OK I’m going to say this once: There is a difference between cursing, and cursing in context.

They called me a what? Well obviously I understood the irony straight away

Last night the internet was up in arms over a tweet made by satirical online newspaper, The Onion, and an allegation that Family Guy creator and Oscars host Seth Macfarlane sexualized a nine-year-old.

Yesterday The Onion tweeted: “Everyone is afraid to say it but Quvenzhané Wallis (the nine-year-old Oscar nominated star of Beasts of The Southern Wild) is kind of a c***, right?,” and deleted it about an hour later after outrage spread like wildfire across the social network.

Not long before that, Seth Macfarlane had joked that the same actress was nine years shy of being George Clooney’s type.

Now, “The C Word” may not be your favourite word in the English language. In fact I despise it most times, but even if you dislike that word, you should be able to recognise that The Onion - a satirical newspaper - was being ironic.

For those who need it spelled out: the Tweet was meant to imply thinly veiled jealousy, because:

- She is a 9 year old nominated for an Oscar.
- She is an incredible actress.
- She has probably already earned more money in a year than you will in 10.

What The Onion did not do is call her “The C Word”. Perhaps it could have called her anything accept a four letter word beginning with the letter C and the point would still have been valid.

But regardless, The Onion shouldn’t have to apologise for being edgy. Nor should it have deleted its tweet, hoping no one had taken a screen shot and that it would all go away. The very fact it deleted the tweet makes it look weak and thoughtless when in fact it had a point to make. It may not have been particularly funny, but it was meant to be complimentary.

As for Macfarlane’s unfunny but harmless quip: THE JOKE WAS NOT AIMED AT WALLIS, IT WAS MEANT FOR CLOONEY. CLOONEY WAS THE BUTT OF HIS JOKE, NOT THE CHILD. The joke - to spell it out once again - implied that Clooney only dated younger women.

It was making him out to be a filthy old man. Not a filthy old man that likes nine-year-olds, a filthy old man that likes 18-year-olds. Still, ew, but really? Come on. Have you seen his latest string of girlfriends. Please.

But there are only a handful of people on Twitter who seem to understand the nuance of both of these comments. Everyone else has consigned themselves to confected outrage, claiming that Macfarlane sexualised Wallis. Macfarlane is many things: He can dish it but he cannot take it and is the creator of one of the least funny films of the holiday season. But a person who sexualises children – he is not.

There has to come a point where we are able to distinguish real problems from actual problems and this is not an actual problem.

“But Claire”, people on Twitter have said, “What would you tell your nine year old if she had just found out that people on Twitter were calling her the C word and people on TV were sexualising her?!”

Well to them I say that I would tell my daughter that the tweet was actually meant as a compliment. It was implying that she had to be a bad person because otherwise she was too perfect. The tweet was received in exactly the opposite was it was intended.

I would tell her that in the age of social media it’s important to be able to feel like she can shy away from every fight and that she doesn’t have to have an opinion on everything. I would teach her to pick her battles. All lessons the vast majority of Twitter users seem to have missed somehow.

As for whether Wallis is at risk of Macfarlane’s advances (or anyone else’s) I think we can all agree that she is as safe as she was seconds before the harmless quip. If anyone should be offended it’s Clooney but you don’t see him mouthing off about it on Twitter. Or anyone else for that matter.

I’m not saying child protection isn’t an important issue. It is. But that’s why we need to make sure children are protected from real and present threats, instead of focusing on fake ones we believe we can fix, because we “saw the signs”.

Rubbish issues like this distract from the real ones. And it’s the stuff you’re not comfortable focusing on that you should be worried about.

Quvenzhané Wallis is going to be just fine. You know why? Look at your life, now look at hers, now back at yours.

SHE’S WINNING.

@ClaireRPorter

Comments on this post close at 8pm AEDST

Most commented

106 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Gregg says:

      05:34am | 26/02/13

      The Oscars and Twitter together so what more can you expect Clare.
      Like, there’s more important stuff that people could address.

    • Claire says:

      07:54am | 26/02/13

      Exactly!!! That’s my entire point!

    • subotic says:

      08:52am | 26/02/13

      This year the Oscar goes to……………………Jail !!

      Too soon? Too soon?

    • Paul says:

      08:57am | 26/02/13

      Twitter hardly lends itself to context… Unless someone is retweeting those tweets that give context.  Even then there is no guarantee that each tweet is read.  And even is the tweet is read people often choose not to take notice as they prefer to get offended.

      Taking a single line out of context is almost a sport these days.  Social media has made it common place but the media were the originators of this practice.  I guess you reap what you sow.

    • Venise Alstergren says:

      10:11am | 26/02/13

      Perhaps Twitter does own the universe? The restriction of 140 characters to a tweet must mean that almost nothing is taken in context.

      I tried irony once-I’ve forgotten where-but after receiving about fourteen hostile replies-I gave up. Ben Pobjie does it so much better.

    • Bonestar says:

      10:25am | 26/02/13

      Good one subotic, it’s gaol though.

    • subotic has a Get Out of NSW Free card says:

      12:11pm | 26/02/13

      @Bonestar, only if you’re a Mexican….

    • JoniM says:

      12:56pm | 26/02/13

      Yep !
      “But there are only a handful of people on Twitter who seem to understand the nuance of both of these comments. “

      Seriously Clare !
      There are only a handful of people on Twitter who can even spell nuance let alone know what it means !

    • nihonin says:

      05:43am | 26/02/13

      Ah the professionally offended, the after birth of everybody else’s conscience.

    • TChong says:

      07:14am | 26/02/13

      nihonin
      I was just about to tuck into a home made brekky ( thanks to dear Mrs.C ) of egg and tomatoe , on toast.
      After your desciptive post, however…....

    • Chris L says:

      07:56am | 26/02/13

      I like it. Is that a McFarlane phrase or did you coin that one Nihonin?

    • nihonin says:

      07:56am | 26/02/13

      Always a pleasure TChong wink

      Enjoy your brekky when you get the chance.

    • nihonin says:

      08:36am | 26/02/13

      It’s just a bastardized version of a Mel Brooks quote in History of the World Part 1, Chris L.  “Critics, the after birth of artists” (or talent, not too sure).

    • subotic says:

      08:56am | 26/02/13

      I was offended by all the “Show Tunes”.

      Any guy who gets into Show Tunes without fake eyelashes & being draped in Boa-Feather headwear makes me nervous.

      And don’t even start with McFarlane’s “fascination” with talking quadrupeds…

    • Jim Moriarty says:

      12:03pm | 26/02/13

      @subotic

      You must be terrified of Bugs Bunny cartoons!

    • Austin 3:16 says:

      01:39pm | 26/02/13

      + 1 nihonin

    • Mahhrat says:

      05:50am | 26/02/13

      Two things:

      First, there is great money to be made in being offended.  Ask anyone who has taken an otherwise important social or economic issue, built an over-simplified and very emotional platform using half-truth and whole lies, then used that position to make themselves money.  There are whole legions of people - either followers of those power-seekers or wannabe powerful people themselves - literally trawling the ‘net looking for things to be offended about.

      Second is this idea that you have the right to a life free from being offended.  I’ve never understood this.  Several politicians offend me.  A lot of comedians do.  There are places I think we should not go as a society.  Those are all fine, but they’re just my opinion!  It’s not more valid because I hold it, only more important to me.

      We do seriously need to get over ourselves.

    • lostinperth says:

      09:30am | 26/02/13

      “We do seriously need to get over ourselves”

      +1
      Why is it that people witha twitter account, blog or facebook page thinks that their views are relevant and important to anyone apart from themselves and their close friends.

      The faux outrage of the PC brigade is both tiresome and offtimes hypercritical

    • Slothy says:

      11:01am | 26/02/13

      “Second is this idea that you have the right to a life free from being offended.  I’ve never understood this.”

      And I’ve never understood comedians who make their name on ‘offensive’ humour getting out of shape when people are offended by it.

    • Squirrel says:

      06:15am | 26/02/13

      You would tell your 9 year old daughter that calling her the c word and sexualising her is a ‘compliment’? I think most people understand the undertones of those comments but directing them to/about a 9 year old child were just stupid…

    • Rob says:

      05:13pm | 26/02/13

      You have totally missed the point, haven’t you

    • Bris Jack says:

      06:20am | 26/02/13

      We have been there and done that with not so funny Catherine Deveny, a mother of 3 sons and her disgusting tweets about Bindi Irwin.

    • Nathan says:

      06:41am | 26/02/13

      I have a real issue with this article, Ted was in fact Hilarious…that is all

    • Pedro says:

      08:27am | 26/02/13

      I enjoyed Ted - a lot. Does that me a bad person?
      What is twitter? And why are there so many articles in newspapers about twitter? But then why are so stories on tv news about youtube clips? Are people in the media just lazy?

    • Jack says:

      04:10pm | 26/02/13

      Does enjoying $65m two hour movie where Marky Mark hangs out with a swearing teddy bear make you a bad person?

      Yes.

      Yes it does.

    • Sickemrex says:

      05:55pm | 26/02/13

      Colour me bad too, Pedro.

    • Damien says:

      06:41am | 26/02/13

      +1.

      WONT SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!?!?

    • Scotchfinger says:

      03:54pm | 26/02/13

      I gather that’s what people are worried about?

    • ChrisE says:

      07:06am | 26/02/13

      It’s a publicity stunt to get more readers to the Onion, nothing more, nothing less.

    • Loddlaen says:

      07:10am | 26/02/13

      Inferring a 9 year is a cunt. Totally edgey and satirical…

    • TEZZA says:

      08:09am | 26/02/13

      Look up the difference between “inferring” and “implying”.

    • Tim says:

      07:47am | 26/02/13

      I’ve always hated ironing.

    • Jack says:

      04:11pm | 26/02/13

      But it’s delicious :(

    • Jim Moriarty says:

      07:50am | 26/02/13

      I’m amazed that there are still people out there that think that the Onion is a real news organisation.

    • Chris L says:

      08:05am | 26/02/13

      The funniest was when Fox ran with one of their pieces, although not so surprising to learn they couldn’t tell satire from reality.

    • Jim Moriarty says:

      08:35am | 26/02/13

      @Chris L

      We were told to stop swearing so much at work, so we started saying “Fox News” instead of eff you. We thought that was much more offensive.

    • James1 says:

      09:02am | 26/02/13

      If you haven’t already, check out the Literally Unbelievable Tumblr.  Be prepared for a little of your faith in mankind to be destroyed.

    • Chris L says:

      09:11am | 26/02/13

      Love it! I’m going to have to try that out! Fox News!

      PS. Regarding the Onion, I recently stumbled upon their nature documentaries titled “Horrifying Planet” and I thoroughly recommend them!

    • Markus says:

      09:14am | 26/02/13

      When real news organisations have stories that are actually more ridiculous than those the Onion publish as satire (I’ve seen both Fox and CNN guilty of this), it becomes increasingly difficult to keep track of the line between satire and sad reality.

    • Markus says:

      10:28am | 26/02/13

      To be fair, when real news networks regularly run stories even more ridiculous than the satirical pieces the Onion publish (I’ve seen both Fox and CNN guilty of this), it becomes increasingly difficult to draw the line between satire and sad reality.

    • crizza says:

      07:53am | 26/02/13

      What is cursing? Do you mean swearing?

    • subotic says:

      09:37am | 26/02/13

      Fuckin’ A they do.

    • PJ says:

      07:54am | 26/02/13

      I bet he was a Gillard Government Supporter in a bad mood about the poll news today

    • Pedro says:

      08:31am | 26/02/13

      Nice segue - not.
      Can you just stay on topic once? Just once?
      I know being a LNP choirboy means you have a tiny attention span but you can do it if you really really try.
      Otherwise you run the risk of being boring.

    • Claire says:

      07:55am | 26/02/13

      This bandwagon is definitely exceeding capacity.

    • sven says:

      07:58am | 26/02/13

      forget the offended masses, isn’t the real question to ask: would a 9 year old girl and her parents been offended by these tweets? of course they would. Right when they should have no reason to be unhappy.

    • Austin 3:16 says:

      02:00pm | 26/02/13

      Why would a 9 year old girl be reading these tweets?

    • Shep says:

      08:03am | 26/02/13

      What’s repulsive is that we’re not allowed to be offended by a child being publically referred to as a “c*#t”.  Of course its offensive, it was supposed to be, it was designed to shock and give social media experts the opportunity to tell everyone else to grow up and get over themselves.

      We are rapidly plummetting to the lowest possible level of social interaction as being both acceptable and in fact encouraged because its edgy. 

      Any sharper and you’d cut yourself lovey!

    • Roxanne says:

      08:29am | 26/02/13

      I agree with you there Shep. I am not offended, I just think it is trash. If I am with people who speak like that, particularily around or to a child, I would leave them and not further associate. Yeah, I know, you have the right to blah blah blah.  Following that logic, it is OK to sit on a train yelling Fucking Cunt at each and every passenger because, you know, it is my right to do that. And to me that is really edgy stuff, swearing and all. Hey, I can go up to the retirement home and call them all stupid senile old cunts cos, ya know, that’s a real laugh too. Grow up.

    • Chris L says:

      09:26am | 26/02/13

      It’s the rarity of usage that gives it the edge. The Onion rarely resorts to swearing for their laughs, so when they do so it does cut deeper. It’s very clever stuff and many of their pieces involve poignant social commentary.

      I recommend checking out a few of their clips before condemning them.

    • Rose says:

      10:24am | 26/02/13

      Language such as this is used whenever a person is incapable of intelligent or humorous input!

    • Slothy says:

      10:56am | 26/02/13

      “My comedy is meant to be offensive! Edgy satire lol!”
      ...
      “OMG, how dare you be offended!”

    • SydneyGirl says:

      11:20am | 26/02/13

      “We are rapidly plummetting to the lowest possible level of social interaction as being both acceptable and in fact encouraged because its edgy.”

      Spot on. When did the lowest possible form of jokes become something to be defended? Same goes for the awful Seth MacFarlane song which is probably best left to be sung amongst drunk friends instead of getting a public outing.

    • fml says:

      08:04am | 26/02/13

      In the end everybody makes money and everybody wins. Well played, Hollywood, well played.

    • Mr Sam says:

      08:30am | 26/02/13

      Thats right on the money!

    • Ohcomeon says:

      08:16am | 26/02/13

      Bless the Onion. Making me laugh for quite the few years now.

    • Anna Spargo-Ryan says:

      08:23am | 26/02/13

      If there’s one thing we’ve learned from successful people in Hollywood, it’s that their masses of wealth ALWAYS perfectly counterbalance the pressure of constant scrutiny, right?

    • Brutus Balan says:

      08:37am | 26/02/13

      I saw a bit of this and yes this man was sexually crude and tasteless. But his song, “We saw your boobs.” had the actresses mentioned cringing, ducking for cover shielding with their hands and were visibly outraged…but what hypocrisy and phoniness of modesty. So, it is alright to show their boobs in sexual play as a play thing for male actors in sex scenes to billions on the screen but are outraged at the mention of it in song? Yes they all saw your boobs on screen and will see them over and over in DVDs over the years till you die and beyond, ladies, no, it should be ‘women’! It looks like no actress will reach the top without a boob out.

    • Gonzo the Great says:

      09:21am | 26/02/13

      Brutus, as has been said many times already in response to this sort of comment: the actresses’ “reactions” were pre-recorded and they were in on the joke.

      Do you really think that even if they were highly offended they’d let it show so obviously on their faces?

    • Kylie says:

      10:04am | 26/02/13

      Those reactions were all pre-recorded and part of the bit, they were in on the joke.

    • Rose says:

      10:29am | 26/02/13

      Female actresses show their breasts for various reasons in a film, depending on the context and story line. It’s not always as a ‘sexual plaything’. What these women didn’t consent to was a moron reducing their work to a song that was designed to publicly humiliate them.
      On so many levels Seth McFarlane was a complete failure of a host!

    • egg says:

      10:51am | 26/02/13

      @Brutus, you didn’t notice the whole thing was pre-recorded and staged? The actresses were… get this… ACTING. They were in on it.

    • Rose says:

      12:00pm | 26/02/13

      If these actresses were in on the joke they’re idiots in my opinion. Why would you allow yourself to be ridiculed in that way? Cheap shot!

    • egg says:

      12:45pm | 26/02/13

      @Rose, oh no, I heard the actresses stating that if Rose on The Punch didn’t approve, they’d be devastated! This will surely rock Hollywood!

    • Ando says:

      01:21pm | 26/02/13

      Rose,
      If your not sure if they were in on the joke I wouldn’t be calling others idiots.

    • SydneyGirl says:

      01:25pm | 26/02/13

      “So, it is alright to show their boobs in sexual play as a play thing for male actors in sex scenes to billions on the screen but are outraged at the mention of it in song?”

      OK we got some insight into your viewing habits.

      I think some of the references related to the actresses in rape scenes.

      In any case they are playing characters on film.  It doesn’t mean that it’s OK for their boobs to be referred to anywhere and everywhere. It’s akin to saying if you play negative roles on film, the public has every right to constantly perceive you and refer to you as a bad man.

    • Rose says:

      01:58pm | 26/02/13

      egg, I really don’t care what they think of my opinion, just like I don’t care about your opinion. We are all entitled to think what we choose.
      I do think that an actress who played a part in a serious movie which depicted serious issues, should be offended if her work is reduced to a stupid ‘boob’ song. If not, her choice, but I do think she’s mad if she doesn’t consider her work should be better respected than a tasteless joke.
      There’s also a better than even chance that some of these women will come out and speak on women’s issues, a little hypocritical if at the same time they’re endorsing a ‘boob song’ as valid mainstream entertainment.

    • Ando says:

      03:27pm | 26/02/13

      Rose and Sydney Girl,
      Your taking boobs way to seriously

    • Alfie says:

      08:40am | 26/02/13

      Seth Macfarlane - Cupid Stunt fail.

    • centurion48 says:

      08:55am | 26/02/13

      Bloody Americans. Not content with mangling everyday English language, they can’t even swear properly. The tweet makes no sense. If you are going to swear, at least learn how to do it.

    • Jaqui says:

      08:58am | 26/02/13

      Oh common, what are you people doing? Why are you watching some overpaid, egotistical, moronic actors doing what they do best, congratulating themselves.
      Who cares!
      The only thing these people do that is concerning is the fascist, terrorist organisation they support, the screen actors guild.

    • SAm says:

      09:08am | 26/02/13

      look im all for a little light hearted laugh, but joke or no, if someone said that about my 9yo daughter there would be hell to pay.
      Im not saying they shouldnt be allowed to say it, but reap what you sow. In this case, yes, I do think people have a right to be angry

    • Gordon says:

      09:10am | 26/02/13

      The Onion has earned the right to the occasional miss-step. But miss-step it was. The joke would have been every bit as funny with a different choice of word. I think the photo caption sums it up nicely. As for the rest of it: Poe’s law.

    • lotekka says:

      09:32am | 26/02/13

      Doesn’t matter.
      Freedom of speech applies to everyone, even pseudo newspapers like the onion and ltd news.

      Just ask marley ... you can say whatever you like whenever you want to.

    • DocBud says:

      10:14am | 26/02/13

      “Quvenzhané Wallis is going to be just fine. You know why? Look at your life, now look at hers, now back at yours.”

      An unbelievably pathetic comment, I hope Quvenzhané has a great career and a long and happy life, but I have no desire to change places with her. My life is just fine and dandy, thank you.

      What is it about your life, Claire, that pales by comparison or did you use “your life” instead of “our lives” to deliberately exclude yourself?

    • Sarah says:

      10:27am | 26/02/13

      Rookie error - mistaking your twitter feed for representative of the thoughts of the general population.

    • CJ says:

      10:35am | 26/02/13

      I actually thought they were pointing out that it’s spelled “Quvenzhané” but pronounced “c—-”.

    • egg says:

      10:41am | 26/02/13

      It was a joke. It made me laugh. Out loud. I can’t believe people are so precious…

    • Bill Crystal says:

      10:57am | 26/02/13

      Nothing can take the sting out of the world’s economic problems like watching millionaires give each other golden statues.
      - Billy Crystal

    • d says:

      11:25am | 26/02/13

      Claire Porter wrote on The Punch last year:

      “...Yes, I am talking about “the C word”. This horrible, derogatory word seems to have slipped into the common Aussie vernacular without very much protest…

      ...renaming the vagina with something you feel more comfortable saying destroys the agency of women, and reaffirms that female sexuality is something that should be feared.

      By everyone.  It’s sexism at its most subtle and also at its most dangerous.”

    • Tension says:

      02:53pm | 26/02/13

      @d

      Classic.  Last year it’s horrible and derogatory, apparently if the Onion say it, it’s okay this year.

    • Rob says:

      05:16pm | 26/02/13

      Not a lot going on up there is there Claire? Read the article.. I mean, really read it. You’ve missed some pretty key things.

    • Confected and outraged plus whatever says:

      11:26am | 26/02/13

      Quvenzhané Wallis is going to be just fine? Really? With a name like that I would say she is going to battle all her life, especially in a team sport. “Hey Quvenz”, or “Zhane” could be her sports name?
      I for one do not think it is confected rage when someone calls a nine year old girl a “C”. If anyone called my son a “C” I would be outraged, regardless if it was implied, inferred or otherwise. Maybe they could have written she was a Nig!!! and you still wouldn’t be offended but for me it could have been done smarter. They could have said she was a smart arse and that wouldn’t have been offensive (in my eyes anyway).

    • St. Michael says:

      12:45pm | 26/02/13

      Nigger, not nig.  Another word it’s not terribly polite to say, although at least coming up with derogatory slang for someone’s melanin content is probably more offensive than a rock ape’s abbreviation for female anatomy.

    • Austin 3:16 says:

      02:03pm | 26/02/13

      Rightio we’ll just have to adjust the internet until nothing is offensive in your eyes.

      Don’t know what we’ll do about those who think “smart arse” is offensive though. Any suggestions ?

    • Barge says:

      11:29am | 26/02/13

      “called her anything accept a four letter word” - the offensive thing to me is that somebody writing in this forum can’t spell. Maybe she meant “except”.

    • Bruno says:

      12:07pm | 26/02/13

      Did I read that wrong?

      Is she really defending using the c word to describe in any context or out of context whatever whatsoever a 9 year old. If so then what a f***** maggot infested c***.

    • Nick says:

      12:34pm | 26/02/13

      When your panties are in a twist you need to remove them, untangle them, and then put them on properly (hint: the label should be at the back).

    • FittyErf says:

      12:43pm | 26/02/13

      Well Claire if you dislike the word c*nt, then you must be one.

      Can’t fault the logic of Dr Dre.

    • Irony appreciating mother of a 9 year old. says:

      12:52pm | 26/02/13

      Clearly Claire Porter, you are not a mother. Further, I’m not sure why you’re wasting your usually excellent editorial on defending the indefensible. If anyone is a c**t, it’s the Onion for making such a crass comment (masquerading as irony) in the first place.  A nine year old girl is only ever going to hear the word c**t and take it to heart and all the rational, adult explanations in the world won’t take out that sting. Poor kid. Let her have her gorgeous moment without all of this associated so-called adult (!!?) humour.

    • Kristin Ferguson says:

      04:00pm | 26/02/13

      I concur with this. I can’t believe we’re even having this conversation, about something said that was so crass and indefensible about a young girl.Whatever happened to letting kids be kids? Is there so much jealousy out there that they have to destroy a nine-year old?

    • Sav says:

      12:53pm | 26/02/13

      That’s not offensive. If he had said she *has* a lovely c*nt, then you know you’ve gone way over the line on about 6 different areas.

    • Barry says:

      12:55pm | 26/02/13

      All they needed to do was say bitch instead and the joke was fine and words much better, except I’m sure Claire objects to that word as well.

    • Rubber Monkey says:

      01:10pm | 26/02/13

      Why do people insist on being offended on other people’s behalf?  If the 9yo or her parents are offended by this they can fight their own battles.  Everybody else’s opinion on the offensiveness of the quip is irrelevant.  It doesn’t offend me what somebody says about a 9yo girl, I’m completely unaffected by it.  It has nothing to do with me.  I wish more people (especially on the webz) would understand this and learn to mind their own business.

    • SydneyGirl says:

      01:31pm | 26/02/13

      By that logic you shouldn’t be here on this article minding the business of offended people.

    • Austin 3:16 says:

      03:31pm | 26/02/13

      Hey SydneyGirl,

      Well what if Rubber Monkey is offended and thus fighting their own battles as they’ve advised others to do. That would make their comments perfectly logically consistent.

    • Kika says:

      01:13pm | 26/02/13

      Seth obviously wanted a bit of controversy and tried to say something RickyGervaiseseque and just missed the target. Nothing to see here folks, move along, move along.

    • Luigi says:

      01:20pm | 26/02/13

      There must be 2 Luigi’s on this blog.  This one never said Bindi needs to get laid, or someone has stolen the moniker.

    • Rose Bush says:

      01:27pm | 26/02/13

      Does anyone else believe that Twitter and Facebook are making us all dumber?
      Or have the dumb people taken it over?
      Are there just more dumb people in the world?
      I mean it is a fair question I believe because as soon as person does not understand something - instead of relying on their comprehension/sarcasm/irony ability they just pull the race/ethic/gender card.
      Not only that but a lot of others seem to be continually offended for everyone else as well.

    • Jane says:

      01:57pm | 26/02/13

      Rose it’s a case of both.Dumb people think social media is as important as their opinions.Plus the world on average is getting stupider by the day. Do what I do and just ignore it’s very existence. Creativity and thoughtful contemplation is going the way of the dinosaurs.The great thing is that whilst all these people are spending time discussing dumb things such as a random tweet from an unfunny website gives people like me the opportunity to create really exciting things in cyberspace that are new and innovative. Don’t lose heart Social media is for the lowest common denominater.There are people out there that are rising above the dross.

    • DocBud says:

      01:43pm | 26/02/13

      The CEO of Onion disagrees with you, Claire, apparently the comment wasn’t ironic and any irony that you forced yourself to see in it to make whatever point you are trying to make must have been of your own creation:

      http://www.fastcompany.com/3006250/fast-feed/onion-publishes-apology-quvenzhane-wallis-offensive-oscars-tweet

      “It was crude and offensive—not to mention inconsistent with The Onion’s commitment to parody and satire, however biting,” Hannah wrote. “No person should be subjected to such a senseless, humorless comment masquerading as satire.”

      Hannah says The Onion will implement tighter Twitter procedures and “discipline those individuals responsible.”

    • Chazza says:

      02:09pm | 26/02/13

      I believe any child on TV in a Film will be viewed by a Paedophile .
      I would think why allow a two year old to be filmed sitting on a toilet,
      or their bare bottom exposed.
      Any Child viewed by the Public will be seen as a sexual attraction by a deviate.
      Remember the Host of the ABC Antique Show, he was sent to Jail for
      having in His Computer ,Child Pornography.
      My point being , all Children on Ads, TV, in a Movie will be seen as a Sexual
      attraction, the tweet through misinterpretation is closer to Home, then we think.

    • The Big Mase says:

      02:53pm | 26/02/13

      Well done.  Online humour is nuanced; often self-deprecating and more sophisticated than sitcom style humour.

      I’m glad that someone with enough sway to write an article here realises that.

    • ramases says:

      03:06pm | 26/02/13

      The word twitter says it all with twit being the operative word. You only have to look at the inane comments that are posted to realise that even 30 second sound bites on TV have a lot more to offer.
      Facebook, Twitter, what’s the world coming too when people put their whole desperate and mundane lives out there to all see, without even a thought for the consequences of some of their antics.
        Its a sad indictment of this time when the world is glued to their mobiles or computers and must be able to be contacted at a moments notice or miss the latest gossip.

    • Jack says:

      04:54pm | 26/02/13

      Why does every article involving twitter feature at least one comedic genius baby boomer making HILARIOUS puns involving the word ‘twit’ - which no one has used since 1972.

      LOL, TWITTER MORE LIKE TWIT AMIRITEGUYZ?!@

      Stick to forwarding emails about funny cats.

    • Liam says:

      04:19pm | 26/02/13

      FYI, he actually said “In 16 years…”

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter