[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 shitless, not because Stern had low ratings and thus a lack of advertisers.

This post has been edited by KayEl: 27 February 2004 - 11:50 AM

[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]

[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.