unprinting

Laser Unprinters

Researchers at the University of Cambridge have devised a way to ‘unprint’ laser printed pages, so that the paper can be reused.

Use a laser, save a tree - via University of Cambridge

Dr Julian Allwood, Leader of the Low Carbon Materials Processing Group at the University of Cambridge, and David Leal-Ayala, PhD student at this group, tested toner-print removal from paper by employing a variety of lasers.

The results showed that toner-print can be removed effectively without causing significant paper damage, allowing the paper to be reused, without being discarded, shredded or sent to a recycling plant.

Coupled with advances in low-energy laser scanning technology, copiers and printers, the research means that toner-removing devices may be a common sight in offices around the country in the future.

[…]

The study predicts that the emissions produced by the pulp and paper recycling industry could be at least halved as a result of paper reuse. “This could represent a significant contribution towards the cause of reducing climate change emissions from paper manufacturing” Allwood said.

The smartest thing would be to build a single device that both prints and unprints. You’d load in either new blank or old printed paper, and out would come newly printed output.

Tipp-ex for the modern world--just hit 'unprint'

By Richard Gray, Daily Telegraph, 20 May 2012
It is a Tipp-Ex for the computer age. Engineers have developed a way of using lasers to remove ink from paper so it can be reused in printers and photocopiers.

The researchers at the University of Cambridge used short pulses of laser light to delete words and images that have been printed onto paper.

The laser vaporises the toner ink without damaging the paper and opens up the prospect of future computer printers and photocopiers having an “unprint” function to allow paper to be reused.

Dr Julian Allwood, who led the research team, said it could drastically reduce the number of trees cut down to produce paper and even provide a cheaper alternative to recycling.

He said: “The process works on a wide range of toners. It does not damage the paper so the feasibility for reusing paper in the office is there.”

He added that he has now been approached by several commercial firms expressing interest in producing the first “unprint” devices.

The researchers, whose work is published in the scientific journal Proceedings of The Royal Society A, found they could remove toner ink from a range of printers and photocopiers by heating it with short pulses of laser light lasting just four billionths of a second.

They found that while lasers that used ultraviolet light and infrared light were all effective at removing the ink, the most efficient was using a visible green laser.

This removed the ink without causing any physical damage to the paper or discolouration. Filters can be used to capture the vaporised ink, which is given off as a gas.

Dr Allwood and his colleagues estimate it would cost £19,000 to build a prototype unprinter but that the costs would come down as technology improves and it is commercialised.

5

Who are Vivians girls? I sometimes wish  I could climb into Maiers photographs and get lost in some Twilight Zone  that seems to exist in her  unprinted  boxes of photographs 

“ Now considered one of the 20th century’s greatest street photographers, Vivian Maier was a mysterious nanny who secretly took over 100,000 photographs that went unseen during her lifetime. Since buying her work by chance at auction, amateur historian John Maloof has crusaded to put this prolific photographer in the history books. Maier’s strange and riveting life and art are revealed through never-before-seen photographs…

Spider-Man is here three versions of him actually .Prints are available in a variety of sizes . As well as commissions of who ever you would like

#artwork #prints #original #fantasy #gothic #ironman #hulk #captainamerica #batman #ironman #arcreactor #darknight #superhero #hawkeye #blackwidow #thor #spiderman

*note* All prints are on Velvet Rag Art Paper. This paper has a textured “watercolor paper” feel. Its’s very thick 350 grain paper with a subtle “aged” yellow tone and a ¼" unprinted border embedded.

Who do you want to see next? Of course prints are available in a variety of sizes .

*note* All prints are on Velvet Rag Art Paper. This paper has a textured “watercolor paper” feel. Its’s very thick 350 grain paper with a subtle “aged” yellow tone and a ¼" unprinted border embedded.

#artwork #prints #original #fantasy #gothic #ironman #hulk #captainamerica #joker #batman

The New Flesh
youtube.com

1 I can take it Sideways Sometimes Some things Feel like I’m on the other side Waves Of every feeling ever felt …screaming 2 Hold it close (So) I can taste it 3 I’ve watched this scene a thousand times And in my head This is how it all begins Yes, I am becoming And this is how it all begins What did you expect? This is not an exit This has begun 4 I can almost see The blackest eyes The new flesh A new disguise …Welcoming… Please 5 Give it to me I can take it Give it to me I can take it Reznor also repeats an unprinted phrase through the coda of the song, which sounds like: I’ve become [alive]

youtube

I have yet to experience a problem with the operating system. If you have Windows 7 or above, 10 is not that bad. It still has features from 8 but it also has features from 7. Ashley and Meg, the women in the video, point out that every other OS Microsoft releases happens to be very well made. 8 was apparently bad so 10 is set up to be the next big thing.

Now, I will say to make a backup of all important files. If you keep your bills on spreadsheets or you have unprinted family photos or anything important, as I have had issues with my OneDrive. The data on my hard drive, however, has been read correctly and no files are missing.

Also, keep in mind that setting up the OS will take around an hour to 90 minutes. So don’t set it up when you have to leave in 10 minutes or try to squeeze it into your break at work. Cortana is on the OS (Microsoft’s Siri), but you don’t have to turn it on.

Panasonic MC-UG729 Upright Vacuum Cleaner

Product Code: B008LA4F0M
Rating: 4.5/5 stars
List Price: $ 719.99
Discount: Save $ 386.99
Special Offers: Check It »
Customer Reviews: Read Reviews »

“The condition of the Panasonic MC-UG729 Upright Vacuum Cleaner you buy and its timely delivery are guaranteed under the Amazon A-to-z Guarantee.”

  • A brand-new, unused, unopened, undamaged item in its original packaging (where packaging is applicable). Packaging should be the same as what is found in a retail store, or was packaged by the manufacturer in non-retail packaging, such as an unprinted box or plastic bag.
  • Give your Vacuum Cleaner or Sewing Machine an upgrade in performance with this brand new product.
  • VacSewCenter provides the best protection to keep your vacuum and sewing machine working in prime condition at all times.
  • Our 100% satisfaction guarantee ensures that you will be happy with your VacSewCenter purchase. We strive to make sure that all of our customers are satisfied and this is why we offer a 7-day money back guarantee. Buyer is responsible for return shipping.
  • We strive to make sure that all of our customers are satisfied and this is why we offer a 7-day money back guarantee. Buyer is responsible for return shipping.

Quiet Force Technology, 12 Amp Motor, EZ Bare Floor Switch, Bonus Floor Brush, Quick-draw OB Tools, 35 Ft Cord, Soft Wheels, Auto Carpet Adjuster, HEPA Media Filter, Wood Agitator – Metal Pedal, 14″ Cleaning Path MC-UG729 [Read more…]

If you have been looking for top recommended best upright vacuum reviews, this Panasonic MC-UG729 Upright Vacuum Cleaner is the best cheapest price on the web we have searched. Many good reviews already proving the quality of this product. The Panasonic MC-UG729 Upright Vacuum Cleaner is equipped with a large number of features that makes it great product. The most sold product is not expensive and it is highly desirable, and if you want this Panasonic MC-UG729 Upright Vacuum Cleaner, you should not miss this opportunity because this product is the price length applications.

Where To Buy Best Upright Vacuum Cleaner 2014

Panasonic MC-UG729 Upright Vacuum Cleaner

Customer rating:


List Price: $ 719.99
Price: $ 333.00
Availability: In stock
Sold and ships: Details »

Special Offer Today! Price: $ 333.00

Click Here »

Price Comparison Shopping Best Upright Vacuum Cleaners Consumer Reports

We have found most affordable price of Panasonic MC-UG729 Upright Vacuum Cleaner from Amazon.com. It offers fast and free shipping. Upright vacuums on sale will be limited stock of certain product and discount only for limited time, so do order now to get the best deals. Before you buy, check stock availability and compare price off Panasonic MC-UG729 Upright Vacuum Cleaner on Top Rated featured products below.



from WordPress http://ift.tt/1JrUQok
via IFTTT
Quilt Hanger Kit Magnetic Invisible 5 Piece

Product Code: B00BZBOWPC
Rating: 4.5/5 stars
List Price: $ 66.00
Discount: Save $ 12.54
Special Offers: Check It »
Customer Reviews: Read Reviews »

“The condition of the Quilt Hanger Kit Magnetic Invisible 5 Piece you buy and its timely delivery are guaranteed under the Amazon A-to-z Guarantee.”

  • A brand-new, unused, unopened, undamaged item in its original packaging (where packaging is applicable). Packaging should be the same as what is found in a retail store, or was packaged by the manufacturer in non-retail packaging, such as an unprinted box or plastic bag.
  • Give your Vacuum Cleaner or Sewing Machine an upgrade in performance with this brand new product.
  • VacSewCenter provides the best protection to keep your vacuum and sewing machine working in prime condition at all times.
  • Our 100% satisfaction guarantee ensures that you will be happy with your VacSewCenter purchase. We strive to make sure that all of our customers are satisfied and this is why we offer a 7-day money back guarantee. Buyer is responsible for return shipping.
  • We strive to make sure that all of our customers are satisfied and this is why we offer a 7-day money back guarantee. Buyer is responsible for return shipping.

The Magnetic Invisible Quilt Hanger 5 Piece Kit will hang quilts from mini to king size with a single package. With ease of installation, no wall damage, no screws or nails, and no leveling device needed, this hanger allows you to securely support yo [Read more…]

If you have been looking for top recommended best portable sewing machine reviews, this Quilt Hanger Kit Magnetic Invisible 5 Piece is the best cheapest price on the web we have searched. Many good reviews already proving the quality of this product. The Quilt Hanger Kit Magnetic Invisible 5 Piece is equipped with a large number of features that makes it great product. The most sold product is not expensive and it is highly desirable, and if you want this Quilt Hanger Kit Magnetic Invisible 5 Piece, you should not miss this opportunity because this product is the price length applications.

Where To Buy Best Hand Held Sewing Machine

Quilt Hanger Kit Magnetic Invisible 5 Piece

Customer rating: 4.5/5 stars


List Price: $ 66.00
Sale: $ 53.46
Discount: Save 19% off your order + Free Shipping
Availability: New, original packaging – In stock
Sold by and Shipping: View details »

Special Offer Today! Price: $ 53.46

( 15:03 PM - Saturday, July 25, 2015 ) »

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

All the lates wireless printers all in one reviews consumer reports are written by real customers on websites. You should read more consumer reviews and answered questions of Quilt Hanger Kit Magnetic Invisible 5 Piece at Review Centre

Discount Finder: Coupon Codes And Special Offers

Find discount wireless printers all in one on sale from all sale brands. Get the best discount Quilt Hanger Kit Magnetic Invisible 5 Piece deals from top brands is on sale at Amazon.com. Here you’ll find a variety of discount special offers and coupon codes on popular Amazon products.

Price Comparison Shopping Best Mini Sewing Machine Consumer Reports

We have found most affordable price of Quilt Hanger Kit Magnetic Invisible 5 Piece from Amazon.com. It offers fast and free shipping. Handheld sewing machine for sale will be limited stock of certain product and discount only for limited time, so do order now to get the best deals. Before you buy, check stock availability and compare price off Quilt Hanger Kit Magnetic Invisible 5 Piece on Top Rated featured products below.



from WordPress http://ift.tt/1EMc4FD
via IFTTT

Some more of my Art that I hope will make you think differently about portraits

*note* All prints are on Velvet Rag Art Paper. This paper has a textured “watercolor paper” feel. Its’s very thick 350 grain paper with a subtle “aged” yellow tone and a ¼" unprinted border embedded.

#artwork #prints #original #fantasy #gothic #portrait

anonymous asked:

There are many burning questions I'd like to ask Aidan Turner but alas most of them are unprintable ;)

I’m a little late getting on the Turner train but those dark curls are really doing something for me. 

Should I Ever Say ‘F*ck’? 4 Things Freelancer Should Consider Before They Swear

We’re all adults here, right? Last year, Robert Lane Green of The Economist implored the The New York Times to “grow up” already. He was referencing its notoriously puritanical swearing policy, which often replaces swears with euphemisms and comically straight-laced words like “expletive,”epithet,” and “vulgarity.”

While the Times had actually just updated its policies in 2013, many observers, including Lane Green, felt it wasn’t enough. Witness the Tumblr called Fit to Print, which still continually tracks “expletive avoidance” by the Times. Here’s just one listing I found on July 7 about actor Dennis Leary:

“In 1993, he even had a hit song [with an unprintable title] about being a terrible man.”

The song’s name? “Asshole.”

Many journalists today insist such delicacy leaves readers confused and uninformed. As Lane Greene wrote, “A serious piece of journalism needn’t dwell on vulgar words, but making the reader sit and puzzle out ‘what is an anti-gay slur that contains a synonym for rooster’ has the unintentional effect of highlighting the word.”

There’s also a case to be made that such publications are diving headlong into irrelevance. In 2014, in a piece Lane Green referenced in his article, Jesse Sheidlower said in an op-ed for the Times, “At a time when readers can simply go online to find the details from more nimble upstarts willing to be frank, the mainstream media need to accurately report language that is central to their stories.”

So amidst all the debates, what are the practical takeaways for writers? Unfortunately, there are no simple answers. After all, profanity is constantly changing: Words that may have been considered offensive 10 years ago may be perfectly acceptable today, and vice versa. What might be offensive to one person is considered G-rated coffee lineup chatter by another. Factor in client preferences and the varying sensibilities of your online followers, and things can get murky.

Yet no matter what your situation, you can break this subject down quite a bit. So if you’re still wondering whether or not you should write “fuck” in that article you’re working on, here are four things to consider first.

1. Is the swearing in a direct quote?

We can talk about your own potty mouth later. But first, let’s cover off a classic scenario. Let’s say your interview subject just swore. Do you quote her verbatim?

If you’re used to the freedom of blogs and online zines, you might be gobsmacked that this is even an issue. But understand that quoting profanity is a pretty recent practice in mainstream journalism. As a 2014 Time magazine piece said about political reporting: “Until recently, vulgar outbursts were often cleaned up before they were reported to the public.”

The thing to know is that, for reasons mentioned previously, the overall journalistic shift is towards inclusion of profane quotes. Last year The American Journalism Review listed The New York Times and the Associated Press among many traditional organizations updating their policies.

In the article, AP standards editor Tom Kent was quoted as saying, “The AP has evolved. A decade or two ago, we tried very hard to avoid using the word ‘hell’ if we didn’t have to. I think we’ve moved beyond that now. And five years from now, lord knows what we’ll be saying.”

Despite these shifts, journalists are generally advised to remain “tasteful” and “non-gratuitous” in their reporting by these more traditional publications.

2. Is this particularly sensitive language?

Some swearing is simple. You stub your toe, you swear, you feel (a bit) better. But there are other, more sinister words. Words that have been used, historically, to shame, abuse, and marginalize others. When you are quoting sexist, racist, or homophobic slurs, it’s advisable to include as much context as possible and proceed with heightened sensitivity. It can be difficult to report difficult words. Yet doing so sensitively, rather than by omission or censorship, is generally the better route.

Here’s an example. Imagine you’re covering a press conference on university campus safety and a police spokesperson tosses out the word “slut” while musing about how female students should dress for a night out. Do you remove it from coverage to avoid further offense? Or is it instructive? Well, I’ve actually given you a real-life case: A Toronto police officer used the word in a talk on campus rape and was quoted verbatim. Ultimately, the controversy spawned the global SlutWalk movement, which is meant to protest unfair treatment of women and rape culture.

In her Times op-ed, Sheidlower encouraged journalists not to shy away from these tricky but potentially valuable discussions: “When language can play such a hot-button role in our society, what we need is more reporting, not less.”

3. What are my client’s style guidelines?

Writing is a business, and the reality is that we writers also need to tailor our finished products to clients’ requirements. Some clients may specify guidelines for your direct quotes and/or your language in personal essays. Always be sure to check your client’s style guidelines, and be aware that they can vary wildly.

For example, The Economist lists these guidelines under “Swear words”:

Avoid them, unless they convey something genuinely helpful or interesting to the reader (eg, you are quoting someone). Usually, they will annoy rather than shock. But if you do use them, spell them out in full, without asterisks.

Often, online publications like the Huffington Post and BuzzFeed allow you to spell out profanity in the text, but stick to asterisks in headlines. As BuzzFeed’s guidelines specify:

Avoid using profanity in the headline or dek of a post, unless you're referencing a direct quote or official name. In those cases, use an asterisk in place of a letter (e.g., “f*ck," “sh*t").

By contrast, Tracy Grant, a senior editor at The Washington Post, told the AJR:

… we think people don't expect to see/read/hear profanity when they come to The Washington Post. We're very comfortable with our position that profanity should be used rarely and only when materially important to the broader journalistic mission.

Generally, you’ll have more freedom writing for online publications. Traditional print newspapers and consumer magazines, on the other hand, as well as specific niche markets (family publications, for example) may require you to be more buttoned up.

While not as restrictive about actual words, online sites do spell out all important guidelines for appropriate content, excluding, as Slate does, content that “degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, or other classification.”

4. Voice

We’ve talked a lot about quoting other people’s words. But what about your personal voice? What about when you want to say “fuck”?

In terms of your voice in personal essays or other nonfiction writing, swearing comes with a whole other set of guidelines. For starters, you generally don’t want to overdo it with the swearing. Compared with the well-placed expletive, a constant “hey-Mom-look-at-me” mode of swearing often has a dulling effect on readers.

And do give these words some literary respect. In her must-read New York magazine piece, “Ode to a Four-Letter Word,” Katherine Schulz encourages writers to rethink four-letter words. They’re not the domain of “fundamentally uncreative and indolent” writers. Sometimes, fuck is the best word.

Schulz also explores the peculiarly complex relationship Americans have with profanity: “a seesaw of schoolmarmish horror and schoolyardish glee,” she calls it. And for the writer, she lays out the risks you face in this confusing atmosphere.

From Schulz, I’ve come to appreciate the fine edge. Profanity dangles before us both the chance for powerful connection with readers—a loyal audience that enjoys when you write passionately and let your crazy out. How great is that? But the flip side of that is risking appearing unprofessional in some markets, and even turning off some percentage of readers.

After publishing a non-fiction book, Schulz wrote that she received hundreds of negative reviews daily on Amazon aimed directly at her apparent potty mouth: “It can be hard to predict whether a writer who curses will wind up exalted or excoriated. I know, because I wound up on the wrong side myself.”

In developing your voice, it’s important to consider many things: a publication’s readership and style guidelines, your own style, your personal history, and, ultimately, what feels right for you.

Is it wrong to try and adapt your voice to connect with a particular group or market? Not at all. The important thing is not to force it. As with humor, when you try too hard with the swear words, it’s just awkward for your readers. So with your personal writing, be as objective as you can. And if in doubt, leave it out.

The Freelance Strategist is a daily publication for and by freelance creative workers navigating today’s changing employment landscape. Brought to you by Contently.

Should I Ever Say ‘F*ck’? 4 Things Freelancer Should Consider Before They Swear

We’re all adults here, right? Last year, Robert Lane Green of The Economist implored the The New York Times to “grow up” already. He was referencing its notoriously puritanical swearing policy, which often replaces swears with euphemisms and comically straight-laced words like “expletive,”epithet,” and “vulgarity.”

While the Times had actually just updated its policies in 2013, many observers, including Lane Green, felt it wasn’t enough. Witness the Tumblr called Fit to Print, which still continually tracks “expletive avoidance” by the Times. Here’s just one listing I found on July 7 about actor Dennis Leary:

“In 1993, he even had a hit song [with an unprintable title] about being a terrible man.”

The song’s name? “Asshole.”

Many journalists today insist such delicacy leaves readers confused and uninformed. As Lane Greene wrote, “A serious piece of journalism needn’t dwell on vulgar words, but making the reader sit and puzzle out ‘what is an anti-gay slur that contains a synonym for rooster’ has the unintentional effect of highlighting the word.”

There’s also a case to be made that such publications are diving headlong into irrelevance. In 2014, in a piece Lane Green referenced in his article, Jesse Sheidlower said in an op-ed for the Times, “At a time when readers can simply go online to find the details from more nimble upstarts willing to be frank, the mainstream media need to accurately report language that is central to their stories.”

So amidst all the debates, what are the practical takeaways for writers? Unfortunately, there are no simple answers. After all, profanity is constantly changing: Words that may have been considered offensive 10 years ago may be perfectly acceptable today, and vice versa. What might be offensive to one person is considered G-rated coffee lineup chatter by another. Factor in client preferences and the varying sensibilities of your online followers, and things can get murky.

Yet no matter what your situation, you can break this subject down quite a bit. So if you’re still wondering whether or not you should write “fuck” in that article you’re working on, here are four things to consider first.

1. Is the swearing in a direct quote?

We can talk about your own potty mouth later. But first, let’s cover off a classic scenario. Let’s say your interview subject just swore. Do you quote her verbatim?

If you’re used to the freedom of blogs and online zines, you might be gobsmacked that this is even an issue. But understand that quoting profanity is a pretty recent practice in mainstream journalism. As a 2014 Time magazine piece said about political reporting: “Until recently, vulgar outbursts were often cleaned up before they were reported to the public.”

The thing to know is that, for reasons mentioned previously, the overall journalistic shift is towards inclusion of profane quotes. Last year The American Journalism Review listed The New York Times and the Associated Press among many traditional organizations updating their policies.

In the article, AP standards editor Tom Kent was quoted as saying, “The AP has evolved. A decade or two ago, we tried very hard to avoid using the word ‘hell’ if we didn’t have to. I think we’ve moved beyond that now. And five years from now, lord knows what we’ll be saying.”

Despite these shifts, journalists are generally advised to remain “tasteful” and “non-gratuitous” in their reporting by these more traditional publications.

2. Is this particularly sensitive language?

Some swearing is simple. You stub your toe, you swear, you feel (a bit) better. But there are other, more sinister words. Words that have been used, historically, to shame, abuse, and marginalize others. When you are quoting sexist, racist, or homophobic slurs, it’s advisable to include as much context as possible and proceed with heightened sensitivity. It can be difficult to report difficult words. Yet doing so sensitively, rather than by omission or censorship, is generally the better route.

Here’s an example. Imagine you’re covering a press conference on university campus safety and a police spokesperson tosses out the word “slut” while musing about how female students should dress for a night out. Do you remove it from coverage to avoid further offense? Or is it instructive? Well, I’ve actually given you a real-life case: A Toronto police officer used the word in a talk on campus rape and was quoted verbatim. Ultimately, the controversy spawned the global SlutWalk movement, which is meant to protest unfair treatment of women and rape culture.

In her Times op-ed, Sheidlower encouraged journalists not to shy away from these tricky but potentially valuable discussions: “When language can play such a hot-button role in our society, what we need is more reporting, not less.”

3. What are my client’s style guidelines?

Writing is a business, and the reality is that we writers also need to tailor our finished products to clients’ requirements. Some clients may specify guidelines for your direct quotes and/or your language in personal essays. Always be sure to check your client’s style guidelines, and be aware that they can vary wildly.

For example, The Economist lists these guidelines under “Swear words”:

Avoid them, unless they convey something genuinely helpful or interesting to the reader (eg, you are quoting someone). Usually, they will annoy rather than shock. But if you do use them, spell them out in full, without asterisks.

Often, online publications like the Huffington Post and BuzzFeed allow you to spell out profanity in the text, but stick to asterisks in headlines. As BuzzFeed’s guidelines specify:

Avoid using profanity in the headline or dek of a post, unless you're referencing a direct quote or official name. In those cases, use an asterisk in place of a letter (e.g., “f*ck," “sh*t").

By contrast, Tracy Grant, a senior editor at The Washington Post, told the AJR:

… we think people don't expect to see/read/hear profanity when they come to The Washington Post. We're very comfortable with our position that profanity should be used rarely and only when materially important to the broader journalistic mission.

Generally, you’ll have more freedom writing for online publications. Traditional print newspapers and consumer magazines, on the other hand, as well as specific niche markets (family publications, for example) may require you to be more buttoned up.

While not as restrictive about actual words, online sites do spell out all important guidelines for appropriate content, excluding, as Slate does, content that “degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, or other classification.”

4. Voice

We’ve talked a lot about quoting other people’s words. But what about your personal voice? What about when you want to say “fuck”?

In terms of your voice in personal essays or other nonfiction writing, swearing comes with a whole other set of guidelines. For starters, you generally don’t want to overdo it with the swearing. Compared with the well-placed expletive, a constant “hey-Mom-look-at-me” mode of swearing often has a dulling effect on readers.

And do give these words some literary respect. In her must-read New York magazine piece, “Ode to a Four-Letter Word,” Katherine Schulz encourages writers to rethink four-letter words. They’re not the domain of “fundamentally uncreative and indolent” writers. Sometimes, fuck is the best word.

Schulz also explores the peculiarly complex relationship Americans have with profanity: “a seesaw of schoolmarmish horror and schoolyardish glee,” she calls it. And for the writer, she lays out the risks you face in this confusing atmosphere.

From Schulz, I’ve come to appreciate the fine edge. Profanity dangles before us both the chance for powerful connection with readers—a loyal audience that enjoys when you write passionately and let your crazy out. How great is that? But the flip side of that is risking appearing unprofessional in some markets, and even turning off some percentage of readers.

After publishing a non-fiction book, Schulz wrote that she received hundreds of negative reviews daily on Amazon aimed directly at her apparent potty mouth: “It can be hard to predict whether a writer who curses will wind up exalted or excoriated. I know, because I wound up on the wrong side myself.”

In developing your voice, it’s important to consider many things: a publication’s readership and style guidelines, your own style, your personal history, and, ultimately, what feels right for you.

Is it wrong to try and adapt your voice to connect with a particular group or market? Not at all. The important thing is not to force it. As with humor, when you try too hard with the swear words, it’s just awkward for your readers. So with your personal writing, be as objective as you can. And if in doubt, leave it out.

The Freelance Strategist is a daily publication for and by freelance creative workers navigating today’s changing employment landscape. Brought to you by Contently.

Should I Ever Say ‘F*ck’? 4 Things Freelancer Should Consider Before They Swear

We’re all adults here, right? Last year, Robert Lane Green of The Economist implored the The New York Times to “grow up” already. He was referencing its notoriously puritanical swearing policy, which often replaces swears with euphemisms and comically straight-laced words like “expletive,”epithet,” and “vulgarity.”

While the Times had actually just updated its policies in 2013, many observers, including Lane Green, felt it wasn’t enough. Witness the Tumblr called Fit to Print, which still continually tracks “expletive avoidance” by the Times. Here’s just one listing I found on July 7 about actor Dennis Leary:

“In 1993, he even had a hit song [with an unprintable title] about being a terrible man.”

The song’s name? “Asshole.”

Many journalists today insist such delicacy leaves readers confused and uninformed. As Lane Greene wrote, “A serious piece of journalism needn’t dwell on vulgar words, but making the reader sit and puzzle out ‘what is an anti-gay slur that contains a synonym for rooster’ has the unintentional effect of highlighting the word.”

There’s also a case to be made that such publications are diving headlong into irrelevance. In 2014, in a piece Lane Green referenced in his article, Jesse Sheidlower said in an op-ed for the Times, “At a time when readers can simply go online to find the details from more nimble upstarts willing to be frank, the mainstream media need to accurately report language that is central to their stories.”

So amidst all the debates, what are the practical takeaways for writers? Unfortunately, there are no simple answers. After all, profanity is constantly changing: Words that may have been considered offensive 10 years ago may be perfectly acceptable today, and vice versa. What might be offensive to one person is considered G-rated coffee lineup chatter by another. Factor in client preferences and the varying sensibilities of your online followers, and things can get murky.

Yet no matter what your situation, you can break this subject down quite a bit. So if you’re still wondering whether or not you should write “fuck” in that article you’re working on, here are four things to consider first.

1. Is the swearing in a direct quote?

We can talk about your own potty mouth later. But first, let’s cover off a classic scenario. Let’s say your interview subject just swore. Do you quote her verbatim?

If you’re used to the freedom of blogs and online zines, you might be gobsmacked that this is even an issue. But understand that quoting profanity is a pretty recent practice in mainstream journalism. As a 2014 Time magazine piece said about political reporting: “Until recently, vulgar outbursts were often cleaned up before they were reported to the public.”

The thing to know is that, for reasons mentioned previously, the overall journalistic shift is towards inclusion of profane quotes. Last year The American Journalism Review listed The New York Times and the Associated Press among many traditional organizations updating their policies.

In the article, AP standards editor Tom Kent was quoted as saying, “The AP has evolved. A decade or two ago, we tried very hard to avoid using the word ‘hell’ if we didn’t have to. I think we’ve moved beyond that now. And five years from now, lord knows what we’ll be saying.”

Despite these shifts, journalists are generally advised to remain “tasteful” and “non-gratuitous” in their reporting by these more traditional publications.

2. Is this particularly sensitive language?

Some swearing is simple. You stub your toe, you swear, you feel (a bit) better. But there are other, more sinister words. Words that have been used, historically, to shame, abuse, and marginalize others. When you are quoting sexist, racist, or homophobic slurs, it’s advisable to include as much context as possible and proceed with heightened sensitivity. It can be difficult to report difficult words. Yet doing so sensitively, rather than by omission or censorship, is generally the better route.

Here’s an example. Imagine you’re covering a press conference on university campus safety and a police spokesperson tosses out the word “slut” while musing about how female students should dress for a night out. Do you remove it from coverage to avoid further offense? Or is it instructive? Well, I’ve actually given you a real-life case: A Toronto police officer used the word in a talk on campus rape and was quoted verbatim. Ultimately, the controversy spawned the global SlutWalk movement, which is meant to protest unfair treatment of women and rape culture.

In her Times op-ed, Sheidlower encouraged journalists not to shy away from these tricky but potentially valuable discussions: “When language can play such a hot-button role in our society, what we need is more reporting, not less.”

3. What are my client’s style guidelines?

Writing is a business, and the reality is that we writers also need to tailor our finished products to clients’ requirements. Some clients may specify guidelines for your direct quotes and/or your language in personal essays. Always be sure to check your client’s style guidelines, and be aware that they can vary wildly.

For example, The Economist lists these guidelines under “Swear words”:

Avoid them, unless they convey something genuinely helpful or interesting to the reader (eg, you are quoting someone). Usually, they will annoy rather than shock. But if you do use them, spell them out in full, without asterisks.

Often, online publications like the Huffington Post and BuzzFeed allow you to spell out profanity in the text, but stick to asterisks in headlines. As BuzzFeed’s guidelines specify:

Avoid using profanity in the headline or dek of a post, unless you're referencing a direct quote or official name. In those cases, use an asterisk in place of a letter (e.g., “f*ck," “sh*t").

By contrast, Tracy Grant, a senior editor at The Washington Post, told the AJR:

… we think people don't expect to see/read/hear profanity when they come to The Washington Post. We're very comfortable with our position that profanity should be used rarely and only when materially important to the broader journalistic mission.

Generally, you’ll have more freedom writing for online publications. Traditional print newspapers and consumer magazines, on the other hand, as well as specific niche markets (family publications, for example) may require you to be more buttoned up.

While not as restrictive about actual words, online sites do spell out all important guidelines for appropriate content, excluding, as Slate does, content that “degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, or other classification.”

4. Voice

We’ve talked a lot about quoting other people’s words. But what about your personal voice? What about when you want to say “fuck”?

In terms of your voice in personal essays or other nonfiction writing, swearing comes with a whole other set of guidelines. For starters, you generally don’t want to overdo it with the swearing. Compared with the well-placed expletive, a constant “hey-Mom-look-at-me” mode of swearing often has a dulling effect on readers.

And do give these words some literary respect. In her must-read New York magazine piece, “Ode to a Four-Letter Word,” Katherine Schulz encourages writers to rethink four-letter words. They’re not the domain of “fundamentally uncreative and indolent” writers. Sometimes, fuck is the best word.

Schulz also explores the peculiarly complex relationship Americans have with profanity: “a seesaw of schoolmarmish horror and schoolyardish glee,” she calls it. And for the writer, she lays out the risks you face in this confusing atmosphere.

From Schulz, I’ve come to appreciate the fine edge. Profanity dangles before us both the chance for powerful connection with readers—a loyal audience that enjoys when you write passionately and let your crazy out. How great is that? But the flip side of that is risking appearing unprofessional in some markets, and even turning off some percentage of readers.

After publishing a non-fiction book, Schulz wrote that she received hundreds of negative reviews daily on Amazon aimed directly at her apparent potty mouth: “It can be hard to predict whether a writer who curses will wind up exalted or excoriated. I know, because I wound up on the wrong side myself.”

In developing your voice, it’s important to consider many things: a publication’s readership and style guidelines, your own style, your personal history, and, ultimately, what feels right for you.

Is it wrong to try and adapt your voice to connect with a particular group or market? Not at all. The important thing is not to force it. As with humor, when you try too hard with the swear words, it’s just awkward for your readers. So with your personal writing, be as objective as you can. And if in doubt, leave it out.

The Freelance Strategist is a daily publication for and by freelance creative workers navigating today’s changing employment landscape. Brought to you by Contently.

Should I Ever Say ‘F*ck’? 4 Things Freelancer Should Consider Before They Swear

We’re all adults here, right? Last year, Robert Lane Green of The Economist implored the The New York Times to “grow up” already. He was referencing its notoriously puritanical swearing policy, which often replaces swears with euphemisms and comically straight-laced words like “expletive,”epithet,” and “vulgarity.”

While the Times had actually just updated its policies in 2013, many observers, including Lane Green, felt it wasn’t enough. Witness the Tumblr called Fit to Print, which still continually tracks “expletive avoidance” by the Times. Here’s just one listing I found on July 7 about actor Dennis Leary:

“In 1993, he even had a hit song [with an unprintable title] about being a terrible man.”

The song’s name? “Asshole.”

Many journalists today insist such delicacy leaves readers confused and uninformed. As Lane Greene wrote, “A serious piece of journalism needn’t dwell on vulgar words, but making the reader sit and puzzle out ‘what is an anti-gay slur that contains a synonym for rooster’ has the unintentional effect of highlighting the word.”

There’s also a case to be made that such publications are diving headlong into irrelevance. In 2014, in a piece Lane Green referenced in his article, Jesse Sheidlower said in an op-ed for the Times, “At a time when readers can simply go online to find the details from more nimble upstarts willing to be frank, the mainstream media need to accurately report language that is central to their stories.”

So amidst all the debates, what are the practical takeaways for writers? Unfortunately, there are no simple answers. After all, profanity is constantly changing: Words that may have been considered offensive 10 years ago may be perfectly acceptable today, and vice versa. What might be offensive to one person is considered G-rated coffee lineup chatter by another. Factor in client preferences and the varying sensibilities of your online followers, and things can get murky.

Yet no matter what your situation, you can break this subject down quite a bit. So if you’re still wondering whether or not you should write “fuck” in that article you’re working on, here are four things to consider first.

1. Is the swearing in a direct quote?

We can talk about your own potty mouth later. But first, let’s cover off a classic scenario. Let’s say your interview subject just swore. Do you quote her verbatim?

If you’re used to the freedom of blogs and online zines, you might be gobsmacked that this is even an issue. But understand that quoting profanity is a pretty recent practice in mainstream journalism. As a 2014 Time magazine piece said about political reporting: “Until recently, vulgar outbursts were often cleaned up before they were reported to the public.”

The thing to know is that, for reasons mentioned previously, the overall journalistic shift is towards inclusion of profane quotes. Last year The American Journalism Review listed The New York Times and the Associated Press among many traditional organizations updating their policies.

In the article, AP standards editor Tom Kent was quoted as saying, “The AP has evolved. A decade or two ago, we tried very hard to avoid using the word ‘hell’ if we didn’t have to. I think we’ve moved beyond that now. And five years from now, lord knows what we’ll be saying.”

Despite these shifts, journalists are generally advised to remain “tasteful” and “non-gratuitous” in their reporting by these more traditional publications.

2. Is this particularly sensitive language?

Some swearing is simple. You stub your toe, you swear, you feel (a bit) better. But there are other, more sinister words. Words that have been used, historically, to shame, abuse, and marginalize others. When you are quoting sexist, racist, or homophobic slurs, it’s advisable to include as much context as possible and proceed with heightened sensitivity. It can be difficult to report difficult words. Yet doing so sensitively, rather than by omission or censorship, is generally the better route.

Here’s an example. Imagine you’re covering a press conference on university campus safety and a police spokesperson tosses out the word “slut” while musing about how female students should dress for a night out. Do you remove it from coverage to avoid further offense? Or is it instructive? Well, I’ve actually given you a real-life case: A Toronto police officer used the word in a talk on campus rape and was quoted verbatim. Ultimately, the controversy spawned the global SlutWalk movement, which is meant to protest unfair treatment of women and rape culture.

In her Times op-ed, Sheidlower encouraged journalists not to shy away from these tricky but potentially valuable discussions: “When language can play such a hot-button role in our society, what we need is more reporting, not less.”

3. What are my client’s style guidelines?

Writing is a business, and the reality is that we writers also need to tailor our finished products to clients’ requirements. Some clients may specify guidelines for your direct quotes and/or your language in personal essays. Always be sure to check your client’s style guidelines, and be aware that they can vary wildly.

For example, The Economist lists these guidelines under “Swear words”:

Avoid them, unless they convey something genuinely helpful or interesting to the reader (eg, you are quoting someone). Usually, they will annoy rather than shock. But if you do use them, spell them out in full, without asterisks.

Often, online publications like the Huffington Post and BuzzFeed allow you to spell out profanity in the text, but stick to asterisks in headlines. As BuzzFeed’s guidelines specify:

Avoid using profanity in the headline or dek of a post, unless you're referencing a direct quote or official name. In those cases, use an asterisk in place of a letter (e.g., “f*ck," “sh*t").

By contrast, Tracy Grant, a senior editor at The Washington Post, told the AJR:

… we think people don't expect to see/read/hear profanity when they come to The Washington Post. We're very comfortable with our position that profanity should be used rarely and only when materially important to the broader journalistic mission.

Generally, you’ll have more freedom writing for online publications. Traditional print newspapers and consumer magazines, on the other hand, as well as specific niche markets (family publications, for example) may require you to be more buttoned up.

While not as restrictive about actual words, online sites do spell out all important guidelines for appropriate content, excluding, as Slate does, content that “degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, or other classification.”

4. Voice

We’ve talked a lot about quoting other people’s words. But what about your personal voice? What about when you want to say “fuck”?

In terms of your voice in personal essays or other nonfiction writing, swearing comes with a whole other set of guidelines. For starters, you generally don’t want to overdo it with the swearing. Compared with the well-placed expletive, a constant “hey-Mom-look-at-me” mode of swearing often has a dulling effect on readers.

And do give these words some literary respect. In her must-read New York magazine piece, “Ode to a Four-Letter Word,” Katherine Schulz encourages writers to rethink four-letter words. They’re not the domain of “fundamentally uncreative and indolent” writers. Sometimes, fuck is the best word.

Schulz also explores the peculiarly complex relationship Americans have with profanity: “a seesaw of schoolmarmish horror and schoolyardish glee,” she calls it. And for the writer, she lays out the risks you face in this confusing atmosphere.

From Schulz, I’ve come to appreciate the fine edge. Profanity dangles before us both the chance for powerful connection with readers—a loyal audience that enjoys when you write passionately and let your crazy out. How great is that? But the flip side of that is risking appearing unprofessional in some markets, and even turning off some percentage of readers.

After publishing a non-fiction book, Schulz wrote that she received hundreds of negative reviews daily on Amazon aimed directly at her apparent potty mouth: “It can be hard to predict whether a writer who curses will wind up exalted or excoriated. I know, because I wound up on the wrong side myself.”

In developing your voice, it’s important to consider many things: a publication’s readership and style guidelines, your own style, your personal history, and, ultimately, what feels right for you.

Is it wrong to try and adapt your voice to connect with a particular group or market? Not at all. The important thing is not to force it. As with humor, when you try too hard with the swear words, it’s just awkward for your readers. So with your personal writing, be as objective as you can. And if in doubt, leave it out.

The Freelance Strategist is a daily publication for and by freelance creative workers navigating today’s changing employment landscape. Brought to you by Contently.