Howard stern

fshhub

Active Member
whats the big deal??
60-80 yrs ago, when the laws were put into effect, that was fine because that was also the laws off air as well. Now days, his behavior is perfectly normal and expected. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS: HE IS DOING IT ON THE RADIO
If it were television, paper or even live none of this would get you arrested in todays society. the F WORD is everyday and expected in most enviroments now days(and normally wont get you into any more trouble than a courteous tone it down sir), why shouldn't it be accepted on the air waves? It IS accepted on television or in magazines.
 

robchuck

Active Member

Originally posted by kinkfish
I am pretty sure clear channel was bought out and their has been alot of movement in the compan. and to my understanding the new owners or GMs of the company have secondary agendas ie.... BIBLE THUMPING

That is far from the truth. First off, Clear Channel wasn't bought out, they're one of the largest entertainment companies in the world. Secondly, I am a former employee of Clear Channel, and I have to say that the Mays family are upstanding folks who are just trying to run a successful business.
As for the indecency issue, here's what I have to say. The airwaves were created for the American public and are intended to be used for the public's interest, not corporate greed. As several other members mentioned, if listeners find Howard Stern offensive, they can simply tune to another station. Stern's success indicates that his show is in the public's interest enough to be syndicated nationally.
What the FCC needs to do is not take Howard Stern off the air, but rather make changes that would allow for an expansion of listener options (in the interest of the public). Times have changed, and the market dictates there is a desire for shows like Howard's. The FCC just needs to watch over the industry to insure that there are options out there so folks who don't like Stern can turn the dial and tune into something a little more suitable to their taste.
I'd like to add; corporate radio groups like Clear Channel, Infinity, and NextMedia aren't necessarily bad for the radio-listening public, but they just need to be policed to keep those options out there so listeners can tune away from Stern and such if they wish.
 

purity

Member

Originally posted by polarpooch
As for Stern, he's part of the problem.

how is he part of the problem? even though he may not be suffering like the others you mentioned, i don't see how he's making it worse. if anything, he's bringing national attention to the matter.
whether it's the fcc, or the government, or whoever gets the finger pointed...the fact remains that they chose howard to set an example of this No Tolerance For Offending People crap. like they really didn't forsee him fighting back??? cmon now! he's been fighting censors from the start so of COURSE this was gonna happen.
i don't blame howard, i don't blame Jesus, nor "Bible thumpers". as with all forms of censorship, this is brought upon by irresponsible parents who have nothing better to do then fight to see all the bad things in the world go away so their children don't get exposed to them. the type of backlash that these lamers creates ALWAYS digs their ditches deeper. anyone remember how much publicity (therefore, record sales) ice t got for cop killer?
 

robchuck

Active Member

Originally posted by Purity
i don't blame howard, i don't blame Jesus, nor "Bible thumpers". as with all forms of censorship, this is brought upon by irresponsible parents who have nothing better to do then fight to see all the bad things in the world go away so their children don't get exposed to them. the type of backlash that these lamers creates ALWAYS digs their ditches deeper. anyone remember how much publicity (therefore, record sales) ice t got for cop killer?

YES, YES, YES!!!
American parents in general are too caught up in being pro-active for their children rather than being pro-active with
their children. If American parents learned some responsibility and spent more quality time with their children rather than fighting battles for them or trying to give their children what they think is best for them, then maybe we wouldn't be so focused on every word coming out of Howard Stern's mouth or every piece of clothing coming off of Janet Jackson's chest.
 

purity

Member
exactly but nowadays too many moms and dads both insist on keeping full time jobs and focusing on their own lives. so the kid's babysitters and television sets become the parents. no wonder why these parents want television and radio regulated so much. they NEED these things to plop their children in front of, rather then spend too much time with em.
 

robchuck

Active Member
Time magazine has a great article this week about mothers who stay at home with their children and obstacles that prevent some mothers from doing that. A statistic was mentioned, and I'm quoting this from memory, that in the past 20 years, monthly housing costs have risen 68% while the average salary has only risen 1% (adjusted for inflation). The American economy has forced many families into a situation where both parents work full time jobs. There are lots of families out there where one parent would love to be at home with the children, except that the economy won't let them.
 

purity

Member
i'm pretty sure that's part of the reason BUT i also think there are others.
nowadays everybody wants what the next guy has so of course there's an overabundence of spending, therefore creating the need to work more just to stay a float. the American consumer averages $13,000 in unsecured debt. so that doesn't even include all of the luxury cars leased by people who can barely afford to keep gas in the tank.
plus there's also the issue of knucklehead couples that rush right into having children without even thinking about how they're going to deal with the extra expense. these are same ones who could barely manage their finances alone. most of em just charge away their expenses, file chapter 7s, and then pump out more kids like it's nothin.
even the ones who weren't planning on having children. 2 words folks: condom and pill. not to say these always work but they sure as hell cut down the risk.
 

purity

Member
bottom line is that REGARDLESS of your financial situation you have no excuse to not be a good parent. children are not just burdens thrown in your life. if you have a kid then your life is no longer lived for you but it's for your child.
no matter how broke or busy you are. there is always plenty of time to be there for your kid/s and raise them right.
 

tony detroit

Active Member

Originally posted by Purity
you have no excuse to not be a good parent.

exactly
I am so sick of politicians and federal courts taking out Marilyn Manson, 2 live crew, Howard Stern, whatever. Your kids are growing up the way you let them. Be parents, but do not take what other members of your society like away.
 
D

daniel411

Guest

Originally posted by tony detroit
exactly I am so sick of politicians and federal courts taking out Marilyn Manson, 2 live crew, Howard Stern, whatever. Your kids are growing up the way you let them. Be parents, but do not take what other members of your society like away.

I'm sure most of us can agree there's no excuse for not parenting. While not personally being a parent, I don't know how much weight my voice would have on that matter.
While it may be a shame that the politicians and federal courts are stepping in to do the parenting. Look at what fshhub had to say.
Originally posted by fshhub

whats the big deal??
60-80 yrs ago, when the laws were put into effect, that was fine because that was also the laws off air as well. Now days, his behavior is perfectly normal and expected. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS: HE IS DOING IT ON THE RADIO If it were television, paper or even live none of this would get you arrested in todays society. the F WORD is everyday and expected in most enviroments now days(and normally wont get you into any more trouble than a courteous tone it down sir), why shouldn't it be accepted on the air waves? It IS accepted on television or in magazines.

Remember that most of these politicians and federal/supreme court justices are from a different generation. A different generation of mainstream acceptable values. While most of us have been brought up in generations listening to "The Beatles" to attending "Ozzfest".
This is completely understandable. As much of modern music had been the medium which has slipped in a change in morals and brought in new age ways of thinking. Much of its purpose is to ever so slowly, push the boundries of our moral base. The writings of a 20th century scholar even mapped that out, and his intent for it in the twentyfirst century.
Look at Elvis, when he came out.. they couldn't even show on tv him shaking his waist. Now... you can see "little" kids doing that in music videos, and no one bats in eye.
Aristotle once wrote that when a change of tone in music enters the youth, the children will flee from their parents ways, this will rock the walls of the cities. Do not let it happen.
Plato's writings warned one not to consider music impartial or neutral. That there "is" such a thing as good and bad music.
I won't state that our politicians and judges are saints by anymeans. However I'm sure in their prospective(many cases atleast), they are trying to cling onto the "values" they were raised with.
Remember also that ones "freedom of speach" has always brought repercussions. This is not new. Even in the early part of our country, heretics were burned, communist were jailed. Whatever goes against mainstream society is attacked.
I wouldn't want to legalize many of my views. As we all should have the power of choice. I do shudder to think though... since "Marylin Manson, 2 Live Crew, Stern" ARE accepted by mainstream society and the media... what will be shocking to the mainstream values of my grandchildren... should I have them?
Especially with what one of the above did to their first born child.
 
you know about the whole Janet jackson thing, I watched the super bowl and the half time show and i didnt know about any exposed body parts till the next day. I'm sure more than half of everybody that watched were in the same boat as me. A few people turn something small into a huge "exposure".
Talking about indecency, my SO and I went out to eat one nite and a family sits down at a table across from us. Now the mother is sitting there feeding her new born the all natural way. I don't have a problem with that as long as it's in the privacy of your own home,but not in public. I don't need to see that when I'm stuffing my face with a steak and potato.
My point is that I turned my head and looked elsewhere, like if you don't like something on the radio turn the channel.
This fcc thing is getting all blown up.
Howard Stern was off the air
Don & Mike Show was off the air
NASCAR DRivers have to watch their language
They are going to be watching shows like NYPD Blue making sure that the don't get to riskay.
I just think that what ever poeple say on the radio or t.v. is not that bad. The kids hear it in school anyway.
 
D

daniel411

Guest

Originally posted by Guppy Slayer
This fcc thing is getting all blown up.
Howard Stern was off the air
Don & Mike Show was off the air
NASCAR DRivers have to watch their language
They are going to be watching shows like NYPD Blue making sure that the don't get to riskay.

-Stern is not off the air. Just apparently six stations due to business reasons for those local stations, not the FCC.
-NYPD Blue was a project to push the boundries of network tv to that of HBO and be riskay! So wouldn't it make sense for the regulators to watch it?
-Who said that the drivers in nascar need to watch their launguage? The FCC or the nascar organization? Seems like it would just be in good business sense for them to self regulate, and make it a "family" sporting event.
-Yeah, I deffinately don't like watching people

[hr]
feed in a restaurant either. Weird huh
I just think that what ever poeple say on the radio or t.v. is not that bad. The kids hear it in school anyway.

Philosophers, psycholigist, and the top musicians have all said that music affects people.
 
The whole NASCAR thing, I'm sure that they make their own rule but don't you think that they stem from somewhere else such as the fcc.
It's all about the $ with nascar and sometimes I think that they will do anything to get it. If fcc or whoever starts making a stink elsewhere nascar picks up on it and covers their butts, enforcing rules, emposing fines
I'm a fan and all I have to say is that if things get heated at the end of a race and Harvick wants to jump on hoods and call someone an Ahole...so what. It's all part of the show. Thats why people watch it
 

polarpooch

Active Member
Harkening way back to the response to my post...
How is Howard part of the problem? Do you LISTEN to Howard Stern? He has been deliberately pushing the edges of decency for years...he's never shown a moment of self restraint. Everything the man has ever done has been about him--and about sticking it in the eye of the FCC. That's fine. I detest the FCC, too. I don't care if Howard Stern talks about anal --- or animal --- or whatever. But it's not that he's pushing the edge--it's that he's blasted past it and just keeps driving.
Me, I just choose not to listen to crap on the radio. Beautiful thing there is called a DIAL on the radio. But to have him say that he's BEING MADE the poster child for censorship is as arrogant as it is wrong. He's MADE HIMSELF the poster child. And with little or no fallout. He hasn't lost his job, and he's using his loss of 6 stations in syndication to begin negotiations for a deal on satellite radio. He's in talks with XM, owned in part by CLEAR CHANNEL (oh yes, they're everywhere), and Sirius Satellite. Satellite is not regulated by the FCC....hmmmmmmm.
How about the public radio host in San Diego who was FIRED because of this? Or Bubba the Love Sponge who was FIRED over this. Or Elliot in the Morning who was FIRED over this.
I hate that Howard is making this about him. Now the rest of us have to defend Howard Stern because we actually think censorship is unfair and contrary to the Constitution. Most of us think he's disgusting, yet we still take to the airwaves (at least I sure have) to defend his right to be obnoxious and filthy--because we see the bigger picture. ( By the way-- I work for the company that dumped him for godssake!) And it isn't that it's a vast right-wing conspiracy targeting him. The left-wing liberals love this too. Just take a look at the VOTE on it in the House.
But he's not defending us. He has more power than any one of us, or all of us put together. He's not using his powers for good...he's using his powers for Howard. Griping about how this policy was designed to get him off the air. It wasn't. It was designed to stifle speech and choice. Howard gets a satellite deal out of it, the rest of us get...PINK SLIPS. And what do YOU get? YOU all just get boring radio and the knowledge that your list of freedoms just got a little smaller--AGAIN.
But what the hell. Resistance is futile. So why bother, right? Would have been nice if the BIG GUY could take one for the team , here. But he's left it to us, the little guys, to fight the real fight. Eventually, when all the little guys get blown out and there's no one left to raise the flag on the First Amendment, it's going to up to you guys.
Good luck.
 

skirrby

Active Member
Originally posted by polarpooch
.
[/ I believe Howard STern should be able to say whatever he wants---but who cares if Stern loses 6 stations?QUOTE]
Simple question.. i care.. and so do all the people who listen to him on one of those 6 stations.. radio as we know it changing... it may have started with these 6 stations..but it will spread.. more and more shows will get yanked for stupid reasons. they have nocked out the 2 most listened to morning shows in the orlando/tampa areas. now there is nothing but crap on the radio here and id be just as happy working in dead silence than listening to the new "cleaned up" airways.....oh well at least i still got neil bortz(however you spell it) to listen to. :rolleyes:
 

purity

Member
Polar,
i don't see howard being selfish in this but i DO see him being the poster child in this. i know that that sentence probably pissed you off but the reality of the matter is that howard is worth WAAAYYY more than any of you guys in radio and THAT'S why he's not fired and THAT's why he makes the money and THAT'S why he gets the satillite deals and THAT'S why he's being made the poster child.
in your business, the money-makers are the attention getters and i already explained the backlash that howard's persecuters are creating. they tried to go for the jugular, he bit back like everyone should have KNOWN he would have done, and the littler guys suffered just like they always have anytime anything hits the fan throughout the history of the human race. howard gets the station fined a few hundred grand but the station presses on because he makes them 10 times the amount on a daily basis. that's economics. it has nothing to do with being fair. when the hell has money ever been fair???
and the "problem" is not that he's pushed the level. ALL entertainers have been using that method ever since elvis started gyrating his hips! how can you knock someone for doing what they do best in the entertainment biz?? these same methods that you call a "problem" are what GOT him in such a position of power. just because it's not your cup of tea doesn't mean that it's a problem.
as a matter of fact, i think we already clearly outlined the root of the problem earlier in this thread. and if yer looking for a specific spark that caused the fire then you should cite justin and janet. looking for the packed TNT that exploded? cite the parents and religious nuts. but to cite howard is simply citing the shrapnel- it was there from the start and if you push it, then it will shove.
 

polarpooch

Active Member
Do you know how syndication works?
It sounds like you don't. That doesn't really matter though, because this isn't about syndication. Though if you knew more about it, you'd see how little this really affects Howard Stern. He was losing those syndication deals with Clear Channel sooner or later. Turned out sooner rather than later in this case.
But you want to go ahead and believe the rhetoric of this guy, have at it. Me, I'll go to work again tomorrow wondering if something I MIGHT say will get me canned.
I've already been forced to use a delay system. I've already been chewed out for comments I've made on the radio. Half hour and 45 minute meetings over content with the general manager. I don't even use sexually explicit language on my show. But it doesn't matter. I've been told "there are no sacred cows here".
It's had a chilling effect already.
And as for the vast right wing conspiracy: I'm a conservative FEMALE radio broadcaster with good ratings and an uncontentious (mostly) relationship with management. The guy who chewed me out? Big time Bush supporter like me. So much for politics influencing job security.
But hey, it's all about Howard Stern. Bite me, it is.
Getting this yet? ANYONE?
 

purity

Member
well i can see yer frustration in never knowing if they may axe you over something lame said over the air. but i still don't see how howard is a part of that problem. that's like blaming the rifle makers for world wars, while ignoring all the politics that really start the actual events.
and he's not just bitching over himself. i listen to him every morning and he's always making references about bubba and all the other people that got canned.
polar, you need to have ME on your show. in less than a half an hour i'll be more than happy to explain to your listeners why i will be an excellent world dictator, why everybody else sucks, how to properly bbq cows and birds, and why golf is not a sport. then at the end we can talk fish. damn i'm tellin you....we can takeover the world.
 
Top