Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Google Republicans Advertising United States News Politics

Sue Googe Uses Google's Font To Run For US Congress (theverge.com) 179

An anonymous reader writes: Sue Googe is running to represent the 4th Congressional District of North Carolina in United States Congress. Since her last name resembles "Google," she has decided to use Google's font to help market her campaign. You can view a picture of Sue Googe standing next to two people holding her campaign signs here. You'll see that "Googe" is written just like "Google," but without the "l." Even the "e" in "Googe" is slanted like the "e" in "Google." "Sue" on the other hand, is not written in the same font as "Googe." It's possible the campaign accidentally selected this font, but upon closer inspection, that seems highly unlikely. It begs the question: Will Google sue Sue Googe? While we wait for Google to comment on the story, you can read all about Sue Googe on her website.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sue Googe Uses Google's Font To Run For US Congress

Comments Filter:
  • Remember one guy who used his fortunate name to start a company and wangle some deals from Microsoft?
    • Remember one guy who used his fortunate name to start a company and wangle some deals from Microsoft?

      Sorry dude, Mike Rowe is cleaning sewars with a camera crew.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        My Mike Rowe crow's mic row rows Mike Rowe's mic crows while he cleans the sewers with a camera crew.

        Sue Googe's Google gaff goes agoo as Google sues Sue Googe; her campaign goes awry.

      • by Tablizer ( 95088 )

        Fitting: Microsoft makes sewers.

  • Next Up... (Score:1, Redundant)

    by dmomo ( 256005 )

    Google Sues Sue Googe.

  • Yuck (Score:5, Funny)

    by youngone ( 975102 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2016 @10:36PM (#52088441)
    Sue needs to employ a photographer for her website before she does anything, at least someone who has a basic grasp of colour balance. What an awful site.
  • for breach of privacy

  • Shouldn't that be Googe Sue - Or is Googe her husband's surname?

    • Re:Chinese name (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 10, 2016 @11:35PM (#52088709)

      Her Chinese name is Jiangxiu Fu (FU Jiangxu; surname fu2, first name jiang1xiu4 (meaning "graceful river") (thanks, Slashdot, for not supporting UTF-8!)). She must have taken the common name Sue when she moved to the United States 18-20 years ago. I found her name on Chinese websites [voachinese.com] (she speaks quick but very clear Mandarin), but it's mentioned here [votesmart.org] too. As for her American surname:

      I've tried to find out who her husband is, solely to determine the origin of his surname, but haven't had any luck. There is no Chinese surname of Guge ("goo guh") (that'd be weird anyway; gu3ge2 means bones/skeleton). In Hangul (Korean) the family name would have to be goo-geu (again, no UTF-8...), in the case she married a Korean, but I've never heard of such a family name. We can safely rule out Japanese too. So that leaves American-European. Digging around on houseofnames.com for Googe turns up an etymology of French or British 14th-century origin; alt. spellings include Gouche, Googh, Gooch, and Gooche.

      Tennessee and Georgia both have histories of having citizens and politicians with the surname of Googe (see 1940s). So yeah, must have got it from marrying an American, probably of European descent. Point being: it's not a Chinese surname.

      Opinion footnote: given that she has absolutely no political history (see above biography link), for a first-time approach at gaining recognition, this is not going to end well for her socially. Legally... well, that's for lawyers to debate. :-)

      • Cool thanks for the info. I guess Jiangxu is a bit of a mouthful to American ears... But at least 'Sue' is something of an abbreviation.

        Nonetheless, I'd be tempted to vote for a candidate named "graceful river"!

        (Gooch is well-known as the name of an English cricket captain).

  • by Anonymous Coward

    It begs the question:

    Nope. [begthequestion.info]

  • by jodido ( 1052890 )
    "Beg the question" doesn't mean "beg for the question." It means to avoid answering the question.
    • by arth1 ( 260657 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2016 @11:27PM (#52088679) Homepage Journal

      "Beg the question" doesn't mean "beg for the question." It means to avoid answering the question.

      No, it doesn't. It means assuming something unproven as basis for a conclusion, or more typically a circular logic, using the conclusion as a premise for drawing the conclusion. Also known as "petitio principii".

      A typical example is "God exists, because the bible says so, and the bible comes from God, so it must be true".

      It's called "begging the question" because the one who makes the fallacy petitions the opponent to accept the premise that's in question.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Fuuuuuck Offfffff

      • "It's called "begging the question" because the one who makes the fallacy petitions the opponent to accept the premise that's in question."

        Where do you people get these etymologies from?

        It's called "begging the question" because that's just the translation of the Latin, "petitio principii". The word "beg" has had more than one usage and certainly the word "question" still has more than one usage. So where does this story about it referring to petitioning some opponent even come from? It's unnecessary. "B

        • An example of "translatese" for the phrase:

          "An appeal of the principles" or an appeal of the premises". Neither of these are real English but just stand as word for word translations of the Latin while preserving word class and case. Hence why a non-literal translation like "begging the question" is far superior: translations don't have to show that you know Latin grammar perfectly, unless you're doing them for an undergraduate course.

      • by AthanasiusKircher ( 1333179 ) on Wednesday May 11, 2016 @09:26AM (#52090273)

        "Beg the question" doesn't mean "beg for the question." It means to avoid answering the question.

        No, it doesn't. It means assuming something unproven as basis for a conclusion, or more typically a circular logic, using the conclusion as a premise for drawing the conclusion. Also known as "petitio principii".

        Actually, "beg the question" doesn't really mean petitio principii anymore, outside of philosophy journals. A post over at Language Log from 2010 [upenn.edu] noted that of the 20 most recent hits for "beg the question" in the New York Times, only ONE was an actual example of "correct" usage: 15 used it to me "raises the question," and 4 were just people bitching about other people using it wrong. A survey of 50 usages in Google News showed 49 uses to mean "raises the question" and 1 hit discussing its usage (not just using it "correctly").

        When the vast majority of even educated, edited prose adopts a new meaning for a phrase, it's standard. Deal with it.

        It's called "begging the question" because the one who makes the fallacy petitions the opponent to accept the premise that's in question.

        Well, that's sort of in the right direction. The link above has detailed etymology -- the problem is that the phrase originally comes from Aristotle, where (in Greek) it would have been understood in context as meaning something like "assuming the conclusion," which is a pretty clear description of the philosophical fallacy. Then it got rendered in medieval Latin as petitio principii, which used two words that had changed meaning since Classical Latin and had connotations that confused things. THEN it was rendered in English about 400 years ago as "beg the question" which was a literal translation of petitio principii, except not really the meanings of that phrase that got across Aristotle's meaning well. THEN both the words "beg" and "question" changed their meaning over the past 400 years to exclude the original connotations that caused that translation from Latin.

        To sum up, we're a couple millennia, three languages, and a few major meaning shifts from the original phrase... so it's no wonder the original meaning of the phrase got lost somewhere.

        Bottom line: nobody but philosophers and language pedants actually know the original meaning of that phrase anymore. Heck, you can find citations of the phrase meaning "raise the question" in good writers' prose even back in the mid 1800s!! The meaning of "raise the question" is well-established and completely dominates current usage.

        Thus, it's time to give up the battle. I used to have my "pet peeves" for usage too, but an English teacher once gave me very sound advice: "When saying the 'correct' thing sounds weird enough or is obscure enough that it distracts from your writing/speaking, it's time to just avoid that 'correct' construction -- because language is about communication, and you're no longer communicating effectively."

        Usage expert Brian Garner calls this a "skunked term": a word or phrase whose common meaning is branded by pedants as "wrong" but whose "right" meaning is no longer understood by even educated speakers. The only right thing to do then is choose a different term.

        If you mean petitio principii, then use "assume the conclusion" or "circular logic" or whatever MORE DESCRIPTIVE phrase actually makes your point clear. If you mean "raise the question," then say it. All of these pedantic arguments about what "beg the question" REALLY means are just BS now -- they're just a waste of time arguing about a ship that sailed LONG ago.

        • by PRMan ( 959735 )

          "the phrase originally comes from Aristotle, where (in Greek) it would have been understood in context as meaning something like "assuming the conclusion," which is a pretty clear description of the philosophical fallacy"

          This is exactly what everyone thinks it means today. So I'm failing to see the point of your rant.

          • This is exactly what everyone thinks it means today. So I'm failing to see the point of your rant.

            Far, far, FAR from "everyone." Only in philosophy journals, and among certain older lawyers.

            If you read the link in my "rant," you'll discover that everyone else in the world (including educated people, editors at the New York Times, etc.) thinks the phrase means something like "raise the question." Do I like the old usage? Sure, I'm a pedant. But I'm also a realist, and if you try using your meaning before a general audience or even an educated audience that isn't mostly logicians, your meaning will

  • You're going to lose your Librul Media certification.

    (Or was that just to avoid a congressional investigation into your biases?)

  • I wonder (Score:5, Funny)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Tuesday May 10, 2016 @11:35PM (#52088713)

    Does her husband sometimes come home, grab her and say "I'm feeling lucky"?

  • by Anonymous Coward

    You keep using that phrase. I don't think it means what you think it means.

  • by Lynal ( 976271 )
    I'm somewhat new to the industry, but my understanding is that there aren't copyright protections for fonts. So that won't work. However there is trademark protections, and the standard there is confusion.

    If consumers think Googe and Google are affiliated then Googe might be in trouble.
  • Google to sue Sue Googe over Sue Googe's use of Google's font.

    LK

    • by caseih ( 160668 )

      No they couldn't sue her over the use of the font. Fonts are not copyrightable, which means that the shape of the letters is not copyrightable. If someone makes a nice new font and sells it, there's nothing stopping someone from making a font that looks very similar to it.

      The issue I see here is one of trademark (IE the Google wordmark), not font.

  • She is a republican.

  • and her political opponent is Hak Facebok

  • Really?!!
  • So, her name isn't pronounced "Goodge" in one syllable, but "Goo-guh", so it sounds like Google without the L. If not, start calling her that and see how fast they switch fonts.

  • So when will Google sue Sue Googe?
  • Why the hell is a politician using colors other than red, white, or blue in the US? Plus throw a damn star in there. Those two factors increase your chances of election by something like 11%.
    • Why the hell is a politician using colors other than red, white, or blue in the US?

      And where is her Ford F150, Smith & Wesson, and 24 Oz T-Bone Steak? I hardly recognize this country anymore. God bless Payton Mann'n and the U, S of A.

  • Tootie Smith, Clackamas County Commissioner in Oregon, is using campaign posters in the style of "Tootsie" rolls - an American candy product.
  • A typeface is a design. a font is a typeface at a specific size.

    Think back to movable type. You talk to your designer, "i want this headline in Palatino" or whatever. You get it in your head. Then you get to brass tacks, and have to go to a drawer, and pull out type at a specific size. That's a font.

    With TrueType and Postscript and Digital Presses, it's kind of all blended and become cloudy. But I'd wish there was a bit more specificness from actual News Outlets. Oh well.

  • The better question is, "Why would she want to associate herself with a company that abandoned 'Don't Be Evil' as a motto?" Her opponent could have a field day with that.

"If it's not loud, it doesn't work!" -- Blank Reg, from "Max Headroom"

Working...