Just because the FCC has now declared certain words to be 
acceptable for network television, does not mean those same 
words are acceptable in the cyberworld. The "F adjective" is 
permissible on television, but is not permissible to most 
folks in the written realm. 

Until recently, I had felt that my role as a content distributor 
was to distribute the content my clients pay me to distribute. I 
did not feel that I should engage in the activity of censorship.

With that having been said, I have in the past rejected 
submissions and returned my client's money based on my own 
threshold of tolerance. One customer had his money returned 
because the company he represented was well-known for engaging 
in spa-mmy behavior. I refused to support his company because 
I could not stomach his business model or business tactics. 

Prior to last week, I never did see the need for a written 
policy concerning the content I distributed. After I distributed 
the article last week, I realized that not only did I cross the 
line with the article and with the publishers who receive 
material from my company, I realized that I need to actually 
implement a written policy concerning the verbage of articles 
used to promote my client's business.

A couple of people have chosen to use the word "damn" to 
amplify their business message. This word had been used on 
three occasions in articles I distributed. All three articles 
passed without a single comment. 

This week, a client slipped the word "God" in front of the word 
"damn." Suddenly, I began to receive condemnation from many 
sectors of the Internet publishing community for placing 
"expletives" into the public realm.  

Now, I must confess that I was a bit concerned about using the 
phrase "GD" with an article. It is not a phrase that I would 
have ever used in an article to promote my own business. 

Some have argued that since I permitted the phrase in my 
client's article, then I "DID" use the phrase for the promotion 
of my own business. They have also argued that this fact 
undermines my credibility, integrity and sincerity. Although 
I can see how it could be construed as such, my integrity and
sincerity remain untarnished. 

To be honest, I almost did censor this article before 
distribution. The reason I did not censor the article was 
because I did not have a written policy in place to address 
profanity in an article prior to the submission of this 
article. 

This is the God's honest truth.

Should I have rejected the article despite the fact that I did 
not have a written policy in place? Perhaps. But, it boils down 
to this... I did not reject the article. 

For those of you whom I have offended, please accept my 
sincerest apologies. 

We have now placed a written policy statement on our purchase 
page concerning our intent to censor content based on verbage 
and concerns of good taste. You may review our new distribution 
policy at:

 http://thephantomwriters.com/x.pl/tpw/distribution/purchase.html


Thank your for your time and understanding in this matter.