To Bleep or Not to Bleep: Why Profanity Belongs in Oral History Transcripts

Oral histories are invaluable resources, capturing the raw, unfiltered essence of human experience. These spoken narratives preserve the voices of individuals in a way that written records or secondhand accounts never could. However, one question often arises when transcribing oral histories: Should profanity be included in the transcript?

At Adept Word Management, we firmly believe that, unless specifically instructed otherwise, profanity has a rightful place in oral history transcripts. Here’s why:

1. Authenticity is the Cornerstone of Oral Histories

Oral histories aim to preserve not just the content of what was said but also how it was said. The tone, choice of words, and expressions—all contribute to the authenticity of the narrative. Profanity, when used, is often a deliberate part of the speaker's vocabulary. It reflects their personality, cultural background, and the emotions of the moment. To sanitize such language risks losing the speaker’s true voice and, with it, the integrity of their story.

2. Profanity Captures Emotional Context

Profanity is often used to emphasize strong emotions—joy, frustration, anger, or disbelief. Imagine a speaker recounting a harrowing or deeply personal experience, punctuated by expletives that underscore the intensity of their feelings. Removing those words dilutes the power of the moment. Including profanity in the transcript ensures the reader feels the full emotional weight of the speaker’s account, as they intended to express it.

3. It’s Not Our Job to Censor Stories

As transcriptionists, our role is not to judge, censor, or reinterpret. Our job is to provide an accurate and faithful record of what was said. Censorship, even with the best intentions, undermines the purpose of oral histories—to preserve history as it was experienced and conveyed by the speaker.

4. Future Researchers Rely on Accuracy

Oral histories are often used by historians, sociologists, and other researchers to understand the past. Omitting or altering profanity can lead to misinterpretations. Researchers depend on transcripts to provide a transparent record of the speaker's thoughts and experiences. Inaccuracies, no matter how small, compromise the transcript’s usefulness as a historical document.

5. Respecting the Speaker’s Agency

When someone shares their story, they’re trusting us to document it accurately. Changing or omitting their words without consent is a breach of that trust. If the speaker chose to use profanity, it’s our responsibility to honor that choice.

Addressing Concerns

We understand that including profanity in transcripts might not sit well with all audiences. However, context is key. The researchers or institutions who comission the transcripts can take different paths to deal with profanity if they decide to make the oral histories public in any way. For instance, if the transcript will be shared widely, it can include a note at the beginning indicating that the content reflects the speaker's authentic language, including profanity. This ensures transparency while maintaining the integrity of the record.

The Bottom Line

Preserving oral histories is about capturing humanity in all its complexity—the good, the bad, and yes, even the profane. Words matter. They’re windows into the speaker’s mind, culture, and emotions. By including profanity, we ensure that we’re not just transcribing words but preserving stories as they were truly told.