Howard Stern Killed By Janet's Boob

[Gazz]

Radio "shock Joc" Howard Stern has been

removed from the air in many of his

markets in the USA

Clear Channel the parent company of

thousands of radio stations in the USA

suspended the brodcasts of the Howard

Stern Show on all of it's stations.

For the "vulger content" of his show.

But Clear Channel is part of the same

production company that produced the

infamous super bowl half time show.

Thus Howard Stern was Killed By Janet

Jackson's boob!

Gazz

[KayEl]

Well, he predicted that it will bite him in the behind after Janet's wardrobe malfunctioned.

Once again, goes to show how immature we are when it comes to sex.

[Fluffybunny]

His show had a lot more to do with than sex. I think he had a lot of chances in the past to try and lighten up a bit, but he has made his entire career on the exposure he gets from pushing the limits too far.

It is what he is known for, and it caught up with him.

I have listend to him before, and am amazed that a grown man can have the mentality of a 14 year old...

[lala5]

funny i lke it

[tarabull]

I've listened (with an open mind) and I say this whole heartedly >> I cannot stand the man....REALLY glad to hear someone finally shut him down can I get a HELL YA?!?!?!?!

[KayEl]

Well, you don't understand that this is a dangerous precedent do you, Tarabull? It seems you are willing to just give up your freedom of speech. Then again, Canada IS a country that forces radio music stations to devote a percentage of airtime to Canadian artists. So I guess the concept of freedom of the airwaves is different for Canadians than for Americans.

There are some broadcasters that I can't stand but I wouldn't advocate to get them off the air. Because nobody is forcing me to listen. I don't like their programs or point of view, but some people do and they are entitled to the show, and the broadcasters in general have the right to view their own opinions or whatever they want to. I am an adult who can make my own decision and I wouldn't want to trample on other people's rights or choice so I can sleep at night.

And BTW, Howard Stern have a lot of sexual content on his show and so what? You claimed to listen to it with an open mind, which I do not think is true because the fact that you consciously need to keep your mind open shows you have some negative impression of the show to begin with and didn't give it a fair shake. I used HATE Howard Stern. But I found the show outrageous and funny. He pushes the limit and honest and that why his show is so successful. But when it comes to social commentary and the phoneyness of Hollywood and politicians, he is the only person who says it as it is.

I don't agree with everything he says or does but that is his opinions and he has the right to express them. Let the marketplace decides whether he remains on the air. Clear Channel took him off 6 stations because they were about to "testify" in front of a Congressional hearing and was scared ****less, not because Stern had low ratings and thus a lack of advertisers.

Edited February 27, 2004 by KayEl

[strichar]

I never cared for Howard Stern. I just never found him amusing...at all.

[thebarman]

Just for us peeps over the pond, we all heard about Janet Jacko's boob (and were neither offended, bothered or impressed) but who is/was Howard Stern, what kinda stuff did he broadcast that was so offensive?

[KayEl]

Howard Stern is one of those so-called "shock jocks".

He basically hosts a morning radio talk show on the air, with an emphasis on jokes, humour, sexual content, and the casual tearing to pieces of celebrities and politicians.

[Sandy Band]

The strange dichotomy between the different attitudes to sex and violence in US programmes does amaze me. An example I encountered recently was a new drama about plastic surgery Nip/Tuck which has recently made it over to the UK.

The first couple of episodes quite happily showed incredibly graphic plastic surgery, someone being murdered and fed to alligators, the lead character being beaten to a pulp (and getting botox injected where I'm sure it shouldn't!) and one character trying to circumcise himself with a pair of nail scissors. Yet in any scene where a female character was topless, such as someone being drawn up for surgery, their boobs were hidden by a strategically placed pot plant. Strange.

Having said all that, I suppose there might have been more complaints had Justin Timberlake taken out a gun and shot Miss Jackson live on air.

P.S. In the UK we seem to work the other way around. A programme will not be made unless there is at least one sex scene in it, therefore gaining the all-important tabloid headlines featuring the words "sizzling romp".

Sorry. What was my point again? I'm just rambling here. Sorry.

Nurse!

[Nethius]

Well, you don't understand that this is a dangerous precedent do you, Tarabull? It seems you are willing to just give up your freedom of speech. Then again, Canada IS a country that forces radio music stations to devote a percentage of airtime to Canadian artists. So I guess the concept of freedom of the airwaves is different for Canadians than for Americans.

The fact that radio stations are required to play so much Canadian content has nothing to do with freedom of speech. Altho i dont 100% agree with it. The rule is in place simply to promote Candian artists. And I don't see a problem with that.

As for Howard Stern, couldn't care one way or the other... now he should be able to be on teh radio (as long as he follows the rules) but you also have to keep in mind that radio stations do have the right not to broadcast his show

[KayEl]

Yes, they have the right NOT to broadcast his show.

BUT, the problem is that they had no problem with Stern in the first place until all this thing over Janet Jackson. Clear Channel knew exactly what they were getting from Stern when they put him on the air. To all of a sudden break his contract and pull it off the air because of the looming threat of fines is a totally different matter entirely. It is pure governmental blackmail.

[stillcrazy]

First things first. Freedom of speech is only meant so the federal government cannot supress a responsible persons idea's or opinion. It is not a blank check to say whatever you like about anyone you like. That's called slander and defamation. His contract calls for his company to pay any FCC fines and legal cost related to his show. So in a sense he has greater protection than the average person.

Second Broadcast TV and radio is free. It is open to anyone who has a reciever. You pay nothing after you have purchased the euipment to recieve a program.

Because it is an open format you have to have some controls on it. Because it is open, you need to regulate what children might hear, not what adults hear. If an adult is offended they can change the station/channel. A child will not know the difference. The influence on children is pretty damn great. They will act as they see adults acting. They will talk as they hear adults speaking adult.

I'm sorry Howard Stern got taken off the air. But Clear Channel only took him off 6 of thier 1400+ stations. If the new fines go into effect, it will be more costly for them to honor his contract, rather than pay it off. But in a sense, he was also the cause of his own demise with Clear Channel.

Two seconds of a forty year old boob didn't Kill Stern. Twenty five + years of pushing the laws to the limit did.

[KayEl]

Yeah, he was with Clear Channel for 10 years and all of a sudden they have a conscience! I am sure they are not complaining about all the money they made off those 6 stations Stern was on.

And once again, this crap about protecting the children.

Howard Stern is in the morning, and as far as I know, children in the US goes to school in the morning. So this thing about children listening is moot.

And you are very naive to think that it wasn't Janet Jackson's boob on TV that suddenly put a clamp on "indecent" material in the media.

Anyway, those found Stern are in the minority. A very minute yet vocal minority. It is a shame that a lot of people are deprived of their favorite radio show because some people are so sensitive that they can't handle it.

[Evil*THE*VEEID]

Howard Stern stinks!! A total bore. So what if Clear Channel took him off the air in a few markets, there is a reason for it, he sucks, no one listens to him. Howard Stern is an old fart. He has a tv show too so I don't feel too bad for him. It is not censorship. Britney Spears' video was "pulled" of the morning music video, to be placed during the evening, THAT didn't happen and her video still plays during the day, evening and midnight hours. So blahhhhhh-hahaha to Howard Stern.

[Gazz]

Quick note here, I just found out that

Howard Stern's current contract has him

being paid over $25,000,000 per year!

He must have been doing something right

to earn that kind of money!

Gazz

[stillcrazy]

And once again, this crap about protecting the children.

Howard Stern is in the morning, and as far as I know, children in the US goes to school in the morning.

Are you saying protecting children is Crap? I don't know about anyone else but I think that 3-6 year olds who hear his ATTITUDE towards others, will not affect the way they deal with other children and adults.

But I guess that dosn't matter to anyone as long as they get what they want.

[Fluffybunny]

And once again, this crap about protecting the children.

Howard Stern is in the morning, and as far as I know, children in the US goes to school in the morning. So this thing about children listening is moot.

The last I checked, he was on between the hours of 6:00 am and 10:00am. So he was on during the time school age kids are around to listen to him.

I am not supporting that as a reason why he was taken off the air in certain stations, just making a point.

So kay, is he carried in Israel?

[stillcrazy]

The last I checked, he was on between the hours of 6:00 am and 10:00am. So he was on during the time school age kids are around to listen to him.

It depends on the radio station. Some of his shows were delayed broadcast or repeat broadcast in the afternoon. So the chances are that he was on when older 'kids' could hear him as well as younger ones.

[doink]

What exactly did the show get suspended for? It can't be for the past so many years, was there some recent incident that was the last straw?

[Bizarro]

the real issue here is not Howard Stern, but rather the new lack of regulation of media conglomerates such as Clear Channel. what some people dont understand is that Clear Channel owns more than one radio station in many, many towns. sometimes, they are their only real competition. since june, there has been a severe relaxing of regulations on media corporations. what this means is that it is now legal for a single corporation to own TV, radio, print, etc. whereas before this was against the law. Clear Channel is a monopolistic corporation, want a little proof?

the radio outlets owned by Clear Channel listed by city

what you should notice is that they own SEVERAL outlets in many cities. with the new deregulation, they could buy even more control in the form of more radio stations or TV as well. this is extremely dangerous to our democracy. we have corporate entities in charge of what we can and cannot hear on the radio or watch on TV. this is a double edged sword because while some people think Howard Stern is offensive and his banning is good, the same rules could be used to move Howard Stern into a community where he is not wanted and no one could remove him from the air. the public's right to question mergers has been removed. it is all up the corporation's whim and programming choice. what you are dealing with here is the removal of competition from media because in the past a small radio company might start offering Stern in a market he has been removed from, but now Clear Channel could go in and buy them out much easier than before. there is no more protection for smaller sized media outlets and the big dogs are running the show. that is why this is so disturbing, not just because its Howard Stern. there is a deeper issue here that is dealing with censorship and the community standards of many large cities have just been laid out by Clear Channel Communications. isnt that something the community should decide for itself?

Edited February 28, 2004 by Bizarro

[babyforrest]

Just a little history lesson regarding the whole Canadian radio stations playing Canadian music issue.

That started decades ago when Canadian artists just couldn't get a break. Radio stations played American music only. One Canadian group that tried and tried being Canadian finally crossed the boarder, pretended to be American, and hit it big. They then revealed their Canadian heritage. That group is The Guess Who. After that the rule was made that a certain percentage of Canadian music must be played on radio stations. Now there are many successful Canadian musicians. Think about it: if the music was still lousy even if it was played in the radio nobody would buy it. If you have any questions I would be more than happy to answer them.

And here I thought all the history I learned in music class was a complete waste of time....

[KayEl]

Stillcrazy, do not take what I said out of context. I did not said that protecting children is crap, it was just the use of the age-old argument. Anybody else know what I meant so don't try to twist it to support your argument. Believe me, children are probably talking about worse while they are in school.

And Fluffybunny, please explain to me how children are listeing to Howard Stern between the time of 6 AM and 10 Am. As far as I know, when I was in grade school, I was trying to stay in bed as late as possible, then busy getting ready and heading out the door to school. I didn't listen to radio or watch any TV until I came home in the afternoon. If you are talking about pre-schoolers, then as a responsible adult you shouldn't be listening. But looking at the dregs on the Jerry Springer Show, Maury Pouvich and Judge Judy, responsible adults are seriously lacking and Howard Stern is a better influence! Anyway, I heard he was on Israeli radio, but I'm not sure about that, I'm not from Israel (or Jewish for that matter).

Finally, Clear Channel may be a monopolistic corporation (that's what you get when you are too successful). The bottom line is black inked profits, so they broadcast what is popular, and the community has decided that Howard Stern is popular. He's number one, if not top 5 in all of his markets. You should hear the furor that is going on in the 6 cities that pull him off right now. If Stern was not popular and pulling in advertiser dollars, Clear Channel wouldn't have aired the show. I said before, they knew about his FCC problems and what his radio show was about when they signed him on. Ultiamtely, they have the right not to renew his contract, or even fire him (and Stern's contract stipulated that he gets paid the full amount offered for the latter scenario). At least get some balls and tell him they were going to do rather than take him off the air all of a sudden, no warning, no nothing....AND under the guise that they have turn over a new leaf. Hypocrites.

And finally, who the hell are the FCC, they are not elected, but appointed. So what is allowed on the airwaves are determined by the opinions of a few people who think that we like to be coddled like children who needs everything done for us.

[Animas Pain]

Howard Stern stinks!! A total bore. So what if Clear Channel took him off the air in a few markets, there is a reason for it, he sucks, no one listens to him. So blahhhhhh-hahaha to Howard Stern.

He sucks?That`s why he was on in those markets to begin with right?That`s also why he`s either #1 or #2 in virtually every single market/time slot that he`s a part of.I hope these comments don`t represent your intelligence level because if they do then I feel sorry for you.

The fact is that Clear Channel was obviously happy with the revenue that Sterns show brought to them.If it wasn`t for the halftime show then he`d still be on in those markets.All of these execs are scared ****less for some odd reason because of all the sudden inquiries into the matter of "decency" in radio/television.It`s absolutely reprehensible that everyone else is taking the heat instead of the old hooker that started this in the first place.

The bottom line is that there needs to be a scapegoat......and,despite the fact that they didn`t expose themselves on tv,radio personalities such as Stern and Bubba the Love Sponge are those scapegoats.

Sometimes I`m ashamed to live in this country.

[stillcrazy]

Stillcrazy, do not take what I said out of context. I did not said that protecting children is crap, it was just the use of the age-old argument. Anybody else know what I meant so don't try to twist it to support your argument. Believe me, children are probably talking about worse while they are in school.

Simple question then: Where do you draw the line.