[Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content
jayen466 at yahoo.com
Tue Oct 18 21:01:57 UTC 2011
From: David Levy <lifeisunfair at gmail.com>
> > The New York Times (recipient of more Pulitzer Prizes than any other
> > news organization) uses "Stuff My Dad Says." So does the Los Angeles
> > Times, which states that the subject's actual name is "unsuitable for
> > a family publication."
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/books/review/InsideList-t.html
> > http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2009/09/mydadsays-twitter.html
> > You might dismiss those sources as the "popular press," but they're
> > the most reputable ones available on the subject. Should we deem
> > their censorship sacrosanct and adopt it as our own?
> No. :)
> Please elaborate. Why shouldn't we follow the example set by the most
> reliable sources?
I don't consider press sources the most reliable sources, or in general a good
model to follow. Even among press sources, there are many (incl. Reuters)
who call the Twitter feed by its proper name, "Shit my dad says".
Scholars don't write f*ck when they mean fuck. As an educational resource, we
should follow the best practices adopted by educational and scholarly sources.
More information about the foundation-l