logo
Americans rudest on the internet

Americans rudest on the internet

Express Tribune6 days ago

Almost two billion words — just under 600 of them swear words — were carefully assessed, and the United States then handed the dubious honour of being the most cursing country in the English-speaking world, at least online.
For the Australian duo behind the research, it came as a surprise that the inhabitants of their own country did not lead the way, such is the stereotype that Aussies are easy-going and relaxed, in actions and words.
But Australians were only the third-most likely citizens to drop a swear word in conversation online.
The reason that America — viewed by some to be a more conservative and polite culture among English-speakers — is the most profane community online may be the anonymity of the screen, according to the study's co-author Martin Schweinberger, a linguist at the University of Queensland, Australia.
"Especially when you're not tied to what you write with your name, for example," said Schweinberger. "There are also cultural differences on what is allowed in social situations."
"Different cultures have different norms on when and what is permitted. It seems as if the Americans, basically, are more forgiving online," he said.
Billions of words
Schweinberger and collaborating linguist Kate Burridge evaluated 1.7 billion words used in online news stories, company websites, institutional publications, blogs and other web sources, across 20 English-speaking regions.
From these sources, they created a list of around 600 obscenities, including modified words and abbreviations, like "WTF", and dozens of variations of the "F" and "C" words and other vulgarities.
They then analysed how frequently those vulgarities appeared in the documents they had found online.
In their results, Americans topped the list with a curse word appearing 0.036 per cent of the time. That is equivalent to 36 curse words in a 100,000-word text.
The British were next, with 25 curses per 100,000 words. Then the Aussies with 22, Singaporeans with 21 and New Zealanders with 20.
Bangladeshis are the politest among English-speakers — just seven vulgarities per 100,000 words.
Polite in the real world
While a broad range of internet sources were used for the study, social media was excluded from the dataset.
That was done deliberately, said Schweinberger, because social platforms require more "weeding" of material that is not suitable for analysis.
However, he said they have analysed the use of vulgarities on social media — compared to face-to-face interactions — in a separate study.
The results, which have yet to be published, are quite different: On social media, New Zealanders top the list, ahead of the Irish and Australians, said Schweinberger.
And in face-to-face interactions, the American stereotype for conservatism is evident. "Face-to-face, the Americans are way down the list," Schweinberger said. "But social media basically had the same pattern that we find in general online data."
Swearing culture
For linguists, a data-rich analysis of the use of language online provides insight into how humans behave and interact.
Andrea Calude, a linguist at the University of Waikato, New Zealand, who was not involved in the study, said it was important to have a scientific approach to how words are used.
"Sometimes you think you know things which you don't, so you have to look at [the] data," said Calude. "We think of English as one thing — one language — but look at how different English [is used] around the world," Calude said.
In particular, the context in which speakers use vulgarity is a useful way to help non-native speakers integrate into a new environment.
"Even in this connected world, we each have our own idiosyncratic way of speaking locally," said Calude. "If you break those patterns, you identify yourself as not one of the locals. It speaks to this idea that there are local communities, even when you have a globalised world."
Schweinberger, who hails from Germany, knows it from personal experience. He once used vulgarity in the company of American colleagues and said he "could see their faces shift completely, as if I'd said something really horrible. I just wasn't aware of these cultural constraints."
Analysing vulgarity, he said, was not only a valuable tool for linguists but for people in all walks of life.
"When we think of these bad words or bad language, it's not that you need to avoid it, it's to learn when to use it appropriately," Schweinberger said, "and then it can be really effective for improving your communication style and skills."

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Americans rudest on the internet
Americans rudest on the internet

Express Tribune

time6 days ago

  • Express Tribune

Americans rudest on the internet

Almost two billion words — just under 600 of them swear words — were carefully assessed, and the United States then handed the dubious honour of being the most cursing country in the English-speaking world, at least online. For the Australian duo behind the research, it came as a surprise that the inhabitants of their own country did not lead the way, such is the stereotype that Aussies are easy-going and relaxed, in actions and words. But Australians were only the third-most likely citizens to drop a swear word in conversation online. The reason that America — viewed by some to be a more conservative and polite culture among English-speakers — is the most profane community online may be the anonymity of the screen, according to the study's co-author Martin Schweinberger, a linguist at the University of Queensland, Australia. "Especially when you're not tied to what you write with your name, for example," said Schweinberger. "There are also cultural differences on what is allowed in social situations." "Different cultures have different norms on when and what is permitted. It seems as if the Americans, basically, are more forgiving online," he said. Billions of words Schweinberger and collaborating linguist Kate Burridge evaluated 1.7 billion words used in online news stories, company websites, institutional publications, blogs and other web sources, across 20 English-speaking regions. From these sources, they created a list of around 600 obscenities, including modified words and abbreviations, like "WTF", and dozens of variations of the "F" and "C" words and other vulgarities. They then analysed how frequently those vulgarities appeared in the documents they had found online. In their results, Americans topped the list with a curse word appearing 0.036 per cent of the time. That is equivalent to 36 curse words in a 100,000-word text. The British were next, with 25 curses per 100,000 words. Then the Aussies with 22, Singaporeans with 21 and New Zealanders with 20. Bangladeshis are the politest among English-speakers — just seven vulgarities per 100,000 words. Polite in the real world While a broad range of internet sources were used for the study, social media was excluded from the dataset. That was done deliberately, said Schweinberger, because social platforms require more "weeding" of material that is not suitable for analysis. However, he said they have analysed the use of vulgarities on social media — compared to face-to-face interactions — in a separate study. The results, which have yet to be published, are quite different: On social media, New Zealanders top the list, ahead of the Irish and Australians, said Schweinberger. And in face-to-face interactions, the American stereotype for conservatism is evident. "Face-to-face, the Americans are way down the list," Schweinberger said. "But social media basically had the same pattern that we find in general online data." Swearing culture For linguists, a data-rich analysis of the use of language online provides insight into how humans behave and interact. Andrea Calude, a linguist at the University of Waikato, New Zealand, who was not involved in the study, said it was important to have a scientific approach to how words are used. "Sometimes you think you know things which you don't, so you have to look at [the] data," said Calude. "We think of English as one thing — one language — but look at how different English [is used] around the world," Calude said. In particular, the context in which speakers use vulgarity is a useful way to help non-native speakers integrate into a new environment. "Even in this connected world, we each have our own idiosyncratic way of speaking locally," said Calude. "If you break those patterns, you identify yourself as not one of the locals. It speaks to this idea that there are local communities, even when you have a globalised world." Schweinberger, who hails from Germany, knows it from personal experience. He once used vulgarity in the company of American colleagues and said he "could see their faces shift completely, as if I'd said something really horrible. I just wasn't aware of these cultural constraints." Analysing vulgarity, he said, was not only a valuable tool for linguists but for people in all walks of life. "When we think of these bad words or bad language, it's not that you need to avoid it, it's to learn when to use it appropriately," Schweinberger said, "and then it can be really effective for improving your communication style and skills."

Born unwelcome
Born unwelcome

Express Tribune

time17-06-2025

  • Express Tribune

Born unwelcome

The writer is a Lecturer in English at the Higher Education Department, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Email him at namdar057@ Many claim daughters are a blessing. They gush about how much they love their sisters. They insist women deserve respect. But the truth hits the moment — day zero — a girl is born. No fireworks, no mithai, no praise, no photos, no phone calls — just silence, sometimes laced with regret and disappointment. And in rural districts like Torghar (K-P) or Kech (Balochistan), she might not even be registered. It's like she didn't arrive at all. The air turns heavy when it's 'just a girl'. The in-laws' mood curdles. The same people who cheered your wedding now weigh your worth. The mother-in-law rattles off how many grandsons her other daughters-in-law have brought into the family. Expect taunts, quiet snubs or worse if you fail to deliver sons. Boys get new clothes, toys and gold; girls often get hand-me-downs or knockoffs. Aqeeqahs and other traditional feasts for baby girls are often modest or skipped altogether while boys get lavish celebrations. Boys are called Shahzaib or Zarrar — names echoing honour, legacy and strength — while girls' names are chosen perfunctorily, almost like ticking off a task. The chromosome that determines a baby's sex comes from the father, not the mother — right? But she bears the consequences of his ignorance, ego and entitlement. Some men remarry after two or three daughters, convinced a new wife will deliver the prize; some erupt in rage; some walk away; others push their wives time and again until a son arrives. One man I know kept trying until the ninth child. When he finally had a son — born with a disability — the unease behind the congratulations was hard to miss. Disturbingly, some still opt for illegal sex-selective abortions. Thanks to pressure, most gynecologists now refuse to reveal gender — a tiny and hard-fought victory. But even if a girl survives the womb, what awaits her next? She tastes it in nutrition. She feels it in healthcare. If there's only enough for one child's food or treatment, the boy gets it; girls get leftovers and their coughs can wait. It's worse in poor households where every rupee must be defended. Even the same parents who lovingly feed and treat their sons think twice about wasting (as they see it) a doctor's visit on a feverish daughter. Before school even begins, her training starts: not in books, but in chores. She helps her mother sweep, cook and care for siblings. She's taught silence and endurance while the boy beside her is told to lead, speak and aim higher (much like training one to crawl while urging the other to fly). No one sees how it chips away at her mind and confidence. In some tribal areas, her fate is sealed before she can even open her eyes. Newborn girls are informally engaged to cousins or tribal allies, tiny futures locked in without consent. It's not fate; it's a choice we keep making as a society. Let's stop pretending these injustices are confined to rural pockets. Urban hypocrisy just wears better clothes. Let's not pretend only the uneducated enable this or that the gender gap in child survival is natural, cultural or economic. We engineer it by preference and prejudice. Change doesn't need another national campaign or billboard with smiling girls. It needs shame! Shame in the hearts of families who treat their sons like heirs and their daughters like consolation prizes. Shame in the voices of husbands who blame women for the biology they themselves pass on. Shame in a society that keeps girls alive, but never lets them thrive. Until we begin to see the birth of a daughter as a cause for celebration -— not restraint, not regret — we'll remain a nation guilty of waging a quiet war on half our future.

Karine Jean-Pierre, former Biden press secretary, leaves Democratic party
Karine Jean-Pierre, former Biden press secretary, leaves Democratic party

Express Tribune

time05-06-2025

  • Express Tribune

Karine Jean-Pierre, former Biden press secretary, leaves Democratic party

Karine Jean-Pierre, former White House press secretary under President Joe Biden, announced on Wednesday June 4 that she has written a book detailing her time in the White House. The memoir, titled Independent: A Look Inside a Broken White House, Outside the Party Lines, is set for release on October 21, 2025. The book promises to offer an inside look at the turbulent final weeks of Biden's presidency, focusing on what Jean-Pierre describes as a 'broken White House.' It will explore the events leading up to Biden's decision to abandon his bid for a second term and the Democratic Party's role in what she considers his 'betrayal.' According to the publisher, Legacy Lit, Jean-Pierre will delve into her personal journey of leaving the Democratic Party to become an independent, a move she attributed to the country's pressing need for creative, strategic thinking. In a statement, Jean-Pierre explained that once Biden's presidency ended and Donald Trump returned to office, she realised that the nation needed to break free from old political boxes. She urged Americans to 'think creatively and plan strategically' and to be 'clear-eyed and questioning' rather than 'blindly loyal and obedient' to political norms. Jean-Pierre's decision to step away from the Democratic Party comes amid mounting scrutiny over Biden's 2024 re-election bid. Books like CNN's Original Sin and reports from various media outlets have cast a spotlight on concerns regarding Biden's cognitive and physical health. Jean-Pierre, who made history as the first Black and openly gay woman to serve as White House press secretary, previously worked as a senior political adviser and served in the Obama administration. She took over the press secretary role in 2022, succeeding Jen Psaki. Her tenure in the White House was marked by both praise and criticism. Some commended her handling of difficult press briefings, while others took issue with her responses concerning Biden's health. In February 2025, Jean-Pierre spoke at the Harvard Kennedy School Institute of Politics, where she reflected on the difficulties she faced in the final weeks of Biden's campaign. 'I had never seen a party do that in the way that they did,' she said of the backlash Biden faced from fellow Democrats. 'It was hurtful and sad to see that happening.' Although Jean-Pierre has stated that she does not miss her time as press secretary, she emphasised her commitment to the administration's work, noting, 'I would not have come back into the administration, I don't think, for anybody else [but Biden].' News of her book has stirred mixed reactions from her former colleagues. Jeremy Edwards, a former Biden White House spokesperson, took to X (formerly Twitter), writing only 'lol,' a response that some interpreted as a dismissive reaction to Jean-Pierre's departure and revelations. As the Democratic Party grapples with its direction in the wake of the 2024 election, Jean-Pierre's book is set to offer a candid perspective on a pivotal time in American politics.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store