Jump to content

Howard Stern this morning...


Steff

Recommended Posts

So now Stern has flip flopped because of the FCC issues. I thought this wasn't a single issue thing.

I have no idea how you got this from what I said...

 

 

Howard made a comment about Bush's position being wrong on the gay marriage issue.. nothing else.. just THAT issue, and since then he was pulled and fired from 6 markets.

 

That's what started his bringing all of the religious groups into this and outing the senators who get kickbacks.

 

Howard still supported Bush regarding the war just 2 weeks ago, the day before he was pulled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Most of his fans are Republican.

 

The point is that people who think idiot lowlifes are the only ones who listen to him are incorrect. Just a fact I tossed out there.

 

And Tex.. I ALREADY said that there should be rules.. which there are.  :huh

 

And I didn't say s*** about those who make over $75K being superior so please don't put words in my mouth Tex..

I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth. I never thought Stern had an uneducated following. Why did you mention it? What bearing does it have on a decency standard?

 

Again,

I stand for societies responsibility to formulate a standard. Sterns show may or may not fall within that standard. But to say, like Murcie, that the government cannot say what you hear over the public airwaves is a knee jerk reaction and wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, the DJ speaketh here. Somewhat semi-informed opinion about this.

 

Personally, I think Howard Stern has crossed the line in a few things that he has spoken, etc. But I don't think that anything he has done would breach the line of anything more than a minor fine. If you are running Stern, expecting a fine now and again should be an expected cost of business. He has made a career of pushing the envelope in acceptable broadcast. But it isn't because of him that there are problems. It's because of Mancow and Bubba the Love Sponge and the dozens of other Baby Sterns that try to make a name for themselves by being ridiculously offensive and cross the line. Slaughtering animals on the air in the station parking lot for example. Cooking human flesh on the air (Mancow did that about three years ago). Constant T&A on the radio. It is ultimately bad and good for business at the same time.

 

In many markets, Howard is a hard product to sell because he is caustic and displeasing to a large segment of the radio market. But in others, he is phenomenally successful. The problem isn't about show content. If something is too offensive for a radio market, it just won't last - because it won't make money. Or the backlash will be so violent that it won't justify the gobs of cash it would make to keep.

 

The problem here is the FCC. The FCC has been under a ton of fire by being oversightless in recent years. They have pared back significantly the amount of local public service content that a station is required to have. Right now, its 30 minutes a week of public affairs programming - which can include newscasts, Christian music and PSA commercials. That's it. As a result, huge news events are missed because of reduced staff and local commitment to the community. This was no more apparent than in Minot, ND where a chemical spill happened and there was nobody at the Clear Channel radio building to notify the message to the town. There are no other radio companies in Minot. One person died, because the public trust was not kept in this case. Clear Channel Communications was not fined in this incident.

 

This is a matter of being a censor because its easy. Its easier tackling someone accidentally dropping an F bomb than it is to tackle absentee owners. Because you can get the DJ fired and the problem "goes away." But when you have companies who support your party forgetting to use the licenses the people granted them to inform them of important events, catastrophes, etc. the ability to enforce guidelines is much tougher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said two weeks ago Stern supported Bush.

You said then Stern gets pulled from 6 markets and investigated by the FCC and Bush comes out for an amendment restricting gay marriage.

 

Now Howard will call for his voters to not support Bush. I guess then those two issues caused Stern to change his mind on Bush and all his loyal Republican listeners will vote Kerry.

 

Steff, you said Bush was screwed if Howard tells his listeners to vote against Bush. You said most of his listeners are Republican. Do you seriously believe they listen to a radio entertainer in deciding what candidate to vote for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth. I never thought Stern had an uneducated following. Why did you mention it? What bearing does it have on a decency standard?

 

Again,

I stand for societies responsibility to formulate a standard. Sterns show may or may not fall within that standard. But to say, like Murcie, that the government cannot say what you hear over the public airwaves is a knee jerk reaction and wrong.

I just typed it was... "a fact I just tossed out there"

It has no bearing on anything.. it was "just a fact I tossed out there"... :huh

 

 

I didn't say such a thing.. as you indicated Murcie said it.. so why are you posting to me about it..??

 

 

I AGREE there should be standards. Just be consistant with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

winodj,

well said and thank you. I've had that same conversation with a local radio station owner who now has syndicated programming almost all day. They own a news talk station (local in the morning and drive times but Rush, Hannity (was O'Reilly), and others everytime else.

 

On the other hand their Sports talk station cut the Dan Patrick show short for local people to talk about HS football and make uneducated, silly statements. So eventually they dropped the local show and increased rating 2X by airing the syndicated product.

 

Money vs. public trust

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just typed it was... "a fact I just tossed out there"

It has no bearing on anything.. it was "just a fact I tossed out there"...  :huh

 

 

I didn't say such a thing.. as you indicated Murcie said it.. so why are you posting to me about it..??

 

 

I AGREE there should be standards. Just be consistant with them.

I was replying to multiple posts at the same time. Not just one person.

 

Since the comment Steff tossed out there concerned Stern I appologize but thought she was trying to make a point.

 

Violent rape has increased every decade since 1960 in every state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said two weeks ago Stern supported Bush.

You said then Stern gets pulled from 6 markets and investigated by the FCC and Bush comes out for an amendment restricting gay marriage.

 

Now Howard will call for his voters to not support Bush. I guess then those two issues caused Stern to change his mind on Bush and all his loyal Republican listeners will vote Kerry.

 

Steff, you said Bush was screwed if Howard tells his listeners to vote against Bush. You said most of his listeners are Republican. Do you seriously believe they listen to a radio entertainer in deciding what candidate to vote for?

Alright.. I'm obviously not explaining this clearly.

 

 

Howard was pulled after making a negative comment about Bush and gay marriage.

 

After he was pulled.. he brought to light many other issues negative to Bush, several senators, the FCC, Hicks, CC, free speech, first amendment violations, possible constitution changes.. and countless other issues.

 

Issues important to EVERYONE in the United States of America.

 

I don't understand where you got "because of 2 issues Howard is calling for his listeners to not vote for him.." I never said that.

 

Howard has a very LARGE fan base.. and even further than that are the Republicans who may not like him.. but are not as conservative as the current administration.. or maybe even Democrats who don't like their choice this year..

 

Howard bringing to light that the FIRST AMENDMENT means s*** to the current G'ment.. which IS a problem... could very well mean a defeat for Bush. And no.. I don't believe they listen to Howard for political advice. Do you think I think that..? :headshake

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Violent rape has increased every decade since 1960 in every state.

That's a bulls*** fact, Tex.

 

1) There are more people living in every state now than there was in 1960

 

2) Incidences of rape get reported FAR more regularly today than they did in 1960

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a bulls*** fact, Tex.

 

1) There are more people living in every state now than there was in 1960

 

2)  Incidences of rape get reported FAR more regularly today than they did in 1960

At least you recognize it as a fact.

 

How would we prove that they get reported more today? Perhaps even more people today are not reporting it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least you recognize it as a fact.

 

How would we prove that they get reported more today? Perhaps even more people today are not reporting it.

Please, Tex, if you really think that rapes were at least as accurately reported then as they are now, then I really think you're on fantasy island with Ricardo Montalban.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please, Tex, if you really think that rapes were at least as accurately reported then as they are now, then I really think you're on fantasy island with Ricardo Montalban.

What I am saying is either statement cannot be proven.

 

OK, I will amend my statement to read

 

More people are reporting rapes and more rapist are being convicted now then before.

 

Does that sound better?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you saying there are less rapes now then 40 years ago?

No, I'm saying the rape "rate" is probably exactly the same as it was in 1960. The "fact" that there are more of them in every state now means absolutely nothing, for the reasons I mentioned before. It's like saying auto thefts are up now, because more cars get stolen today than in 1960. Technically, that is correct, but it means nothing in reality, and it's certainly not any kind of fact that would be used to back up any theory regarding whether people have become more kleptomaniacal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...