."raghead"). And rest assured: while lefties may hold the title of the dirtiest mouths on the net, righties - hands down - have the most morally repugnant ideas out there. Posted by: Morris Berg at March 1, 2007 6:43 PMSomebody get this goober a flippin' cookie! Posted by: Captain Bringdown at March 1, 2007 8:04 PMNow, would this suggestion of not using the "F" word apply to Dick Cheney on the Senate floor? Posted by: Sharon Cobb at March 2, 2007 2:27 AMThat's a good question, Sharon. Posted by: newscoma at March 2, 2007 7:14 AMPost a comment
Comments Policy: Your comment is subject to deletion if it is off-topic or includes foul language or personal attack. Readers, please email me if you find comments that include egregious violations of this policy. Comments may not post immediately - do not post twice!
|
|||||||||||
