As soon as you mentioned Chaucer, all credibility started to slip away. He was a cad. or a dirty old man... i don't know... posted by Frasermoo at 5:32 PM on February 3, 2004
Apple alters the title of songs based on pattern matching, it's not a person. I fooled around one day searching for non-naughty yet bowlderized song titles. posted by substrate at 5:53 PM on February 3, 2004
Ah, thanks substrate.
Speaking of Chaucer, here's his Treatise on the Astrolabe, possibly the oldest technical manual in the English language. posted by homunculus at 7:14 PM on February 3, 2004
It looks dumb, yeah, but you'd know Apple would get in trouble with the crowd that just finished having a conniption over a boob context or no context if they left it in. (the cock, that is) posted by Space Coyote at 8:59 PM on February 3, 2004
..but the song in the last two sentences it becomes clear is not really a "rooster" and really is a "c**k". Plus it is Chaucer. So there can be no doubt this is a rude song that 400 years later we are still censoring. Not unlike Jacksons teet. We can be sure 400 years hence we will still be censoring teets and c**ks. posted by stbalbach at 9:10 PM on February 3, 2004
It's innuendo. I don't really blame Apple for playing it safe with their pattern matching, but the whole thing is pretty funny.
We can be sure 400 years hence we will still be censoring teets and c**ks.
I'm not so sure. After all, Chaucer's country now has the Sun and its page 3 girls, so who knows? posted by homunculus at 10:19 PM on February 3, 2004
That is weird - since installing iTunes, I cannot visit the iTunes music store without un-hiding it from within iTunes. I guess they really don't want us non-'merkins to visit, huh? posted by dg at 10:30 PM on February 3, 2004
posted by Frasermoo at 5:32 PM on February 3, 2004