Sad Sad day for free speech
 

Today was the last day Howard Stern could be heard for free. :(

Thank goodness. Now let's see if anyone would actually pay to hear this asshole.

How is it a sad day for free speech? No one forced him to leave. He just didn't want to play by the rules. It is one thing to push the envelope, but what he was doing was WAY beyond the bounds of what could be termed acceptable. He was rude, boorish, annoying and obscene (for public airways). He is entire shtick was to push the boundaries and be an asshole.

I say that Howard, by pushing the limit as much as he did, ruined the airways for many others (he did not do it alone - Opus & Andy as well as others did their fair share).

I for one like Stern but at this time I can't buy Sirius. While he did push limits no one forced anyone to listen to him but the FCC got their panties in a wad after the whole Janet Jackson incident and decided that the fabric of our morality was being corrupted by "adult" topics on the public airwaves.

Good. Now all I have to see of Howard is dumb billboards. Hopefully those will go away soon.

I'm much more concerned that the FCC appears to be positioning itself to enforce "decency" standards on cable services.

It is not possible to prevent those under eighteen from listening to public airwaves radio. Obviously I am no poster child for the Moral Majority, but even I think that some things go "too far" - Howard consistently crossed the line in my book.

With rights comes responsibility - too many people have forgotten that.

just never cared for his bit. nothing against those who seemed to enjoy it but it always seemed to cater a little too much to the 'lowest common denominator' set for me.

cant honestly say I'll miss him because I never listened anyway

No big loss. I don't see this as a blow for free speech - the airwaves have never been consider "free" - they are highly regulated and pretty much always have been.

But, like Capt Jack, I never listened to him and was only aware of him when he did something outrageous enough to make the news.

I have a friend who is getting Sirius specifically so that she can listen to him on her drive to work in th morning.

Her drive to work is only about 18 minutes long.

I like him sometimes. He's a smart guy with too much of a tendency towards the scatological, but when he's interviewing a celebrity that can keep up with him then good things happen. Also, when their doing the news, it can be funny. But there isn't enough of that to make it worth my time to specifically try to catch the show.

If I stumble across the show I'll usually listen long enough to determine which mode he's in and more often then not quickly move on. Unfortunately, in hyping the satellite show he seems to be focusing on now being able to spend more time in the wrong mode.

There are two things that I will never pay for:

1. radio programming
2. sex

Remember way back when and people were scoffing at the idea that people would pay to watch TV?

If I were on the road just a little bit more often (or if there was just a bit more static in the NPR reception in my apartment) I'd be all over satellite.

MY views on Howard are about the same as Alex's. When he wants to, he can be really funny, even inciteful. But far too often he goes for the lame cheap banal laugh. He even manages to ruin the good salacious fun that goes on in his studio by being a crude moron the whole time. So I gave up trying to listen to him long ago.

I do, in a way, pay for radio programming. I support KCRW.

As for sex, I usually pay for it afterward. Days or weeks afterward. ;)

I know he can be crude and rude and it does seem that after the FCC started cracking down he did push as far as he could go.

I suspect I'm more irritated at the fact that out of nowhere the FCC decided to start fining people and shows left and right for what was acceptable in the distant & not so distant past and it's just gotten out of control.

And now if I want to listen to Howard Stern I have to pay for it. Thanks government.

Don't blame the government - blame the greed of Howard Stern. He knew what he was doing, he knew the rules.

And this is definitely NOT "out of nowhere." Howard has been at odds with the FCC for years.

And the level of crude behavior has been getting worse over the years. The FCC finally had to put a stop to the decline.

It's sort of like when you are driving. If everybody keeps their speed to 65 (assuming a freeway with a 65 MPH limit), then there are no problems. Usually, you can go 70 without too much concern; the law will usually just look the other way (but it is still breaking the law). Then people start pushing it to 75 and it is "iffy". When the whole freeway starts doing 80, there is a problem and the CHP will start cracking down on speed laws. Sure there are people who regularly drive 85 and are surprised when they get a ticket because "they've always driven that fast." Just because you've been able to do it so much in the past doesn't mean that it was wrong!

Howard insisted on going a 110 all the time.

And I admit that my driving analogy isn't the best: speed is something that is measurable and definable. Decency on the airwaves is a little more nebulous.

My views -

Howard followed the money. He's always been a shrewd person and knew a good thing when he saw it. More power to him!

Every day and in every way, the FCC totally sucks ass.

I hope satellite radio doesn't go the way of basic cable TV. These days we're paying for censored shows littered with commercials. What a joke.

I don't think pay radio is the way for me just yet - NPR plus my iPod is just fine.

I think decency is over rated

I think decency is treating others well, not hushing up those bad ole cuss words.

I'm seriously considering....oh, geez, that's gonna look weird. Seriously considering getting Sirius. Well, that's the way the sentence crumbles.

(added) and it's not just for Stern, whom I can't hear in Hawaii anyway. Clear Channel's got their hooks in most of the public stations. They're very right-wing. They shut down the rock station here and changed it to The Fish. Yeah, I'm ready to pay for radio, and it just became available here.

How about parents who would prefer to keep their children from hearing rubbish like what is heard on Stern, Opus and Andy, et. al.? The point is that airwaves radio is, for the most part, not controllable by the parent (as far as keeping it from getting to the children), whereas a pay option (such as Sirius, XM, cable TV and satellite) is more readily parentally controllable.

There has to be a threshold of what is acceptable to be put out on the airwaves and on the Superbowl halftime show. That threshold has been long passed.

What, they don't make "off" buttons any more? When Alice is in the car, we listen to a CD in the morning, as it's either filth or hate. Moving Stern to Sirius won't change that here, he doesn't even get played here.
As a parent, it's my responsibility to filter what gets into my kid's head. She came home from school today and asked me what chronic masturbation is, an eighth grader used the phrase to insult another eighth grader. After considering the fishing addict lie, I told her the truth, and she was completely and utterly disgusted. "That's what made it such a funny insult to them." I said.
So, should I pull her out of school? I went to private school - Born Again Christian Private School, in fact, and there was a lot more sex and sex talk going on there than at the public school I went back to upon being thrown out. (Halloween, forks, Ozzy, headmaster's lawn, long story.)
No matter what you do, some stuff's gonna get heard by your kid. Fact of life. But I also feel there's things out there a lot more obscene than talk of boobies and farting. Like the Patriot Act. But that's a different thread (and yes, KY, I did read it!)
Your mileage may vary!

What, they don't make "off" buttons any more? When Alice is in the car, we listen to a CD in the morning, as it's either filth or hate. Moving Stern to Sirius won't change that here, he doesn't even get played here.
As a parent, it's my responsibility to filter what gets into my kid's head. She came home from school today and asked me what chronic masturbation is, an eighth grader used the phrase to insult another eighth grader. After considering the fishing addict lie, I told her the truth, and she was completely and utterly disgusted. "That's what made it such a funny insult to them." I said.
So, should I pull her out of school? I went to private school - Born Again Christian Private School, in fact, and there was a lot more sex and sex talk going on there than at the public school I went back to upon being thrown out. (Halloween, forks, Ozzy, headmaster's lawn, long story.)
No matter what you do, some stuff's gonna get heard by your kid. Fact of life. But I also feel there's things out there a lot more obscene than talk of boobies and farting. Like the Patriot Act. But that's a different thread (and yes, KY, I did read it!)
Your mileage may vary!

I ended up starting to listen to Howard by accident a couple years ago. All of my shows that I listen to in the morning end at 10am, and on days when I wouldn't get to work until after that time, there wasn't anything else to listen to, so I ended up listening to Howard. I did like listening to some of his interviews, and there were times when he would be interesting, but other times, it was just potty humour and the like, which isn't my thing. And the sex stuff wasn't offensive to me - it was just boring. I've heard other people do similar things that I found funny, but for some reason, his approach didn't do it for me.

What really was turning me off his show was Robin though. She irritates me to no end. She's like a really bad version of Ed McMahon. She goes along with pretty much everything he says and rarely adds anything original to it, and then there's what sounds like her fake laugh.

So now, I don't know what to listen to after 10am. I liked Adam Carolla ok on Loveline, but I'm not sure I'm all that interested in listening to him that much more.

Hear, hear! You must spread some Mojo around before giving it to Fab again.

I don't know, I 've got to wonder if the impact of naughty words and humor would vanish if there weren't so many restrictions as to increase their "naughtyness" value. Kids hear the stuff plenty of placces whre there are no controls. But I think for most people you pass a certain threshold and the forbidden becomes boring.

It is a parents responsiblity to filter what their kid is listening to not the governments or a commission (FCC).

We were all going along fine until one day OMG there was a second of boobie on TV. EEK! What is the world coming too! Surely Howard or Opie and Andy must have caused it! The very fiber of our morality is being corrupted by potty humor. Let's fine everyone and make sure the innocent children are protected form something that parents should be protecting them from anyways. Then the FCC started going crazy fining for things that PB (pre-boob) were acceptable.

I fully agree that Howard started pushing the boundaries after the 'incident' and went as far as he could go after he signed a deal with Sirius. But really, for nearly 20 years he was acceptable for the public airwaves then one day he wasn't. It's sad that more people don't see what's wrong with this situation.

The FCC has always been a strong protector of the airwaves. This happened long before Howard didn't invent being rude and boring on the air.

They didn't fine him for being boring ;). If you find him rude and boring no one is making you listen. And that's the point. They started fining him (and others) for things they did PB and wern't fined for instead of saying Hey, turn it off if you don't like it. I don't listen to Christian radio or watch Christian TV but I'm not trying to get it off the air because I find a lot of what they say offensive. I just don't listen.

Honestly I was more pissed by Sandra Tsing Loh being dropped from KCRW for not bleeping the F-word from her commentary. Of course that was done out of reactionary fear of the FCC, but I was dissappinted that the leadership there quickly made the cut to someone who's commentary was nowhere near Howard Stern's.

To be sure the eventually apologized and made nice, but to me it underscores the self-censorship through intimidation and fear that government agencies sometimes possess

Dec 19 1941

Twelve days after Pearl Harbor, Franklin D. Roosevelt under authority of Congress, created the Office of Censorship. The bureau had discretion over communications with foreign countries. Participation by domestic publishers was "voluntary".

One of my favourite pieces on the f-word....

WARNING: NSFW :WARNING

WARNING: ITS FROM MONTY PYTHON :WARNING

AGAIN: NSFW

EDIT: WARNING: NSFNA :WARNING :p

http://www.edict.com.hk/vlc/listenin.../useframes.htm

Wouldn't that make it NSFNA?

yes it would, so I had to edit it...

EDIT: its still very hilarious.... hope she looks past the Monty Python part....

Considering that Stern was fired from his first NYC gig (WNBC) in 1985 because he was too crude and that his first (of MANY) major FCC fine was in 1992 to the tune of $600,000, I would hardly say that he was "acceptable" for 20 years.

Sure things started getting stricter after the wardrobe malfunction. But it was the straw that broke the camel's back. The rules had been broken for quite some time. Just a little at first, then more and more until, "OK, that's it!"

While it is easy to cry "it's not the government's job to protect me," when people do not do a good job of moderating themselves, then yes, it is the government's job to step in and smack somebody upside the head. It's called personal responsibility (when you don't excercise it, somebody's only gonna put up with so much crap until they break). Too many people do not know when to stop!

Also, the big-bad government has not "over-reacted." It is clearly stated in the "rules of the game" that naked boobs are not allowed on broadcast television. When rules get broken, the defecation is gonna hit the rotary oscillator.

Should the FCC not react when Janet flashes? If not then, when? Two boobs at once? Heck, let's just cut to the chase and allow full-on intercourse complete with close-ups. After all, if a parent doesn't want their children to see this, then they just need to turn the TV off!

And why stop with the TV? Let's allow strip clubs to open right next to schools - after all, only consenting adults are allowed into these places.

And why should only 18 and over folks be allowed to have all the fun? Why 18? 17 is close enough isn't it? How about 16? I know some 14 year-olds that act more "adult" than some 30-somethings - should they be allowed to view such material?

But don't let the big-bad government tell me what to do :rolleyes:

Hey, I take offense to that.....

Umm, wait, no I don't.... Ummm, nevermind...

I sense a great disconnect from the content of Kevy's posts on this thread and his previous posts (particularly the one's with links). Big the FCC steal Kevy's brain too?

She? She who?

I think the reference is about Wendybeth - that girl is lost every time a Monty Python reference is made.






:D







The sole purpose of this post was so that € doesn't worry about me.

Did someone mention....


Monty Python????

That's not Python, it's our good friend Jack Wagner. (click on the little cassette to hear a RealPlayer sound file)

Umm... what little cassette?

What's a cassette? ;)

Gn2Dlnd beat me to it. That's the voice of Disneyland doing that speech, my friends! I love that file!

Once you start censoring where do you stop? Just think - Mark Twain's collections have been burned for being indecent, so has Ray Bradbury, Stephen King, Faulkner, Salinger and more. Check out http://www.banned-books.com if you don't believe me.

It's what you teach your kids not what the world teaches them. You are the most important influence in their lives. Although I'm not a parent, I work for a non-profit that focuses on abused and neglected children. What I've learned is that a Mentor (parent) can make a difference.

As for Howard, I'm a fan. But I also listen to Alternative music, watch horror movies and read horror, like Marilyn Monroe and enjoy a good dirty/blue joke. That's what I like, I don't insist anyone like what I like. Listen to what makes you happy.

You're saying this about Stern? Heh.

5 days in. *ponders* nope....oddly enough, still dont miss him ;)

Ya know I get that some of you don't like him. And that's fine. You didn't listen to him to begin with and you did that with free will. I'm shocked by some of the replies here and I think the FCC stole Kevys brain given his history ;) but his points are good and well taken. Thank you Kevy.
The posts about how you don't miss him, how he's boring really don't add anything but filler to the discussion. If you don't see anything wrong with the FCC cracking down like it is etc etc then this thread isn't for you.

Mistyisjafo is correct. Once you start where do you stop? What's to stop them from taking LoveLine off the air? It's a radio show about sex. Sure, it has a doctor and deals with "medical" issues but in the end it is a radio show about sex. If you've ever listened to it, it gets pretty *low*.

How many radio stations are owned by Clear Channel? How consertative are they? The FCC cracks down on one and Clear Channel has an excuse to pull the *liberal* shows and replace them with Christian radio.

Where is this going to end? What has to be pulled off the air (radio or tv) for you to care?

I think the dividing line here is Public Access. Radio is a commercial venture but it can be experienced to by all, same with television, billboards, etc. Radio has had guidelines provided and enforced by the FCC for as long as I can remember. The other big factor controlling the airwaves is advertising. I have no problem with porn being on PPV and I don't have a problem with Stern's smut being on PPL. Stern and no one else, chooses to present the type of things he does. Using the cloak of the "evil FCC limiting my free speech" BS just doesn't work for me. He knew what the rules were going in. I'm not sure why he couldn't abide by them, but that was his choice. His actions have rammifications based on the rules set up by the FCC.

This isn't a free speech issue, IMHO. This is Stern making a stink in the name of free speech to get more ratings and more income.

I could not have said it better myself! Unfortunately, I need to spread some mojo around before giving it to NA again. :snap:

Donna

Comment's about Stern's childishness are relevant to the conversation in that I don't particularly respect him as a spokesman for free speech. Any valid points he has are undermined by the pointlessly offensive drivel he produces. He makes a poor spokesman in the battle agains the real censorship problems because he's easy to pass off.

I'm much more concerned about the record fine handed to Fox for implied sex before 10PM, all based on a totoal of 4 unique complaints. 700 Million people in this country, and 4 people complaining was enough to trigger a penalty from the FCC. 4 complaints hardly defines a "community standard". Those are the battles that need to be fought, not Stern who blatantly corsses well beyond the line.

I don't have a problem with the FCC putting certain limits on what can be said or done on publicly owned airwaves, my problem is that enforcement is inconsistent and the rules are frequently inane and contradictory.

I'm not particularly clear on why Sirius and the other one are exempt from FCC regulation. Yes, you have to pay to listen and special equipment is needed but they must still be broadcasting over segments of EM band licensed from the government (unlike cable, which circumvents the physically limited publicly-owned medium completely).

Could a traditional radio station avoid FCC sanction if they encrypted their signal and distributed decrypting equipment?

Isn't that what the kids call a webcast?

After thinking a bit more about it, I agree. He isn't the best spokesperson for free speech. He is very easy to pass off because he is rude, can be crude and does go as far as he can. I still think it beyond sucks that he left the public airwaves but I suspect he would have left for the money Sirius offered him regardless of the FCC.

Grr. I don't recall hearing about that. Whatever happened to if you don't like it turn it off? Or should we just go back to the days when married TV couples sleep in seperate beds.

Actually it is what radio already is (everybody just uses the same encryption protocol and relies on the same third-party decryption devices).

That's why I'm not clear on how beaming it from a satellite gets around the rules that beaming it from a tall tower subjects you to.

I think they're going with the subscription thing...must be 18 or older to subscribe, after all.

Its actually very similar to cable, as there is a lot of bandwidth within that on frequency that they shoot down, they can put a lot of channels on one frequency, so there is a lot less of a perceived scarcity of frequency band... snot much different then satellite TV, only they can probably fit a lot more channels on satellite radio then they can on satellite TV....

Road trip in Allybells car! SHOTGUN!