Fracking ban

A fun one from the Romenesko blog today: [The Stamford Advocate in Connecticut has banned the word “fracking” in its comment section](http://jimromenesko.com/2012/10/17/hearst-site-bans-the-word-fracking-in-comments/), citing how it’s often used as a replacement for certain versatile curse word that starts with an F.

Upset is Sharon Wilson, a Texas advocate for people negatively affected by [hydraulic fracturing](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_fracturing), aka fracking. Wilson received [a comment on her blog](http://www.texassharon.com/2011/11/28/who-put-the-k-in-fracking-the-truth-the-whole-truth-and-nothing-but-the-fracking-truth/#comment-31077) from someone named “kim feil” which contained the text of an email from Hearst Connecticut Media Group representative Brett Mickelson.

Mickelson’s email apparently is in response to Kim, who noticed that the [Stamford Advocate](http://www.stamfordadvocate.com) banned “fracking” in its comments. He writes that “many of our users attempt to exploit a perfectly legitimate word as a replacement for it’s (sic) more vulgar cousin.”

Wilson goes through [a convoluted theater](http://www.texassharon.com/2012/10/17/breaking-new-fracking-ban-in-u-s/) of trying to figure out what offense the word “fracking” could possibly offer. [Clearly, she is not a fan of “Battlestar Galactica.”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frak_(expletive))

(For the record, the Chronicle’s comment boards allow you to frack as much as you want.)

By Michael Becker

Michael Becker is the Web Editor of the Bozeman Daily Chronicle. He has been a blogger and professional journalist since 2005, covering subjects ranging from nonprofits and crime to engineering and technology.