The Foxboro Reporter has proclaimed the town’s name should be “Foxboro” and “Foxborough” is old and should be left for the cows and farming. Their rationale includes the following points:
1. The Foxboro Company printed the newspaper at one point.
2. The short version saves space in print.
3. The short version saves time and effort when you’re addressing a letter. 4. We are no longer an English colony.
5. Attleborough officialy changed to Attleboro when becoming a “City”.
6. Foxboro is the most efficient spelling and the least cumbersome for a modern era.
Though the newspaper and its parent company The Sun Chronicle use a shorter version, the company does use the original Foxborough for a number of institutions and the town historian.
Their reaoning for using the alternate, shorter version without the “ugh” is flawed. One flawed rationale is we should not use the original Foxborough because it is a throwback to the past but then claimed they would continue to use the shorter version because it “has been our style since The Foxboro Company was the hub of the town.” Both were in the past. (psst: they didn’t mention another shorter version with an apostrophe. Nor did they mention earlier newspapers in town had other names. Nor did they mention their competitors who use Foxborough in their masthead and print.)
To their points of why the short version should be used, the following counterpoints for using the original version are offered: 1. The Foxboro Company no longer exists.
2. We should not be incorrect to save time and space.
3. We do not want to contribute to low intelligence in the country. 4. We should be glad for our heritage and know our history.
5. We don’t have to do what another town or city is doing.
6. It may be shorter but shorter isn’t always good.
An important part of why the old newspaper has the name it does: “On May 1, 1920, the paper was sold to Edgar H Bristol (co-founder of the Foxboro Company).” Foxboro Company (Jan. 1, 1914-Jun. 1990) was sold to a British company.
If we are to wipe out and forget our past and New England’s ties to England, should all cities and towns with names ending in borough, ham, field, burg, ville, and similar terms be changed? That is a very long list. In Massachusetts there are a dozen municipalities in Massachusetts that began with the term “borough”. 1. Attleborough (town 1694 / city Attleboro 1914)
2. Boxborough (town 1835)
3. Foxborough (town 1778)
4. Lanesborough (town 1765)
5. Marlborough (town 1660 / city 1890)
6. Middleborough (town 1669)
7. New Marlborough (town 1775)
8. North Attleborough (town 1887)
9. Northborough (town 1775)
10. Southborough (town 1727)
11. Tyngsborough (town 1809)
12. Westborough (town 1717)
One columnist recently wrote that everyone in town had someone in their family who once worked for the Foxboro Company. This is not true. Were those who worked for the “company” or had family who did or still work for those who purchassed the “company” subconciously indoctrinated by the paycheck to use “Foxboro”? Did their signs around Foxborough have a not so subtle inflluence?
If the newspaper’s real reason for using a shorter version is they owe their allegiance to The Foxboro Company they should claim it; own it. But don’t confuse readers nor the world. Don’t advocate for using a shortened or incorrect spelling (homophone) because it sounds the same. If any student did that in class their grade received would be an “F” for FAILING. Please don’t contribute to the lack of intelligence in our students.
Don’t be fooled by their “logic” and claims they believe “it’s no big deal” how you spell the name of the town. If they didn’t consider it a big deal, why write an editorial about which to use?
The editors asked “Does anyone really object to the shorter version?”
I, for one, and many other residents object to the shorter version and proudly use the correct version of our town’s name: Foxborough!
Question: Who was Foxborough named after and why?