Posted on 09/29/2014 3:38:42 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
No, FR is not trying to quash satire. However, it should be clearly labeled as such in the title. Some people seem to think it's great trickling our readers into falling for satire. It's not. A lot of people come to FR and scan the headlines clicking on articles of interest. If they're not familiar with the author or source, they may be misled and may even pass it on to others. No thanks.
If you post satire, please label it as "satire' in the title.
Thanks
Bad choice of words... lol
Or was it.. SATire????
Well, hg, I find this ironic because, of the two of you, you're the one who appears to want power -- the power to tell everybody what/who is good, bad, readable, etc.
If Jim wants John Semmens gone - after all these years - that's his call. It is not, nor should be, yours, just because you don't care for him or appreciate his writing.
Signed, Brigadier N.F. Marwood-Git (Ret.)
Gee, I don’t know.
Thank you.
This is the problem-when browsing through the “latest posts” list, the identity of the original poster is not present, only the title.
Every post on FR is instantly picked up by Google.
Everyone here should try this educational experiment-at random pick a fairly unique phrase from somewhere on FR and enter that phrase into the Google search engine.
It will appear as a search result, with the thread title, the website name (Free Republic), a post time, the URL, and an excerpt that includes the search phrase (highlighted).
The chance that a satirical piece will be misinterpreted by someone out there in Internet Land is multiplied greatly by this exposure, adding to the belief in some circles that FR is a kook site, or is involved in spreading lies.
You will not see the word “satire” unless you click on the link and scroll up to the top of the thread.
The simple expedient of adding the word “satire” to the thread title avoids all of this.
While that is an understandable explanation, I do think Mr. Semmens' contributions of late could have been handled differently. His satire has been a part of FR for years.
I never asked for nor do I want his stuff "pulled".
I may object to his vanity posts (for that is what they are)
but I've almost never made comments to that effect. Why?
Because he generally isn't directing traffic off-site.
Do I think he's a self-important "look at ME!" wanker?
Oh HELL yes. It's obvious.
But at least he posts the whole mess HERE.
Amen!
Was it?
By the same token, it should be presented with the understanding that it IS satire. For example, people watch Saturday Night Live or MAD TV for the satire. They watch the nightly news for the lack of it. To slip satire into a format like FRs, where headlines summarize the content in a news format, is a little annoying.
I'm in the habit of looking at the source. If it's an intriguing headline but from Satire News (or whatever that is), WND, etc., I move on where if it had come from a local newspaper or such source, I'd have clicked on it.
That’s funny. So they suck him in huh? LOL, we’ll I’ve been taken in a few times too.
You would think he would back off a little to prevent embarrassment.
Some might think this very same thing about someone who is always the 1st or 2nd reply with a snarky scolding to any "suspect" thread, year after year after year....
In the meantime, HG kills time:
We are handling it differently. Labeling satire in the title is now policy. Thanks
Oh, for Pete’s sake. This is all very simple, really. Semmens simply has to indicate in the title of his threads that they are satire. That’s it.
You make good points.
I don’t always check the source, to my detriment. It has cost me at times.
What I detest more than anything else, is the headline that is so misleading that the body of the story causes the headline to be seen as a complete and total lie, just to get people to read on.
Big or small.
Photo caption jokes or satire threads.
Vanities or in-thread comments.
First to post breaking news.
Witty comments.
Attacking bloggers for sport.
You do it. I do it. We all do it.
You can knock people here for lots of things, but accusing them of "look at me" is over the top. That's what it's all about for all of us.
Enjoy your pudding.
-PJ
It was just clumsy and quick posting on my part.
I am not good at satire.
Snark, yes, satire, nah.
Perhaps. Or perhaps it's because they accepted on good faith and got a joke pulled on them instead. Sometimes funny, sometimes just annoying.
So… this is not a slam on those people. It is just a way we can celebrate our diversity! (That last sentence was satire.)
Satire ... or sarcasm? Though satire is surely sarcasm full-throttle! {^)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.