The campaign for "santorum" neologism begins with a contest held in May 2003 by Dan Savage, sexist columnist and LGBT rights activist. Savage asks its readers to make definitions for the word "santorum" in response to the US-US. Senator Rick Santorum's view of homosexuality, and comments on same-sex marriage. In his commentary, Santorum has stated that "[i] n every society, the definition of marriage has never been my knowledge including homosexuality.That is not to choose homosexuality.This is not, you know, men in children, men in dogs, or anything the case. "Savage announced the winning entry, which defines" santorum "as" a mixture of foaming lubrication and dirt that is sometimes a by-product of anal sex ". He created the website, spreadingsantorum.com (and santorum.com ), to promote the definition, which became the top internet search results, displacing the senator's official website on many search engines, including Google, Yahoo! Search, and Bing.
In 2010 Savage said it would take over the site if Santorum donated US $ 5 million plus interest to Freedom to Marry, a group advocating the recognition of same-sex marriage law. In September 2011 Santorum asked Google to remove the definition of its search engine index. Google declines, responding that the company does not remove content from search results except under very limited circumstances.
Video Campaign for the neologism "santorum"
Santorum Santorum's comment on homosexuality
In an interview with the Associated Press on April 7, 2003 Santorum said there was a connection between the Catholic Church's sex abuse scandal and liberalism and relativism. He argues that moral relativism involves accepting any adult consensual behavior in the privacy of people's homes, even if that behavior may be considered perverted. Santorum believes this attitude leads to an unhealthy culture.
Santorum says that while he has no problems with homosexuality, he has a problem with homosexual acts, "as I do with other acts, what I consider to be, acting outside of traditional heterosexual relationships, and that includes different actions, not just homosexual. "He continues:
We have laws in the state, such as those in the current Supreme Court, which have sodomy laws and they are there for a purpose. Because, again, I argue, they undermine the basic principles of our society and the family. And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to have consensual sex in your home, then you have the right to do bigami, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to commit adultery. You are entitled to anything. Does it undermine the fabric of our society? I'll argue, right.
Santorum says he is opposed to a non-marital relationship between a man and a woman, the basis in his view of a stable society: "It is not to choose homosexuality, it is not, you know, boys in children, men in dogs, or whatever the case. "
The interview triggered angry reactions from gay rights activists and some politicians. A spokesman for the Democratic Senator's Campaign Committee described Santorum's view as "divisive and reckless." while conservative activists see them as "principled opposition to same-sex marriage".
Maps Campaign for the neologism "santorum"
Response by Dan Savage
On April 25, 2003 , in the New York Times program Savage responds to Santorum's comments, arguing that the statement is as clear as the Republican Application for homophobic voters. A Savage column reader, Savage Love , then suggested a contest to create a new definition for "santorum". Observing that he had previously attempted to coin a sexual "neopathology", Savage agreed, writing on May 15, "There is no better way to perpetuate the Santorum scandal than by attaching his name to a sex act that will make his big white teeth fall from his big, empty head. "
He told May 29 that he has received 3,000 suggestions, and posted some nominations for readers to choose from. On June 12 he announced the winner as "a mixture of foamy and dirt that is sometimes a by-product of anal sex".
Savage creates a website, spreadingsantorum.com , to spread awareness of the term; this site displays the above definition brown splattered spots on the white declared page. Savage also created another website, santorum.com , featuring the same content. The Philadelphia Inquirer reported in July 2006 that the site appeared at the top of the Google search for the name Santorum. Asked if he worries about the effects on Santorum's children, Savage replies that gay and lesbians also have children, who are asked to listen to gay relationships comparison with incest and bestiality. He also said, "The only one who comes to me while wringing their hands about the Santorum children is a fool who does not understand how serious the right to destroy us." Savage offered in May 2010 to remove the site if Santorum donated $ 5 million to Freedom to Marry, an advocacy group for same-sex marriage.
In February 2011, Savage said he would revive his campaign. In January 2012, the sexual term is still the top result for the name Santorum on some search engines, including Google, Bing, and Yahoo.
In a July 2011 video on Funny or Die , Savage proposes redefining Santorum's first name if Santorum does not stop criticizing homosexuality. Savage observes that "Santorum has not stripped gay bashing, because it's all he has," and supports the reader's suggestion to redefine "rick" as a verb, thus making 'Rick santorum.' into complete sentences.
Reception and political impact
The word santorum , as defined, has been characterized as "obscene", "not printable" or "vulgar".
The American Dialect Society voted "santorum" as the winner in the "Most Disgraceful" category in the 2004 "Word of the Year" event, as a result of several newspapers reportedly ignoring the category from their coverage of the announcement.
Google Current reported in 2006 that the word has inspired punk rock and blues songs; Philadelphia Weekly columnist Liz Spikol writes that it's starting to appear on stickers and T-shirts. Jon Stewart mentioned it on The Daily Show more than once; his reference in May 2011 caused the word to be one of the most frequently asked search terms on Google the next day. Stephen Colbert of The Colbert Report also refers to more than one occasion.
The Savage campaign has been widely discussed in the media, but the word itself does not gain wide acceptance, according to the New English Dictionary of Slang Language and Unconventional English in 2006. The 2007 update of this work, > The Concise New Partridge Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English , does not contain entries for "santorum".
Stephanie Mencimer wrote in Mother Jones in 2010 that "some observers even suggest [neologism] may have contributed to the" 2006 defeat of Santorum by Bob Casey. Savage has tried to donate $ 2,100 to Casey's campaign, but his donation is returned.
Noam Cohen from The New York Times describes the situation as online identity hijacking. He questioned whether the automated search algorithm should be entirely devoid of human wisdom.
The problem comes back during the 2012 presidential primaries where Santorum is a candidate. A comment on The Globe and Mail suggested difficulty in avoiding double entenders when writing about Santorum because of the Savage campaign. Santorum Santorum reaction
Santorum discusses this issue in an interview in February 2011 with Roll Call : "It's one person.You know who it is.The internet allows for this kind of vulgarity to circulate.It's unfortunate that we have someone who obviously has some but he has a chance to talk. "
After announcing he may run for the 2012 presidential nomination, he told The Daily Caller in April 2011 that he did not hire anyone to help move the Savage website lower in search results but hoped the possibility of nominating self as president will shift his own site upwards organically.
In an interview in June 2011, Santorum said, "There are dirty people out there who do terrible things, it's unfortunate that some people think it would be a big joke to make fun of my name, that comes with the territory."
In July 2011, Santorum said that news coverage on the subject would be very different if he was liberal rather than conservative: "The Mainstream media will hit the roof - and rightly so!"
Google-bombing
The New York Times reported in 2004 that people have tried using Google bombs to link the names of some American politicians, including George W. Bush, Hillary Clinton, and Rick Santorum, to so-called "prepay phrase ". Bloggers who link to Spread Santorum cause it to rise in Google rankings.
In 2010, Michael Fertik of ReputationDefender (now Reputation.com ), a company to help people influence their Web presence, described the search engine's problem as "destructive" and said it was "one of the more creative and prominent Google issues "he's ever seen. Mark Skidmore at Blue State Digital says Santorum will find it difficult to shift Savage's site, as Savage has more than 13,000 links to 5,000 for its own Santorum site. Chris Wilson in Slate describes the situation as "classic Google bomb". "
Santorum Santorum request for intervention by Google
When asked in June 2011 whether Google should intervene to prevent the definition appearing so obvious under the search name, Santorum says they should intervene only if they usually do so under these circumstances. In September 2011 Santorum asked Google to intervene by changing the indexing of the content, saying, "If you are a responsible business, you do not allow such things to happen in your business that impact the country... To have a business allow this type of shit which will be channeled through their website or through their system is something they say they can not handle but I think that is not true. "In response to Santorum's request, a Google spokesperson confirmed that Google did not" remove content from our search results, except in very limited cases such as illegal content and violations of our webmaster guidelines. "
According to Talking Points Memo (TPM), "Google does bullying" on google bombing in the past. In an interview with TPM, search engine expert Danny Sullivan stated that Santorum misinterpreted the campaign as a "Google bomb", when in fact it was the relevant use of the search query santorum to create a "new definition for the word". Sullivan argues that, in a Google bomb, jokes persuade Google's algorithm to deliver incorrect results for certain terms (for example, when joke-lovers uncover a search term "miserable failure" to refer to the biography page of the presidency of a site the White House web). In the case of Santorum, on the other hand, the term "santorum" still points to a web page about "santorum" - which happens to be Savage's neologism instead of the Senator from Pennsylvania. Sullivan concluded that, "for [Senator Santorum] to say Google can get rid of it would be like he said, 'I do not like the word' unicorn 'and I think that definition should be lost.'"
In February 2012, the link to the site briefly disappeared from the first page of Google search results for "Santorum" after Google changed the SafeSearch algorithm. Further changes restore the site to the first page of Google results, and its ranking in other search engines has not changed significantly. Site placement in search results may vary depending on who is searching. Google states that the change was not the result of a certain manual intervention to produce this result.
References
External links
- Spread Santorum
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments