Thread Title Censorship

Catchfire
moderator
Member: 5019
Joined: Apr 16 2003

I have to say, it was all I could do not to title this thread 'Fuck Censorship', but in the end I thought that too melodramatic.

RevolutionPlease started a thread called 'Fuck Psychiatry' in the body and soul forum, and this was changed to 'Screw Psychiatry' after a few days with no announcement in the thead as to why. I thought RP had done it until I realized that editing OPs is still impossible in the new babble. Then it turns out that Michelle was asked to change the the thread title because it was popping up on the front page, and 'the editorial standards for the front page are different than mine are here on babble'.

Michelle, I have the utmost respect and sympathy for the job you do here and Ithink you do it very well. Furthermore, I too have little patience for the 'concern' Sven shows in reaction threads and elsewhere on babble. I also know that if it was up to you, you wouldn't have made the decision to edit RP's thread without her permission. But this is unacceptable.

I don't recall agreeing to any terms of use which stated I couldn't use the word 'fuck' if I wanted to. If rabble doesn't want potty-mouthed babblers creating content on their front page, then they shouldn't have the rss feed published there (a point that had been made by others before). It's disingenuous and insulting to babblers to have their words edited like this. I, for one, would like an explanation from the editorial board that made this demand.

And I don't want to hear any mealy-mouthed, liberal explanations about how it's only a cuss word, and can easily be replaced. We've heard it all before.


Comments

Unionist
\,,/ rabble-rouser-l33t \,,/
Member: 12323
Joined: Dec 11 2005

I'm surprised the word "psychiatry" wasn't replaced...

 


Michelle
\,,/ rabble-rouser-l33t \,,/
Member: 1560
Joined: May 10 2001

Would it make you happier if we made it an explicit part of babble policy, that there be no swear words in babble titles?  (Serious question, I realize in print that the tone could be misinterpreted.)  I'm raising this with other staff at rabble, by the way, so we'll see what kind of resolution results.

I didn't announce it because I didn't want to derail the thread into a debate about whether or not I should have changed the thread title because the on-topic discussion was going so well, and because I didn't have a choice anyhow, so the debate would have been fruitless.

We're not changing the RSS feed to the front page.  That's not an option, sorry.  It's an editorial decision of rabble to have the babble threads on the front page and I support it and that's not going to change.  So obviously we have to find a way to resolve the conflict between differing editorial standards between babble and the front page. 

Personally, I have no problem with clearly-marked user-generated content on the front page containing the occasional swear word.  But I'm not the only person on the editorial team and while I will certainly put forward that position, it also must be recognized that I work on a team and I have to compromise, too.  So, I'll let you know what happens. 

Please do feel free to put your input in this thread, and it will be taken into consideration.  


Catchfire
moderator
Member: 5019
Joined: Apr 16 2003

Actually, I like the RSS feed on the front page. But take it or leave it would be my suggestion.


Michelle
\,,/ rabble-rouser-l33t \,,/
Member: 1560
Joined: May 10 2001

By the way, Catchfire, I want to thank you for your respectful tone in this thread.  I respect your position, and I've been feeling pretty demoralized lately at the rude and sarcastic tone accompanying so many complaints about the site recently, whether they're aimed at me or at other people who work here (who are not just colleagues, but friends).  Thank-you for putting forward your views while still respecting our work.


martin dufresne
rabble-rouser-supreme
Member: 12463
Joined: Dec 24 2005

It seems obvious to me that "fuck" - or "screw" for that matter - are not just "swear words": they reiterate the dominant sexist view of sex as violence and other people as targets of it. They pull sex talk - which can be so delicious - into generic hate speech. So, I am fine with keeping them out of thread titles. (Of course, I would be overjoyed if this were a collective decision, rather than an imposition.)


oldgoat
moderator
Member: 2130
Joined: Jul 27 2001

Yeah, my own feeling is that fuck psychiatry is what Revolution Please felt, and fuck psychiatry is what he meant to say.  Changing his words for him is not what Michelle or I wanted to do, and the matter is under discussion.

Some of the new features of the redesign have involved issues in the relationship between the babble part of rabble and the news magazine part of rabble.  The evolution of this relationship over the years has been interesting, but things have always worked out, as I'm sure they will in this instance.

It is not my feeling that the readership of rabble will drop over like a bunch of Tennessee fainting goats at the sight of the word 'fuck'.

 


remind
\,,/ rabble-rouser-l33t \,,/
Member: 7289
Joined: Jun 25 2004

Well, I most certainly see the editorial board's point, as I cringed when I saw the title, liked the thread, but hated the title.

Also, now that thread titles are front page hot linked, I also make my titles differently.

As for sven, as mentioned in the thread in question, his sole purpose is to seed malcontent and wear people down so they no longer want to be here IMV. He should have been permanently banned after the fiasco a year or so ago with maysie, instead of a temporary ban.

 


martin dufresne
rabble-rouser-supreme
Member: 12463
Joined: Dec 24 2005

"It is not my feeling that the readership of rabble will drop over like a bunch of Tennessee fainting goats at the sight of the word 'fuck'."

More likely their ears will prick up like those of fighting Alabama rams...


Slumberjack
rabble-rouser-for-life
Member: 11108
Joined: Aug 8 2005

Compared to the whitewashed content in the mainstream media, it's refreshing to come here and acquaint oneself with vulgarity from time to time.


martin dufresne
rabble-rouser-supreme
Member: 12463
Joined: Dec 24 2005

That vision of sex is pretty mainstream in my book, but I see your point.


Unionist
\,,/ rabble-rouser-l33t \,,/
Member: 12323
Joined: Dec 11 2005

martin dufresne wrote:
That vision of sex is pretty mainstream in my book, ...

I'd love to see a copy. Laughing


martin dufresne
rabble-rouser-supreme
Member: 12463
Joined: Dec 24 2005

Your local magazine stand.


Sven
rabble-rouser-supreme
Member: 10972
Joined: Jul 22 2005

I'm ambivalent about the thread title "issue".  I was just curious to see it changed, without comment (until someone asked about it).

_______________________________________

Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!!


Michelle
\,,/ rabble-rouser-l33t \,,/
Member: 1560
Joined: May 10 2001

remind, I've already asked you and Sven not to refer to each other in your posts.  So far it's gone well, so please don't start up again.  We know you don't like Sven.  We know your point of view about whether he should be here or not.  Thanks.


Caissa
rabble-rouser-for-life
Member: 13752
Joined: Jun 14 2006

I found the original title offensive. I believe people should be able to make their points without resorting to potty mouth. And to answer Michelle's question above, yes, I believe the Rabble Editorial position should be incorporated into the Babble terms of use.


Stargazer
rabble-rouser-supreme
Member: 7061
Joined: Jun 9 2004

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the word fuck, and Caissa, if you find Fuck Psychiatry "offensive" perhaps you have never spent time in the system as a "client". Not sure, have you?

 

Is it the word fuck you find offensive, or the entire "fuck psychiatry"?  Either way, I don't think it should have been censored.

 

Won't someone think of the children? Won't someone think of the psychiatrists? Surprised


Catchfire
moderator
Member: 5019
Joined: Apr 16 2003

The issue is not whether the title made us 'cringe', whether we found it 'offensive', or whether cursing indicates that a babbler's mastery of language is inadequate. As if we don't all have our own toolbox of rhetorical devices. I don't want to turn this into some kind of free speech crusade, because I'm not really a believer in free speech as such. My sentiments align more with oldgoat's. I like a stiff drink and I like a good cuss word every now and then, and this move by the editorial board strikes me as craven, clueless and (gasp!) bourgeois.

Since when did progressives give a flying fuck about decorum?


Caissa
rabble-rouser-for-life
Member: 13752
Joined: Jun 14 2006

Stargazer, if you read my post in the "FP" thread I outlined my positive experiences with psychiatrists.

Catchfire, next you'll be telling me decorum is "Bourgeois."


Catchfire
moderator
Member: 5019
Joined: Apr 16 2003

Is that question meant ironically, Caissa? Decorum is defined by the bourgeoisie. Or, if you like, the ruling classes. Fuck that, says I.


Caissa
rabble-rouser-for-life
Member: 13752
Joined: Jun 14 2006

Of course, it was ironic. Irony is defined by the Left.


Unionist
\,,/ rabble-rouser-l33t \,,/
Member: 12323
Joined: Dec 11 2005

I tend to agree with Catchfire's view about this specific act of censorship, but when some posters make it about: "Psychiatry: For or Against", I start to lose interest. I have family members and friends who were helped, hurt, and neglected by psychiatry. I'd like to be able to think about issues of censorship, as well as the "look and feel" of rabble's front page, without having to join any pro- or anti- organization.

Caissa wrote:

Of course, it was ironic. Irony is defined by the Left.

Best laugh of the morning so far - thanks, Caissa!


Stargazer
rabble-rouser-supreme
Member: 7061
Joined: Jun 9 2004

It has nothing to do with being "for or against" psyciatry. It has to do with the person who opened this thread and his/her take on the industry. If his/her choice of words bother anyone, then don't click on the thread and don't read it. Pretty simple really. I would hate to have the way I felt censored because it "offended" anyone on a progressive board.


triciamarie
rabble-rouser
Member: 13970
Joined: Jul 28 2006

The word "screw" in this context sounds to me like mealy-mouthed pandering to conservative interests. And I can't think of another replacement word that wouldn't have that same effect. Is that really the tone rabble.ca wants to establish? They should be thanking their lucky stars that babblers raise real progressive issues, in real language, linked to their front page. It would be easy for them to justify hiving off the forum titles section as part of user-led babble, and on principle, refrain from imposing their outside standards (whatever those may be).

One downside to swear words in the title, though, is that the thread gets caught in internet filters. The same words used in posts don't have that effect. I'm not sure if rabble.ca gets blocked when thread titles with swear words appear on it.


Catchfire
moderator
Member: 5019
Joined: Apr 16 2003

Caissa wrote:
Of course, it was ironic. Irony is defined by the Left.

Ha!


Snert
rabble-rouser-supreme
Member: 16695
Joined: Nov 4 2008

Quote:
It's an editorial decision of rabble to have the babble threads on the front page and I support it and that's not going to change.

It doesn't sound like they want the babble threads unless they've been bowdlerized.

Nice message though.  "Please, feel free to confront the injustices of the day... but do so politely, if you please!" 

 


oldgoat
moderator
Member: 2130
Joined: Jul 27 2001

For what it's worth, and that's not much, I've been helped by psychiatry, and I've even met psychiatrists I liked.  This was however, not my story, it was someone elses story whos experience was different from mine, and sadly not uncommon.

 

I still had no problem with the thread title.


Catchfire
moderator
Member: 5019
Joined: Apr 16 2003

Well, now we know what babble moderators feel about the change in RP's thread title. Any chance at hearing from the editors who demanded it in the first place? I would like to point out that an article from the front page could have the word fuck in it, but apparently a thread title can not. Indeed, most threads linked to on the front page likely have any combination of creative cursing in them. But, apparently, having the word on the actual FP is too much. Does the rabble editorial staff hope that readers with delicate sensibilities will simply look at the FP without cliocking on any story or babble links?


Michelle
\,,/ rabble-rouser-l33t \,,/
Member: 1560
Joined: May 10 2001

Sorry, but you're not going to get an instant response.  We don't meet every other day.  We've mentioned it on our list, and we'll bring it up at an upcoming meeting, sometime in the next month or so.  I'll report back when I have some news.


Snert
rabble-rouser-supreme
Member: 16695
Joined: Nov 4 2008

Quote:
Sorry, but you're not going to get an instant response.

Well, the editorial board didn't have to wait long.  That title got sanitized almost immediately.

Just me, but it would have been cool if whoever's eyes were burned by that bad, bad word could have likewise been told "I can put that on the list and we can discuss it some time this month, but until we can discuss this, babble is not going to start censoring people".   


HeywoodFloyd
rabble-rouser
Member: 5226
Joined: Jun 26 2003

Sorry guys, it isn't censorship if Babble says you can't use certain words. Not unless babble somehow formed the government.


Michelle
\,,/ rabble-rouser-l33t \,,/
Member: 1560
Joined: May 10 2001

Jebus.  We have an organizational structure.  Day-to-day decisions get made by individual editors and the publisher.  If there's a disagreement about a decision that has been made, then sometimes we just go with it for the time being and decide to discuss it more in-depth afterwards in order to make some sort of policy or come to an agreement for future reference.  That's what is happening in this case.

So no, the entire editorial board didn't get together in five minutes and say, "Hey, would you mind removing the word "fuck" from the title of that thread?"  It was a decision made by one person, who asked us to comply, and I did, but oldgoat and I also said we'd like to discuss it further since this sort of thing will likely come up in future.  And so it's on the agenda for discussion with everyone the next time we have a meeting.


Snert
rabble-rouser-supreme
Member: 16695
Joined: Nov 4 2008

Quote:
Sorry guys, it isn't censorship if Babble says you can't use certain words.
 

Ok.  Then in the interest of clarity, what shall we call it?

"Soviet-era copy editing"?

"redaction"?

"Writing tips for the uncouth potty-mouth"?

I guess the bottom line is that I wouldn't expect a message board like this to start editing people's words without their permission, and without any kind of warning.  I know the response to this ("If you don't like it...") but I'm still really surprised.

Anyway, off to start my "Stephen Harper can Burn In Heck" thread.  


Michelle
\,,/ rabble-rouser-l33t \,,/
Member: 1560
Joined: May 10 2001

:D


Caissa
rabble-rouser-for-life
Member: 13752
Joined: Jun 14 2006

You want to BBQ Harper in Michigan?Wink

Little cold isn't it?


Stargazer
rabble-rouser-supreme
Member: 7061
Joined: Jun 9 2004

Laughing @Caissa


Catchfire
moderator
Member: 5019
Joined: Apr 16 2003

bumpity-bump


Caissa
rabble-rouser-for-life
Member: 13752
Joined: Jun 14 2006

Thought I needed a smile today, Catchfire?


Catchfire
moderator
Member: 5019
Joined: Apr 16 2003

You bet. Here's a second one for free: Laughing


Caissa
rabble-rouser-for-life
Member: 13752
Joined: Jun 14 2006

Ah, that's me after the Canadiens winning last night.


Snert
rabble-rouser-supreme
Member: 16695
Joined: Nov 4 2008

I find it interesting that a thread title like "Fuck Psychiatry" gets quietly removed and replaced, on the grounds that the front page of Rabble has certain standards it wants to uphold, but a thread title like "New Yorkers pee themselves in fear" is the sort of public face Rabble wants.  Huh.

Really, which makes Rabble look worse?  Having strong opinions about Psychiatry?  Or having a hearty laugh at people in genuine fear?

Anyway, just my two cents.  Carry on.


Caissa
rabble-rouser-for-life
Member: 13752
Joined: Jun 14 2006

I, too, would prefer to see that thread title amended.


Jingles
rabble-rouser-machine
Member: 4322
Joined: Nov 13 2002

Christ. Good thing I didn't go with my first title: "New Yorkers Shit Their Collective Pants".


Caissa
rabble-rouser-for-life
Member: 13752
Joined: Jun 14 2006

I often get mistaken for him, Jingles. Wink


Slumberjack
rabble-rouser-for-life
Member: 11108
Joined: Aug 8 2005

Snert wrote:
  I find it interesting that a thread title like "Fuck Psychiatry" gets quietly removed and replaced, on the grounds that the front page of Rabble has certain standards it wants to uphold, but a thread title like "New Yorkers pee themselves in fear" is the sort of public face Rabble wants. 

Perhaps because public peeing, although disturbing in it's own right, is generally not considered as graphic as public fucking is, and normally, they aren't done at the same time...at least not in anything that I've experienced.


Maysie
rabble-rouser-for-life
Member: 9938
Joined: Apr 21 2005

Oh, Slumberjack. You are so adorable.

Warning: NSFW

Watersports


Slumberjack
rabble-rouser-for-life
Member: 11108
Joined: Aug 8 2005

What can I say, I've led a sheltered existence...

 


Login or register to post comments