Well I am not sure if everybody has heard about all the controversy over Howard Stern (as usual lol) but the FCC has been crawling up Howard's you know what,so let's hear what you think about it?
:thanx: for participating.....
Printable View
Well I am not sure if everybody has heard about all the controversy over Howard Stern (as usual lol) but the FCC has been crawling up Howard's you know what,so let's hear what you think about it?
:thanx: for participating.....
I HATE IT. Howard Stern is awesome,I Love His Show! The FCC needs to leave him the fuck alone.It really upsets me Im the biggest fan of his.He is the best radio/t.v personality EVER. Well i guess that about covers it.
I used to hate Howard Stern but now I love watching his show on E. We don't get his radio show out here. But yeah I actually kind of like his show sometimes. I wish they would just get off his back.
Well I am at least glad that nobody picked Rush Limbaugh yet because I kind of just threw him in as a joke being that he is just about the opposite of Howard!
But I think it is hilarious the world of shit Rush Limbaugh has managed to get his ass in after the way he used to sit up on his "Wack" ass show and bash people all the time!
Howard kicks ass and Ashcroft & Limbaugh suck ass,and maybe it is Howard's ass they suck!?
I find this very interesting and a very typical statement of someone who doesn't listen to Rush or has never listened to Rush. I happen to listen to both of them although I listen to Howard a lot less. I can only take him in small doses because quite frankly, I could probably grab a tape of one his shows from five years ago and play it today and you'd never notice the difference. Howards only topics are lesbians, porn stars, midgets, and mentally unstable combinations of one of the first three. The problem with Howard is that he never deviates from these topics. There was about a two year period of time I stopped listening to him, and when I tuned in to him again, it was the same old tune and it just doesn't stay funny for that long.Quote:
Originally Posted by MissJADEN link=board=1;threadid=8162;start=msg95588#msg95588 date=1081750253
Now, the reason I say you don't listen to Rush is that they actually agree politically much more than you realize. Howard is on an anti-Bush ramble right now because of his paranoia of this "vast consipiracy" of the Bush administration to get him off the air by the FCC. Funny enough, he railed against Clinton for the same reason. Howard is a perpetual victim by the FCC and rather than accept the fact that he's responsible for his own actions, he'd rather blame everyone else for his troubles. It's like the F student blaming the teacher for receiving a failing grade rather than accept the fact that he never listened in class and failed all his tests. That aside, if you read Howards books, he's actually quite politically conservative and he certainly is a fiscally concervative person. I've heard him speak highly of Limbaugh on countless occasions and the oposite is true also. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reiley have all said complementary things about Howard Stern on their shows recently. O'Reiley was talking extensively about Stern saying that although the lesbian and sex talk gets old (which it does), he is a true genius in the industry when he talks about the news with Robin. Rush recently even called him brilliant last week. I'll bet you didn't know that though.
I like to listen to Rush on occasion even though I am very liberal. He is articulate and offers an intelligent view on the news and media, even if I do not always agree with his opinions.
Well you are correct in the fact that I do not watch or listen to Rush Limbaugh, at least not anymore anyways because the few times I have seen or heard him talk he simply repulsed me!Quote:
Originally Posted by DancerWealth link=board=1;threadid=8162;start=msg95597#msg95597 date=1081752879
And I agree with you that Howard can at times be repulsive (maybe even much of the time), but not near as repulsive as the FCC or Rush in my opinion! (oh yea and Asscrotch, oops I mean Ashcroft)
However silly Howard is most of the time though some of it just cracks me up!
Well since you like Rush I hope his legal problems work out so you can continue to listen and/or watch and enjoy!?
By the way I have'nt heard the last of his legal woes, so if you care to elaborate on the latest?
There's an undercurrent to the FCC Howard Stern fines which really has nothing much to do with Howard. The first FCC fine was against Clear Channel Radio network, which carried Howard's show on just 6 of its radio stations, but which carries Rush Limbaugh and other conservative shows on about 600 of its radio stations. Viacom, the producer of Howard's show, was NOT fined, nor was Howard himself.
However, conservatives finally figured out that the first FCC fine was a "wolf in sheep's clothing", and went public with that fact after Clear Channel was the only radio network called before congressional hearings. IMHO this second round of fines which actually involve Howard are a belated effort by the liberals to disprove the "wolf in sheep's clothing" accusation from conservatives by treating Howard equally under the law.
Personally I dislike Howard for one simple reason...we are 2 of the same and if I were to ever get into radio again I would be accused of being a Stern clone
This amuses me because my mom and I actually DID listen to his show on the way to school! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Pan Dah link=board=1;threadid=8162;start=msg95054#msg95054 date=1081666178
That said, I don't have a very strong opinion on Howard, but I believe all forms of censorship should be illegal, so my opinion on the FCC is pretty easy to figure out. ;)
Howard is sometimes funny, but sometimes I find him to be offensive for its own sake, which doesn't appeal to me.
However, I don't approve of censorship in any form. Janet's tits, porn, and Howard Stern should be available to the public. Let free markets determine what is and is not appealing to Americans.
(That said, things like child pornography and snuff films should be illegal because of the actual damage they inflict on participants.)
I was injured by the whole Janet Jackson boob thing.
When that sucker popped out I tried to get a good look at it and smacked my head on my tv screen...
:laughing: lmao, yea I bet alot of bumped heads and black eyes that day.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blade is a D.j. link=board=1;threadid=8162;start=msg96551#msg96551 date=1081897834
Oh well, as a broadcaster by trade I guess I should add my :twocents: so here goes.
Unlike magazines, books, satellite radio, cable TV over the air broadcasting is different. It comes into your home whether you want it to or not. You don't buy anything but the receiver. Radio has no effective "warning" system (not that the V chip is so effective--but that's another thread).
There are a limited number of frequencies (None in the Northeastern US) and each license is worth tens of millions in the open market (even though their value doesn't appear on the books).
The air belongs to us, and our federal government is responsible for representing us in using it for the public good.
That said, there are times when children are likely to be listening, and times where they are not. The FCC has, for the past several years, loosened the rules for the 10 PM to 6 AM time slot.
Howard's show would be perfectly acceptable during that time.
By the way, the FCC does not go after anyone but the license holder. Individual DJ's are not fined...Howard himself has not been fined....only the company that holds the license to the station broadcasting his shows.
The FCC acts only in reaction to public complaints. Believe it or not, the person complaining has to provide the FCC with a tape of what was offensive, not the station, making a complain doubly difficult. (I don't tape record the radio as a matter of course).
Anyway, there are so many great uses for our radio spectrum and so many other ways for people to get Howard Stern type humor without putting it on a limited public resource. I don't see it as censorship, but rather a matter of choice.
Anyway, sorry for the rant. :soapbox:
I like the First Amendment. I also like it when vulgarity does not fill the airwaves. There is an inherent conflict there,and I haven't figured it out. And I couldn't care less about Howard Stern or Rush Limbaugh. Or Al Franken, for that matter.
I like Howard, what I don't like are all the women that are willing to bow down to him. I think Howard is actually educational for young women, if they get the proper messages from it. And sometimes he is funny. I think that he should be allowed to air, but only at certain times, as is. I think as long as he is aired when children are asleep, then the FCC should leave him alone.
I don't know what the conflict is, just don't listen, turn the station, turn it off, seems pretty simple to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Zeno link=board=1;threadid=8162;start=msg97021#msg97021 date=1081978858
Kids, public availability. I don't see it that simplistically. I understand that it is that simplistic for others. That's fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard_Head link=board=1;threadid=8162;start=msg98565#msg98565 date=1082332284
well the f.c.c. is getting out of hand! banning everything!it's bullshit. i mean if howard can't say certain things on air why can oprah talk about the "rainbow" on national t.v?
I do not care about Howard Stern...he bores me...I have never heard anyone whine so god damned much. Fark him.
Rush Limbaugh offers bombastic liberal bashing, and that's about it. Intelligent? No. Provocative? Yes. And I'm not necessarily liberal either, more moderate. Limbaugh has been largely responsible for the decline in public debate in this country, IMO.
i think ralph should be booted!him and his "pointer" he's a dick!
The FCC has had an axe to grind even before Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction/publicity stunt." Didn't work anyway because her new CD tanked. Howard has been on their radar back to the days when he was working in Detroit. He's taking his act to Sirius Satellite radio soon for a whole lot of money.
Speaking of DJs being unfairly prosecuted by the FCC. Opie and Anthony were yanked off the air after a "Sex for Sam" stunt go awry in St Patrick's Cathedral. Their afternoon show made the long commute home somewhat bearable.
He is a little annoying but honestly I still like watching the show it's interesting and sort of funny. Also if he bothers you I don't think he really is how he acts on the show- it's an act for viewers. His wife said he's a great husband. I put leave him alone.
Due to the FCC's hounding, Howard has signed up with and soon moving to Sirius satellite radio. Likewise, Opie and Anthony are already on XM satellite radio. Since these are subscription satellite radio stations, the FCC cannot go after them.
However, what I'm more interested in knowing is how the government will react when controversial shows (be they talk shows or others) are distributed over peer-to-peer networks (http://www.slyck.com/index.php) and/or peercasted (http://www.peercast.org/). Peercasting is using peer-to-peer networking technology to broadcast live over the internet without paying HUGE amounts for bandwidth. As my own talk show (www.scottjensenshow.com, which has finally moved out of its test shoot phase and is currently doing dry runs) will be distributed over p2p networks, this is an issue that is very much of interest to me. Government bureaucrats, politicians, and control freaks (be they the Religious Right or male-bashing feminists) love to control people so I don't put it past them to try to extend government's jackboots to p2p if they can.