It goes back to the premise of whether a newspaper should uphold standards in language or simply reflect the increasing coarseness of much of the language used today.
It seems as if the Kansas City Star has decided to go the low route, according to a recent story where it referred to a squirrel as “pissed off.”
Merriam Webster notes the term is “slang, often vulgar.”
“I was offended, however, by your use in quotes of “pissed-off squirrel,” a reader emailed Star Public Editor Derek Donovan recently about a story in the newspaper about an increase in bats.
“I do not like to hear “pissed” in conversation, and I do not want to read “pissed” in my newspaper,” she wrote. “I find it very offensive and do not think that seeing it in print in the newspaper is acceptable. The meaning would be the same if you had used “ticked-off.”
Donovan was clearly on the fence whether the Star should “push the envelope” on coarseness.
“Of course I get her point, which is perfectly reasonable,” Donovan responded. “Although some readers tell me they think The Star should push the envelope more when it comes to this kind of thing, it’s far more common for me to hear from readers who expect the paper and its website to rise above the coarseness of so much of the language we all hear every day.”
Donovan used the shop-worn excuse that it wasn’t the reporter talking about a “pissed off squirrel,” but it was a direct quote from a source. Of course, if the “source” had dropped an F-bomb or used the dreaded “N” word it would have never seen the light of day.
“There’s one complication here, though. The offending “pissed” wasn’t in the reporter’s voice, but was instead part of a direct quote from a source,” said Donovan. “That would then leave two options to avoid using it:
“1. Substitute “ticked,” set apart by parentheses to indicate it isn’t the word the source really used. Most readers will of course read between the lines here.
“2. Simply omit the quote entirely.”
His summation?
“That’s three different possible outcomes, and I know each will find its own adherents.”
Aah, yes, the old three-headed dilemma as opposed to the standard two-headed dilemma. What’s a newspaper to do, especially one that generally strives to be family-friendly? Omitting quotes (full or partial) entirely could take away from the story too much, so I think some sort of quote is necessary here. Surely the source said something other than “pissed-off squirrel” in describing what he/she saw. Those additional words could have been quoted (a good reporter should be encouraging his/her source to elaborate), creating some room for possible paraphrasing (i.e., the use of “ticked off”) on the reporter’s part.
I once quoted Hollywood great Charlton Heston dropping an F-bomb in an interview I conducted with him in Pitch. The primary feedback I got was a letter from him thanking me for quoting him accurately.
I generally avoid profanity in my public writing because, while I love good curse words more than David Mamet does, it can also take the reader out of the piece if it’s not handled correctly.
I used an eight-letter word for falsehood in a recent piece I did on the movie “Bully” because I thought the Motion Picture Association of America’s decision to put an R-rating on “Bully” was ludicrous. Most teens hear those words in casual conversation every day. My 17-year-old and 13-year-old nephews didn’t have to see the movie to learn those words. Teens need to see this movie and discuss the topic involved, so the rating was an astonishingly bad ruling.
The Pitch and KCActive.com are both aimed for adults.
In this Star piece, I think the quote was appropriate because it told us what the subject said and how he communicates.
If my subject uses profanity, I include it, but I, who cuss like a chimney in person, hold off on using it in my narrative. Profanity loses any shock value if you cuss more than once.
For example, when Bill Cosby uses a single cuss word in “Bill Cosby: Himself,” it has more impact than in all the cursing Richard Pryor did. While I adore both comics, Cosby’s unique assessment of cocaine users is more memorable because he curses so rarely on stage.
In the Fox News segment with Bob Beckel that was discussed on this site earlier, however, his use of profanity in attempting to refute a false assertion about Head Start, alienated viewers and did nothing to help those watching understand the topic at hand.
He said the sort of thing I say when somebody slams a car door on my arm.