This is breaking news:
There is a new ban on fracking in the United States!
I just received the following comment on my blog post Who put the “k” in fracking? The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the fracking truth.
Updated – BREAKING: New fracking ban in U.S.
{ 30 comments… read them below or add one }
-
October 17, 2012 at 2:05 pm
-
October 17, 2012 at 2:23 pm
-
What the frac???
-
October 17, 2012 at 2:40 pm
-
Holy Shut-Up!
-
October 17, 2012 at 2:48 pm
-
You’ll just have to talk about it the long way – injection of waste water with surfactants and other chemicals, some unknown, into the Earth’s crust to release deposits of natural gas. Or is releasing of gas now banned by Hearst?
-
October 17, 2012 at 2:50 pm
-
I wonder if Hearst Media Group has any money in fracking operations/frack corporations/frack industry suppliers/frack leases?
If Hearst thinks some of their readers/posters are using the term inappropriately, why don’t they ban them rather than all usage of the word frack? And, Mr. Mickelson, puhleeze don’t give us that tired line about how much staff time it would take to patrol the comments section. Obviously even you, a big kahuna, have the time to patrol.
-
October 17, 2012 at 2:53 pm
-
My argument would be which term is more vulgar….I think the one we are all avoiding here is one heck of a lot less vulgar than fracking…but that’s just me…
-
October 17, 2012 at 3:04 pm
-
Butt why? fracking insurgent is O.K but don’t frack with me is not?
-
October 17, 2012 at 3:11 pm
-
I agree that fracking is obscene. Fracking is obscene by what it does to air, water, the land, people’s lives and communities.
Are we now to refer to fracking as “that which must not be named” or as “you know what”?
As Hearst Media Group must be aware, the Natural Gas industry spends gazillion of dollars to buy legislators and to write the legislation which promotes the process.
Perhaps Hearst Media Group needs to take it’s head out of it’s “you know where” and start doing some real investigative reporting instead of acting as a stenographer for the perpetrators of “that which must not be named”
-
October 17, 2012 at 3:33 pm
-
Seriously??!! Get the frack outta here!
-
October 17, 2012 at 3:34 pm
-
here in CA, Robert Nast wanted “no frack” for his personalized license plate … the state refused the request … go figure?
-
October 17, 2012 at 3:42 pm
-
Why, isn’t that just fracking crazy….!!
-
October 17, 2012 at 3:47 pm
-
Looks like I’m screwed. Or should I say: It looks like Hearst Group but their “you know what” in my “down there”?
-
October 17, 2012 at 4:01 pm
-
I blame the children and their dirty little mouths!http://youtu.be/gdyr1DZV92k
-
October 17, 2012 at 4:16 pm
-
No more fracking ! Hooray !
-
October 17, 2012 at 4:33 pm
-
If only the deciders at Hearst had the power to ban the truly vulgar process of fracking we would all be a lot safer.
-
October 17, 2012 at 4:35 pm
-
Ironically, it was the frackers who invented the word. Whether certain media or Industry is now offended by the use of the word because of its negative connotation or not, we’ll that’s just too damn frackin bad-it’s part of the lexicon now and it isn’t going to change.
If any of you frackin frackers have a frackin problem with that, well, go frack yourself. You’ve fracked us over we’ll enough.
-
October 17, 2012 at 5:43 pm
-
So do they ban freaking, farking, forking, f***ing, f@#$ing, etc.? How about every other word used as substitutes for “vulgar” terms (shoot, gosh, darn…).
I don’t think young Mr. Mickelson has thought this one through. (I also don’t think he understands the usage of its vs. it’s, but that’s another issue.)
-
October 17, 2012 at 6:27 pm
-
WHAT A RESTRICTION???? It would be nice if the RRC SWR’s would be so restrictive!
-
-
I’ll bet that if this media group up north had the GASHOLES drill through their living room, they would have a different idea!!!!
-
October 17, 2012 at 8:59 pm
-
I have a picture of the error coded “ban” at https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=4747411886157&set=a.1512633618722.2067617.1320864445&type=1&theater
-
October 18, 2012 at 12:33 am
-
Normally I’m more erudite than the response that follows: Hearst Media Group is now a certifiable pussy. Yes, that’s right, they’re frelling pussies.
-
October 18, 2012 at 9:22 am
-
Is there nothing that you people can’t feign outrage over? Or work into some convoluted conspiracy theory?
I mean seriously, do you realize how you guys look to NORMAL people?
-
October 18, 2012 at 9:28 am
-
-
Mike ‘ole buddy—I’m a NORMAL person and I know that you “SUCK”.
-
-
October 18, 2012 at 10:38 am
-
Blowing up people in Jefferson County PA, is that normal Mr Knapp? Isn’t that a bit outrageous?
-
October 18, 2012 at 10:39 am
-
Frell!
-
-
wonder if spelling it as frac|< will get it past the censors?
Leave a Comment
In order to understand the impacts of this latest fracking ban, we must first understand the definition of fracking.
Maybe it’s exploit!
Nope, that can’t be it.
It must be “its more vulgar cousin.” But, who is this cousin? Could it be the grammatically incorrect “fraccing” or “fracing?” Nope, I was unable to find a dictionary definition of either word and Google searches kept changing my search terms to “fracking.”
Seeking an answer to the cause of this latest ban, I went directly to the source Brett Mickelson, Executive Producer, Hearst Connecticut Media Group.
His reply:
Here is what I understand, Mr. Mickelson: Fracking is a real word. It is used by real–often angry–people to describe impacts to their vital natural resources, health and long-term well-being. It is used by the Government of the United States, by our president and by other elected officials. It is used by scientists in their scientific reports. It is even used by industry.
Banning all comments using the word fracking effectively prevents a large segment of the populace from
exercising their First Amendment rightsharing their direct experience with this risky process. (brainy types pointed out that our 1st Amendment rights do not extend to a paper owned by someone else. Long live free speech!) That is convenient for industry.In the interest of upping the level of maturity in the general public, will Hearst Media Group also be banning additional vulgar cousins: dang, son-of-a-gun, and shoot fire? What about vulgar cousins of body parts? Will you ban all commenters from the user name Dick?
Mr. Mickelson, don’t thank me for understanding because I don’t.
Subtitle: Hearst Media Group Bans Fracking.
New information update: Do as I say, not as I do. Thanks to Dory.
Hearst Newspapers owns 15 daily newspapers, including Houston Chronicle, San Francisco Chronicle, Albany Times Union and San Antonio Express-News. Scroll down to the bottom of the pages at the links below, it will say “© 2012 Hearst Communications Inc., Hears Connecticut Media Group, a division of Hearst Newspapers.”
Excluding the headline, the word fracking is used 3 more times in the article.
Update: As Jim Romenesko points out, fracking is in the urban dictionary. I voted for usage #3 because I’m immature that way. So honored to be mentioned by Romenesko.
This was also picked up by Grist and Capitol Tonight.
Update 2: Hat tip to commenter Scott for this video of children abusing a vulgar cousin.
Update 3, Hearst responds: