Which blogs use Carlin's seven dirty words more?

[EvilMonkey]

Apparently it was a challenge issued from one blogger to another, and someone did a search and found out some results. At least according to this guy, there is an 18-1 advantage for one side. Care to guess which one? No? Well @&%^$# you too!

http://newsbuckit.blogspot.com/2007/02/sev...ver-say-on.html

[Texsox]

Duh. I didn't think it needed empirical data. Of course this is more a commentary about catering to an audience. There are good reasons in some forums, even here, to ban the use of

1. s***
2. piss
3. f***
4. c***
5. cocksucker
6. motherf***er
7. tits

[EvilMonkey]

So Tex, are you saying that the liberal audience is more vulgar?

[Texsox]

So Tex, are you saying that the liberal audience is more vulgar?

 

Yes. And the religious wing of the conservative movement is easily offended by adult language.

[Balta1701]

So wait a second, they're counting appearances at sites like Kos and MyDD, which allow just about anyone to sign up, create an account, and start posting comments and diaries, and comparing them to a bunch of Conservative sites that don't allow comments? If you count comments, there's probably more postings in 1 day @ Kos than there is at all of the non-commenting conservative sites combined since the beginning of their existence. It's no wonder that there's an 18-1 ratio when there's 50 times as much content.

 

If anything, this simply shows how unwilling the conservative blogosphere is to allow people to comment on their posts, which is something that's been noted in the lefty blogosphere for quite some time. Instahack, Malkin, powerline, etc.

[Texsox]

No one really takes this "research" seriously do they? Anyone could be posting, including rabid conservatives upset with the blogs.

[EvilMonkey]

So wait a second, they're counting appearances at sites like Kos and MyDD, which allow just about anyone to sign up, create an account, and start posting comments and diaries, and comparing them to a bunch of Conservative sites that don't allow comments? If you count comments, there's probably more postings in 1 day @ Kos than there is at all of the non-commenting conservative sites combined since the beginning of their existence. It's no wonder that there's an 18-1 ratio when there's 50 times as much content.

 

If anything, this simply shows how unwilling the conservative blogosphere is to allow people to comment on their posts, which is something that's been noted in the lefty blogosphere for quite some time. Instahack, Malkin, powerline, etc.

I've been to 9 of the ones on the conservative side, and those allow comments just like the others. I know that Instapundit doesn't, but I believe Malkin does, or did until she kept getting death threats. I don't suppose Koz gets many death threats, does he? I know malkin is called every ethnic slur imaginable by her haters, I wonder hom naby people make fun of Koz? I've been to 5 of the Lib sites, and I see more vitriol on Koz than on any 5 conservative sites I have been to. DemUnderground is the worst.

 

 

And before you get your panties in a bunch, I do not take this 'study' seriously. Just thought it was kinda interesting. The site even says that it isn't the best study, and has flaws. I guess they just put up that words that appeared in trackbacks also go counted. Just found it humorous that the persuasion that wants to bring civilit back into politics resorts to profanity more that most.

 

And tex, I'll agree that the religious wing of the conservative movement is easily offended by adult language. And that f^&%#ing pisses me off.

[Balta1701]

DemUnderground is the worst.

Ever hang around FreeRepublic.com?

 

Anyway, just looking at their data, it's actually quite obvious which ones they were able to count comments and which they weren't. Atrios, for example, has comments, but he runs them through Haloscan, a different company than Blogger, so the profanity in his comments wasn't counted. Huffington post, on the other hand, hosts its own comments on the same screen as posts, so when someone posts some profanity, it gets counted. Therefore, even though Atrios has been around for like 3x as long as Huffpo, huffington Post has almost 1000x as much profanity as Atrios. I could probably go to Atrios's comments and find more profanity in a single thread than this study counted. Just by looking through the list you can see easily who's comments were counted and who doesn't have any or wasn't counted: TPM, no comments, Kos, 1000x as much, counted comments.

 

All I'm saying is that this study's methodology is so completely flawed that you can't even say that one side uses more profanity than the other.

 

And finally, to pretend that either side's chief people don't receive death threats is simply silly. Hell, I got a column listed on AOL once about 5 years ago and I got a couple. The thing you should pay more attention to is not whether or not they're receiving them (I guarantee you every major author out there does), but whether they choose to publish them and what they do with them.

 

Malkin publishes them because she wants to use them to tar her entire opposition as extremists, while she's the more "mainstream" and respectable one, while most of the others are smart enough to just ignore them. And it just so happens that the rest of the media keeps buying it.