vendredi, janvier 05, 2007

Les médias britanniques commencent un peu à me courir sur le haricot avec leur manie de bipper et d'étoiler tout mot qui pourrait comme on dit "heurter les sensibilités". J'ai du mal à comprendre comment cr*p, s**t et b**bs pourrait être moins offensants que crap, shit et boobs. C'est quand même le concept qui, au départ, choque ou pas! Et quand à ceux qui prétendent que cela "protègerait les enfants", je leur conseille d'aller faire un tour dans n'importe quelle cour de récré.

Non à l'amputation des mots!


British medias are starting to get on my nerves, with their abuse of bipping and starring every word that could be "against someone's sensibility". I fail to understand how cr*p, s**t and b**bs are less offending than crap, shit and boobs. Isn't it the concept, in the first place, that should shock people or not? And to those who pretend that it "protects the children", I advise them to hop around any school in the world to hear what kind of words are used by these children.

Say no to the amputation of words!

3 commentaires:

Anonyme a dit…

Sorry, I am for this protection.

You know what kind of words do they use?

M87 a dit…

If there is someone to be protected, why not just drop the whole news altogether? If the only thing the newspaper article has to say is "Pete said f**k to Kate", then maybe the journalist could find something more interesting to say?

Anonyme a dit…

That is to give people a realistic side of the life. Journalists got to be truthful for what they report, isnot it? This protection is a compromise between what is in the reality and what is in expectation.