OT - HOWARD STERN SILENCED

Page 1 of 3  
The Howard Stern radio show has been pulled of the air in every market by the suits at Viacom due to the actions of the FCC. Stern will probably be back on the air on the XM band within a few months.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Since I get Howard on a locally owned, independent station, WCCC, I'm wondering if this is some sort of April Fool's joke.
Barry
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I hope not.
-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
For a copy of my TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter, send email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Interesting OT - What's happening in that arena made me think. He's got a right to present his shtik, but if you want it, you should have to seek it out. You shouldn't have to listen to it when you're walking into some retail store or next to somebody at a stoplight with kids in your car.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Hold on now, "but if you

roll up thier windows when approaching another stopped vehicle? I personally do not listen to Howard, But back in the day I did listen to Greaseman on DC 101. I liked him then and to this day I remember some of his bits. We should all be able to speak our mind, Hmmm there should be a law about that, people should be allowed to say what they feel! I think it's the first amendment! I also have kids and I don't want him sitting around watching a foul mouthed movie at 2 years old. So I monitor what he watches. Yes I even filter out the cartoons that I think is not appropriate. But see that my choice and I HAVE THAT CHOICE, if I want to watch cartoon figures put guns to thier head and pull the trigger then I can Bu t I am not going to let my son watch it. I make the decisons for me not let some old battleaxe do it.
Searcher 1

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
This has absolutely *nothing* to do with the First Amendment. A company deciding that their customers don't like what their DJ is doing and pulling the plug is not censorship. It's called good business. If Howard wants to get his message out, (heh, heh, yeah, he's freakin' brilliant!) he can buy his own string of radio stations. Why should Clear Channel feel obligated to air his garbage? If you say that they are just buckling under pressure from the FCC, I believe the FCC is just reacting to public complaints. Enough people have complained about his and other peoples over-the-airwaves crap so they're stepping up. But mostly, I think that Clear Channel is just practicing what they believe to be good business. Speaking of offensive words coming from cars, I have 5 and 8 year old kids. It sucks when a car pulls up next to us at a light with his/her megawatt stereo blasting the nastiest gangsta rap so loud that no rolled up windows will stop the sound... "Daddy? What's a Mutha F**ka?" The law stops me from blowing his worthless head off but it doesn't stop him from polluting my kids' heads with garbage. Well, there are some never-enforced noise laws but that doesn't stop them. Yeah, that's a great example of freedom of speech.
Bruce Redding, Ca.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004 08:53:13 -0800, "Bruce"

They still are, they only took him off in six markets. He's still on some Clear Channel stations.
Let's also remember that the show is exactly what it always was, and Clear Channel knew exactly what they were buying from the get-go. They bought it because people listen, which pays in the radio biz.
FWIW, Clear Channel also owns our local Gangsta' Rap station. <G>
Barry
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well, yes and no.

You're right on the money there. Except that for ten years it has been good business to have Howard spew his sophomoric brand of comedy. All of a sudden, he's obscene? I think the FCC fines had more to do with the "business" decision that any concern for the tender ears of their customers.

They shouldn't.

This is where the First Amendment is being violated. The FCC is knuckling uder to a small group of complainers and is levying fines to get some speech restricted. I am hopeful (but not holding my breath) that the broadcasters, or more likely, the dj's (since the bulk of the fines are aimed at them) will take these new restrictions to court and win back some sensibility.
--
John Snow
"If I knew what I was doing, I wouldn't be here"
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
you wrote-
This is where the First Amendment is being violated. The FCC is knuckling uder to a small group of complainers and is levying fines to get some speech restricted. I am hopeful (but not holding my breath) that the broadcasters, or more likely, the dj's (since the bulk of the fines are aimed at them) will take these new restrictions to court and win back some sensibility
(Cut and pasted from my other post under different thread)
Let's check the verbiage shall we?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. "
This amendment is the one we get "freedom of religion", "separation of church and state", "freedom of speech", "freedom of the press", "the right to assemble" and "the right to petition". Agreed?
The same amendment you claim gives constitutionally protected speech also gives the right to petition the government to redress (or remedy) grievances. That is what is happening. The FCC, which by the way isn't congress and can enact any legislation it chooses until a suit is filed and the supreme court rules either for or against, is reacting to the petitions of those who have exercised their right to petition. You have the right to petition against this and if you are successfully able to get enough support for your cause can in fact determine the outcome without any fear from the government restricting your ability to do so.
So not only is the 1st amendment not being violated but it is essentially being used exactly as it was intended.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
As the "owner" of the airwaves, which are leased to the stations, the FCC can make what conditions it cares to make for use. First says you're free to speak, it does not say you may do it without consequence. You know certain "hate" words are banned, don't you?
<Secret> wrote in message

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

NO, it can't. The FCC like every other goverment agency has a charter which dictates what it can and can not do. The FCC was created to regulate licensing and technical issues. They have somehow now become the arbiters of what is and is not indecent in broadcasting. The problem is that they do not have that authority. The issue of indecency (which was already decided by the Supreme Court more than 30 years ago) is one for the courts not for a regulatory agency.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Actually, if you were not full of yourself, but information, you would know that the issue of obscenity is a local issue. And this case of lessors of the public airways is a perfect example. Locals enter their comments in the stations' FCC license files as they will, and if that isn't letting local standards decide, I don't know what is.
Supreme Court is a place where people with bad manners or dictatorial pretensions take their case when they find it's against the common standard.
<Secret> wrote in message

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
My family and I live in a racially mixed neighborhood (Hopewell, VA). Everyone gets along great with no racial overtones (at least not that we've encountered). My daughter refers to black people as brown people because as a 5 year old, that's how she views it. We stopped at a small convenience store last May. There was an SUV parked in front of the store with no one in it and it was blaring "gangster rap". The song that was playing was clearly echoing the "N" word every second. My daughter, curious and having been talking clearly since 2, asked me what the "N" word meant. I explained that it was JUST a word that bad people call brown people. I played it DOWN because I didn't want to encourage further curiosity about the matter. A five minute answer would have provoked a day of thought on the subject and 20 more questions. More knowledge than I care to place on a 5 year old mind. I started fuming that my daughter had been put in a situation to hear this against MY will. I proceeded to go into the store and ask who owned the Ford Expedition outside. A young black man (accompanied by an older black woman that I assumed was his mother) acknowledged that it was his. I told him my daughter had a question for him and proceeded to let her ask HIM what that word meant. His attitude quickly turned to anger as he heard her question. He looked at me and started (notice I said started) to go into a racially charged rant and puff his chest at me. His mother was just as shocked that the "N" word just came from my daughter's mouth. I simply held up a finger to pause him for a second, and asked my daughter to tell him where she heard that word, to which she replied "a song". I then asked her where she heard that song, and she pointed to his vehicle "right there". He looked confused but his mother's face turned to anger as she turned towards him. I then sarcastically thanked him for educating my daughter on the subject and started walking away. The MOTHER, not the young man, followed us out to the car and stopped me. She apologized to my daughter for it and asked me why I did that [confronted the young man]. I replied that I thought it was my responsibility as a parent and person to point out to the young man the consequences of that song (playing aloud) and that I have NO problem with the music, only that it should be heard by adults exclusively. I also expressed my belief that music like that (and Eminem, David Allan Coe et al) only serves to degrade young minds and goes against all that I am TRYING to teach my daughter. I told her once that door is open, it's hard to close. I can't unteach my daughter about that word. I have no problem with sound minded adults listening to it privately in an atmosphere of adults. She said that made perfect since and apologized to me and walked away. As we were leaving, I could hear her rant at her son as a CASE of CD's was flying from her side of his SUV. The last thing I could hear was him yelling a sentence that contained the word bitch. I can only assume that he was calling her (or my daughter) that word. I can also assume that he provided further proof to her of the validity of the point that I was making.
Do you think HE learned anything from was had just occurred? Do you really think that the First Amendment was designed to protect vulgarities?
--
********************************************************************
I think there is only one quality worse than hardness of heart and that is
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Three cheers for you, Dad! Good job.

-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
For a copy of my TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter, send email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I think I see the problem here.
Pencil "lead" hasn't been made of lead in decades, maybe a century. Pencil "lead" is graphite, that is carbon. I have yet to see a single study that links carbon to much of anything.
If you are homeschooling, I pray for the deliverance of your children from your "education" of them.
- - LRod
Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite
Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999
http://www.woodbutcher.net
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I was educated decades ago! My mechanical still take leads, though! (or so they're called).
Thank you for correcting me and making me feel older than I thought I was.
--
********************************************************************
I think there is only one quality worse than hardness of heart and that is
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
For a copy of my TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter, send email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Old teachings never die. I'm still trying to convince my mother that blood isn't blue and that hair isn't dead skin cells.
--
********************************************************************
I think there is only one quality worse than hardness of heart and that is
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.