• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Stern suspended.....

Ed

Philosopher
E
Joined
Aug 4, 2001
Messages
8,658
On the news today. He did a real no no yesterday, evidentially.

Anyone hear the show?
 
Is this anything to do with Shemp's left nut, by any chance??
 
I don't know if it's related but I had heard that since the great Janet Jackson Bare Breast incident of '04 that the FCC was going to be cracking down.

Stern, if anyone, would have a bullseye on his back but he makes so much money for the corporate monster it's probably just a dog and pony show.

Anything he did to get suspended will be worth gold in free buzz.
 
This site has a recap of the Howard Stern show in question and I don't see anything on there out of the ordinary. Although they do mention that the show was getting bleeped a lot that day, so maybe the bannable offense was bleeped. Bizarre.
 
According to all news I've seen, it's just that Clear Channel won't put up with his brand of ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ any longer.

Unfortunately, a lot of people find it entertaining. I wonder how long CC will be able to stand their ground.
 
This may shed a little more light on the matter:

http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pub&dt=040225&cat=entertainment&st=entertainmentmediasterndc

Apparently, Viacom is pretty agitated also.....

I'm wondering how many more such actions will be taken with other media hosts/shows as a result of Janet Jackson fall-out. Granted, I'm no big fan of Stern's anymore. His show has been pathetically predictable for years. Still, it's ironic that all these mass media corporations suddenly had a change-of-heart-attack after the Super Bowl. Where was their "moral majority" before that? :(
 
Ladyhawk said:

Granted, I'm no big fan of Stern's anymore. His show has been pathetically predictable for years.
Click to expand...

You know when I lost interest in Howard? After his divorce. Until then he was a likeable Everyman drooling over girls but unable to slip the leash and fulfill himself. Once he got divorced, he was just another playboy. Yawn.

My personal theory is that people who actually love Howard are people for whom a large part of their sex life is fantasy. When you actually feel fulfilled in that area, Howard's antics seem merely juvenile and the girls just silly bimbos.
 
Sundog said:


You know when I lost interest in Howard? After his divorce. Until then he was a likeable Everyman drooling over girls but unable to slip the leash and fulfill himself. Once he got divorced, he was just another playboy. Yawn.
Click to expand...

Considering he has been steady with his girlfriend for 3 or 4 years now, he no longer counts as a playboy.
 
Marc said:


Considering he has been steady with his girlfriend for 3 or 4 years now, he no longer counts as a playboy.
Click to expand...

Shows you how much attention I pay. :D

He hasn't been on in this market for years, anyway, but everytime I flip past his show on TV there's some tired bit going on with a woman not nearly as hot as the one next to me. Click.
 
Hell, I can deal with the bimbos, the midgets, the lesbians, etc. Problem is, I remember when Stern broadcasted (albeit a short period) in Detroit. He was truly controversial, then...raising issues that people only whispered about....not just sex, sex, sex. And, he was fun-neeee....

I used to watch his show on "E" occasionally and stopped when I realized that he just didn't make me laugh anymore and he sure hadn't given me anything to think about ....

Too bad. He's more than got the talent.
 
I don't like this guy anymore ... never really did (Opie and Anthony were funnier when they were in Boston) but I see a dangerous trend here. I mean, couldn't anyone see it coming when Ashcroft covered up the topless statue of Minnie?

It just feels wrong to be going backwards. I don't want to see this country throw away free speech and become puritan.

Besides, this put the government in control of the media ... bad bad bad.
 
Jaan said:
I don't like this guy anymore ... never really did (Opie and Anthony were funnier when they were in Boston) but I see a dangerous trend here. I mean, couldn't anyone see it coming when Ashcroft covered up the topless statue of Minnie?

It just feels wrong to be going backwards. I don't want to see this country throw away free speech and become puritan.

Besides, this put the government in control of the media ... bad bad bad.
Click to expand...


Agree with you on the govt' involvement, Jaan. But, I wonder if the trend we've been moving toward over the last 20 years isn't dangerous as well. Like you, I don't want to see us become a puritan state. But, lately, we've been more of a 'no holds barred' state and I don't see where that has enriched us as a society. Instead, young people seem to have far less self-respect. Women certainly have not fared better, as a whole.

Is it possible we're at a point where we don't need to digress, and we don't need to go forward? Maybe this is a good place to just stop and rest?
 
Ladyhawk said:



Agree with you on the govt' involvement, Jaan. But, I wonder if the trend we've been moving toward over the last 20 years isn't dangerous as well. Like you, I don't want to see us become a puritan state. But, lately, we've been more of a 'no holds barred' state and I don't see where that has enriched us as a society. Instead, young people seem to have far less self-respect. Women certainly have not fared better, as a whole.

Is it possible we're at a point where we don't need to digress, and we don't need to go forward? Maybe this is a good place to just stop and rest?
Click to expand...

I know what you're saying. I guess since not much really offends me I'm not so sensitive to it ... however, there is a place and a time for everything.

Take this whole Janet Jackson thing that added significant fuel to Ashcroft's holy bonfire. Personally, I think she should get charged with a count of indecent exposure for every child that saw her. But a radio show like Stern's is different, you know what you're getting when you tune in. I watched the super bowl with my parents ... I was NOT happy to see JJ's ta ta's with my 56 year old mother sitting next to me. Not enough therapy in the world ...

But the thing that bothers me most is that this started with Ashcroft covering up a very nice statue. What next, banning Renoir paintings? I mean, the guy used to paint his own family members nude, how sick is that (c:

Myself, I think it comes down to access ... you should not be subjected to "filth" on a casual basis. Heck, I don't want to be subjected to rap music on a casual basis! Still, do you see my point? We're subjected to a constant media bombardment without wishing it.

Currently, much of it comes down to what the public chooses. If nobody listened to Stern, he would have just been some other dufus. Perhaps the solution in the future is more technical. Let's say that all media we access can be self censored ... something programmable and integrated. I could choose not to see violence, or nudity, or to hear rap music. My own personal digital media settings. I could also choose to see it all. I already do this to a certain extent, I "unprogram" BET, EWTN, and HSN from my cable TV for example. Instant personal digital boycotts, now how cool would that be?

I think people were always rotten, I don't see how our society has really changed that or made it worse. People talk about the good ol' days, but forget the good ol' days weren't that good if you were Jewish, black, or gay. People just need to chill out and stop sweating the small stuff.
 
Jaan;

I think you've hit every nail on the head precisely! JJ should be penalized up the wazooo.

As for how society has progressed (or failed to), I can tell you this much.....recently, a 9 year old boy said, "yo, bitch" to me and thought it was funny.

If I'd done that to anyone at the age of 10, I would still be trying to claw my way out of the closet my parents would have locked me into. Freedom of speech is a right I would protect to death. But, not at the cost of surrendering self-respect and integrity. If we give up those things, what makes us different from the animals?
 
Ladyhawk said:
Jaan;

I think you've hit every nail on the head precisely! JJ should be penalized up the wazooo.

As for how society has progressed (or failed to), I can tell you this much.....recently, a 9 year old boy said, "yo, bitch" to me and thought it was funny.

If I'd done that to anyone at the age of 10, I would still be trying to claw my way out of the closet my parents would have locked me into. Freedom of speech is a right I would protect to death. But, not at the cost of surrendering self-respect and integrity. If we give up those things, what makes us different from the animals?
Click to expand...
That's a good question.

I think the first thing to realize is that we are animals. Civilization has to be learned, it is not natural.

Like you, I would never have been able to get away with being rude like that when I was 10 but that is because we both have parents who raised us a certain way. Society is of course complex and what is acceptable changes ... there have been times when (otherwise) good, decent "God fearing" folk thought it was perfectly acceptable to teach their children to be racist, and currently there are quite a few children in the world being taught that the road to Heaven is paved with the bodies of Americans.

Our society will never be perfect, that is an impossibility. However I think when all is said and done, the most important freedom is the right to be left alone. Animals do not have that right (c:
 
I have found Imus as offensive as stern, especially when he does his racist stuff, but then because "you know I'm just kidding man..." it's ok. He's also more right wing than Howard. Howard did a flip on the death penalty when he found out the racial bias in it (a black is far more often sentenced than a white).

He's offensive, but I'm a firm believer in switch the channel and know what your kids are watching or listening to. If you are going to leave it up to the government to decide what you can see and hear, then you will see and hear only what the government wants you to know.

To be honest, if he has people listening, then they have a right to listen. He's a reflection of society, people who like him don't start out not liking him. He doesn't convert people to his audience.
 
scribble said:
According to all news I've seen, it's just that Clear Channel won't put up with his brand of ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ any longer.

Unfortunately, a lot of people find it entertaining. I wonder how long CC will be able to stand their ground.
Click to expand...

I find it very entertaining. However, whether you're a fan of Stern or not is beside the point. Clear Channel's CEO, John Hogan, had to go before congress for the indecency in broadcasting hearing. Stern was suspended from the 6 markets that Clear Channel carries his show on, in violation of their contract with Stern. Then John Hogan apologized to congress and said he made a mistake by airing Stern's show. Keep in mind that Clear Channel had been carrying Stern's show for around 10 years. There was never a problem until now. Janet Jackson shows her boob, there are hearings on indecency in broadcasting and now all of a sudden John Hogan says it's a mistake to air Stern's show. If you don't like Stern - don't listen. And, anyone worried about children listening to him unsupervised, shouldn't be. Stern is on at a time of day when children are at their most supervised. They are either getting ready for school, on their way to school or at school while he's on. If Clear Channel wanted to drop Stern because his show was losing them money, I could understand that. To drop him because government is way too involved in what is appropriate for Americans to watch and listen to is unconscionable.
 
you know

Sundog said:


You know when I lost interest in Howard? After his divorce. Until then he was a likeable Everyman drooling over girls but unable to slip the leash and fulfill himself. Once he got divorced, he was just another playboy. Yawn.

My personal theory is that people who actually love Howard are people for whom a large part of their sex life is fantasy. When you actually feel fulfilled in that area, Howard's antics seem merely juvenile and the girls just silly bimbos.
Click to expand...

You know, I cut my hair, finally, way back in 1974. I really wish Howard would do the same. I lived in Westchester back when Howard first came to WNBC. When I first heard Howard - man, it was the craziest stuff I had ever heard on the radio, and it was great. Nothing was sacred and he even made Imus seem like a stick in the mud. And he was really funny in this horrible, hilarious sort of way. But, man, it is 20 or 25 years later and it's still the same schtick. I don't get Howard anymore here in the boondocks and it's just as well I guess. I really think Howard lost me back around the time of the Fartman thing. Stupid and funny is fine. Just stupid is lame.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom