Comments on: Maybe he was just calling them bloggers http://www.buzzmachine.com/2005/11/08/maybe-he-was-just-calling-them-bloggers/ by Jeff Jarvis Fri, 10 Feb 2012 15:30:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Andrew Tyndall http://www.buzzmachine.com/2005/11/08/maybe-he-was-just-calling-them-bloggers/#comment-12159 Andrew Tyndall Wed, 09 Nov 2005 10:52:39 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2005/11/08/maybe-he-was-just-calling-them-bloggers/#comment-12159 The Guardian implies that it would indeed have been calumny to insult disaffected youth with the term "scum" if that translation had been apt. Where does the BuzzMachine stand on this? If a disaffected professor, for example, were to be referred to as "Pondscum," would this be a playful taunt, using medieval terminology? Or would this amount to fighting talk, "calling criminals criminals"? The Guardian implies that it would indeed have been calumny to insult disaffected youth with the term “scum” if that translation had been apt.

Where does the BuzzMachine stand on this?

If a disaffected professor, for example, were to be referred to as “Pondscum,” would this be a playful taunt, using medieval terminology? Or would this amount to fighting talk, “calling criminals criminals”?

]]> By: ruth http://www.buzzmachine.com/2005/11/08/maybe-he-was-just-calling-them-bloggers/#comment-12152 ruth Wed, 09 Nov 2005 02:41:56 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2005/11/08/maybe-he-was-just-calling-them-bloggers/#comment-12152 Peasants once were technically 'churls', from which came the adjective, "churlish", because churls (who were not free) tended to have a chip on their shoulders. Maybe if we called the disaffected "fortunates" it would improve their attitudes? Peasants once were technically ‘churls’, from which came the adjective, “churlish”, because churls (who were not free) tended to have a chip on their shoulders. Maybe if we called the disaffected “fortunates” it would improve their attitudes?

]]>