Clear Channel cans Stern

[tke711]

Story Here (http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/INDECENT_PROGRAMMING?SITE=WIMIL&SECTION=HOME)


"Clear Channel drew a line in the sand today with regard to protecting our listeners from indecent content and Howard Stern's show blew right through it," John Hogan, president and CEO of Clear Channel Radio, said in a news release. "It was vulgar, offensive, and insulting, not just to women and African Americans but to anyone with a sense of common decency."

Hogan said the show would not air on Clear Channel stations until officials are assured it will conform to acceptable broadcasting standards.
Although they are saying it's temporary, do you really think Stern will conform to "acceptable broadcasting standards"????

[IamZed]

No one would listen to him if he did.

[cdw]

No, and he won't need to...he'll just find another station. Personally I don't listen or watch the guy...the couple of times I did I wanted to punch him out...but hey.. whatever floats your boat. And obviously he appeals to a lot of people.

[tke711]

Exactly! So, with the nations largest radio station chain not carrying his show, what are the chances it will survive?

[cdw]

Isn't he on cable TV? Does this effect that show also, or just his radio? He'll just go somewhere else or the station will change it's tune when it's losing revenue and getting tons of calls from disgruntled listeners.

[Coot]

I don't like Stern and I don't listen to him. This though, is just more boobage fallout. Iffin you don't like what's on the radio, change the damn station.

[SixofNine]

Exactly! So, with the nations largest radio station chain not carrying his show, what are the chances it will survive?

Pretty good, I would think. Stern is an employee of Infinity, not Clear Channel. I don't have any numbers at my fingertips, but I would guess that the vast majority of stations on which Stern appears are owned by Infinity, not Clear Channel.

However, there is something going on. Radio stations are running scared because of all of the chest-thumping in Congress and at the FCC as a result of Nipplegate. Lots of talk of increased fines. Apparently there are four separate delays on Stern's show now adding up to 11 seconds. They even dumped out of a pre-recorded bit the other morning.

cyd, Stern has a half-hour show on the E channel, a video condensation of his radio show. It's on late (no earlier than 11:00 PM, I think). Given the time and the fact that it's a cable channel, I don't think they have the same concerns.

Brian

[mikepd]

Clear Channel is all about money and always has been. They do not care about the public good or any other such nonsense just cold hard cash. Here is an excerpt from an AP story on Stern that also mentions our own local version the much beloved 'Bubba the Love Sponge':

'Clear Channel's new policy includes companywide training about indecency, possible fines against DJs, and automatic suspensions for anyone accused by the FCC of violating indecency rules on the air, company officials said.

The initiative came one day after the company fired the DJ known as "Bubba the Love Sponge," whose show drew an FCC-record fine of $755,000. The program aired in four Florida cities and included graphic discussions about sex and drugs "designed to pander to, titillate and shock listeners," the FCC said.

"Clear Channel is serious about helping address the rising tide of indecency on the airwaves," said Mark Mays, president and chief operating officer. "As broadcast licensees, we are fully responsible for what our stations air, and we intend to make sure all our DJs and programmers understand what is and what is not appropriate." '

A $755,000 fine is serious pocket change and these people are taking notice of that and not decency, morals, the public good or any of that fine sounding uplifting talk.

The regulatory dog is getting some sharp teeth in its bite and the morality dead executives at the top are feeling the pain.

[Violet1966]

I can't stand stern and think he's been a catalyst, for what's become indecently acceptable in this society. He's not alone...mr springer is up there too. I would love to see clear channel pull the plug on him, but I can't see it happening. Too many dollar signs involved. I can only hope :)

[Necore]

Although they are saying it's temporary, do you really think Stern will conform to "acceptable broadcasting standards"????No, of course he won't. Ignorant abuse of the 1st Amendment has become mainstream and the "in" thing to listen to and watch today. After all... television and movies have no influence on the way our children think and act, right?

But I find it quite amusing how many of the same people who always scream about censorship of violence and gore in today's theaters are appalled at Mel Gibson's movie of Christ's crucifiction.

[Violet1966]

No, of course he won't. Ignorant abuse of the 1st Amendment has become mainstream and the "in" thing to listen to and watch today. After all... television and movies have no influence on the way our children think and act, right?

But I find it quite amusing how many of the same people who always scream about censorship of violence and gore in today's theaters are appalled at Mel Gibson's movie of Christ's crucifiction.


Stern gets so much free press at times like this. This will just make him more money. My opinion on this...I think he's trying to compete with the publicity Jesus is getting at the moment and clear channel is helping him because it lines their pockets. Very little man he is...I wouldn't put it past him. The maggots.

[Flagger]

I think what is scary about this has nothing to do with Stern at all. He is doing the same show he has been doing ever since I heard him back in 1988. I listen to him where I live now because it is more interesting in the morning than another 92 in a row or call now to win this nationwide contest.

CC has carried him for years. It was only before their appearance before congress that he was pulled off of SIX stations (the only six CC stations in the country that carried his show). He is still on about 75 stations nationwide. I think the idea of community standards is a big slap in the face of free speech to begin with. What is to prevent some future community or even administration to decide that reading from the Bible is obscene because it contains stories of incest and murder among other things. How about speech against the government as being called obscene.

CC is trying to curry favor as it continues to gobble up stations across the country. It further wants the ownership rules in each city relaxed. Stern is merely a pawn in a much bigger game between government pressure and corporate wishes.

Suddenly Stern was so offensive to Logan and his nine year old daughter? What a crock of shit.

[Neo]

Well I was pleasantly surprised about what I found in the Op-Ed section of today's LA Times. An article by Rush Limbaugh on the controversy over Stern.

I am neutral on Limbaugh and don't listen to him except when on long drives to Mexico and he is the only thing of interest on at a certain hour. Then I can only listen for about 10 minutes. Get my drift?

What surprised me was how intersting and well written was his opinion piece and how exceptionally well he tied in so many related subjects and in such a short piece.

Limbaugh said in part:

"After it happened, people were stunned when I came to Stern's defense. The uninformed thought that I, as a conservative, must believe that the government should be in the business of silencing smut and regulating morality. But that was a week ago and the story has stretched. Now the buzz is that Stern was not dropped by Clear Channel for violating its decency standards. No, Clear Channel dropped Howard because he had been critical of President Bush. And, as the tale goes, since Clear Channel is reputedly close to Bush, the president called Clear Channel and told it to get rid of Stern."

The whole article is here. (http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-limbaugh7mar07,1,5554855.story?coll=la-news-comment)

[Steve]

If true, I can't imagine anything the President could do to destroy his political future than to personally intervene in an issue like this.

[Flagger]

There was something I heard today that a few of the Clear Channel stations that dropped Howard have continued to use the commercials he has recorded for local businesses. Now if they are doing this and not paying him, shit just for the fact that his broadcast is not good enough for them but his talent is good enough for them to sell is downright fucking criminal if you ask me.

[Sierra Mike]

There was something I heard today that a few of the Clear Channel stations that dropped Howard have continued to use the commercials he has recorded for local businesses. Now if they are doing this and not paying him, shit just for the fact that his broadcast is not good enough for them but his talent is good enough for them to sell is downright fucking criminal if you ask me.
Watch the lingo, please. This portion of the forum is open to the unregistered public.

SM

[Sierra Mike]

Watch the lingo, please. This portion of the forum is open to the unregistered public.

SM

Sorry, it was pointed out to me that the above reads more like a drive-by snipe than anything else; it's not. But we do need to start policing ourselves regarding vulgar language (and by this I mean the F-word more than anything else) in the "open" forums, since minors can see it. I'm as guilty of that as others.

SM

[Flagger]

Sorry, it was pointed out to me that the above reads more like a drive-by snipe than anything else; it's not. But we do need to start policing ourselves regarding vulgar language (and by this I mean the F-word more than anything else) in the "open" forums, since minors can see it. I'm as guilty of that as others.

SM

I just want to point out that the shoutbox is just as viewable to minors as this forum. This is a screenshot I just saw before I had logged in this evening.

This not meant as a snipe back at all, just pointing out something. I also didn't use "fucking" to damage any minors. Merely was expressing my feelings on this alleged act of Clear Channel if they are/were in fact running Stern's spots without his programme.

[cdw]

uh oh.... I'm gonna get sent to my room again soon. I can tell.
:lol:

[Sierra Mike]

I just want to point out that the shoutbox is just as viewable to minors as this forum. This is a screenshot I just saw before I had logged in this evening.

This not meant as a snipe back at all, just pointing out something. I also didn't use "fucking" to damage any minors. Merely was expressing my feelings on this alleged act of Clear Channel if they are/were in fact running Stern's spots without his programme.
That's innuendo, not swearing. I'm certain I don't have to explain the differences to you.

SM

[FrankF]

I don't like Stern and I don't listen to him. This though, is just more boobage fallout. Iffin you don't like what's on the radio, change the damn station.

I don't listen to him either. Or Mark and Brian (they try to be funny, but aren't), or the 700 Club, or Rush Limbaugh. Come to think of it, I don't listen to any talk radio crapolla.

[joseftu]

Was Stern really removed from Clear Channel because he criticizes Bush?

I know Stern's been reporting it as fact on a daily basis, but I don't think it's really likely. But if it is true, it was a major mistake, because his audience has grown, and he actively works to convince people to vote Bush out of office every day.

As for his show...unless there really was pressure from Bush, he wasn't censored. But I have to admit, I listen to him, and I sometimes have lauged out loud. He's vulgar, and often repetitive, and his cohorts can be so sickeningly sycophantic, but he has flashes of really insightful and psychologically risky comedy. The pieces where he's played tapes of his father, and talked to his mother--that was far above most of what we hear on the radio. It was risky and honest in a way that I'm sure makes Clear Channel and its ilk far more nervous than the butt bongo, or even Janet's nipple.

[cdw]

I don't listen to him...at all. I think I saw one of his New Year's Eve shows on HBO and it was rediculous...raunchy to make a point. Who needs it?
So, I haven't a clue what he has to say or why. I turn the channel, which is what I think those who don't care for him should do. From what I understood, he was fired because of his skits and the fines that are now being handed out... which I also do not agree with at all. As for this Bush crapola, I can't imagine that Bush doesn't have something better to do than to worry about HS.... certainly would fit in with Howard's agenda to keep repeating it though. :)

[Coot]

Clear Channel was only playing Stern on a few stations. I don't think this has much to do with Clean Channel's politics per se. Clear Channel is also clamping down on hosts they do have under direct contract as well. Right down to the local stations and local personalities. It's a result of the fines that are being levied against them more than anything else.

Michael (my daddy's Secretary of State) Powell has decided the time is ripe to swing the rubberband back and most of radio is getting whiplash. I would say that it is Bush policy to get the vulgarity off the air. I don't care for Stern, but I don't think the FCC has any business getting this arbitrary either. Radio should be reflecting the values of society. In a very real way, it's not doing that right now.

[yazdzik]

Whilst Stern and his ilk disgrace both the press and the country, the "community standard" cannot logically be that of 1955 Indiana.
Nor, as much as I destest the current inability of the press to report accurately or literately, can the first amendment be sacrificed even to community standard.
One would hope that either tweedle-dum or tweedle-dee would have taken a proper consitutional stance, but Bush is a sick prude who puts his own personal religion above the constitution he swore to protect, and is thus vile; the Massachusetts mediocrity has not found out yet who will pay more for him at auction, and his villainy has as yet no identifiable colour.
-MY

[cdw]

Rogers, who has been the dominant personality in the Miami-Fort Lauderdale market for more than a quarter-century, says his employer, WQAM (AM 560), has virtually strip-mined his occasionally risqué program.

"They've taken away about 70 percent of my comedy bits," said Rogers, who has been given a new list of forbidden words, which include trademark epithets he's used thousands of times over the years.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflorida/sfl-radio20mar20,0,7109326.story?coll=sfla-home-headlines

everybody's subject to this, so howard can get off it that it's about criticizing Bush. It has to do with the FCC and fines and wanting people to clean up their act... which I find out of hand. I don't know what Bush has to do with that if anything. This is also the reason we weren't too happy with the FCC wanting to change the ownership rules to allow them to have more stations..radio or TV or newspapers. Even without the FCC in the picture those owners can really wreak havoc on our rights to listen to what we want to. Can't do that if they won't put it on.