We value your support now more than ever.

All year we’ve been covering the issues that matter most to you—the pandemic, the election, policing, housing, and more—and now our end of year membership campaign is here. Will you support our work to ensure we can bring you the same informative local reporting in 2021?

On Wednesday, Washington Post staff writer Rick Weiss wrote a front-page piece about the 2.5 million chickens that ate contaminated pet food. As the story notes, the “revelations are the latest in a rapidly widening scandal that started out with reports of a few deaths of pets” and highlight problems in U.S. food-safety protections.

And so plenty of readers on washingtonpost.com felt compelled to comment on the piece. One obstacle: They had a lot of trouble getting the word “chicken” onto the site. Here are some excerpts from the comment section:

The Miracle of Modern Agriculture! Feed plastic waste to the c*ic*ens. Make cattle carnivorous! Lots of new diseases to be explored! THANKS! By thrh | May 2, 2007 12:40:48 AM

Donate the 100,000 Indiana chi c k ens to Africa. DHS protects your food supply about as well as they protect America from cybercrime and spam, which is almost not at all. By open | May 2, 2007 12:31:37 AM

“Chicken” clearly packs none of the offense associated with such commonly asterisked words as f**k, s**t, a**hole, and so on. But it does share a certain consonant combo with the f-word, and that’s “ck.” A survey of article-comment sections of the Post site hint that those two letters trigger certain spasms in the paper’s obscenity filter. For example, a comment responding to a May 3 story about Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice reads like this: “Shouldnt Condi be atta***ng Russia?”

The Post‘s obscenity filter is clearly working overtime. Get the whole story in next week’s Dept. of Media.