The Howard Stern Show
March 12, 2004 7:25 AM   Subscribe

The Howard Stern Show was Howard-free the first hour and a half this morning while they played soundbites and songs about their current battle with the FCC, CC, and GWB. Howard threatens a revolutionizing move to satellite radio. Petitions circulate, some articles written but surprisingly minimal public outcry thus far.
posted by Miyagi (31 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite
Also in Salon.
posted by alms at 7:42 AM on March 12, 2004

Yeah, Howard has some other articles listed under 'Required Reading' on his web site - he is giving his audience a little homework to do.
posted by Miyagi at 7:47 AM on March 12, 2004

All things come to an end.

Howard had a good run.

But afaic he's not shocking any more.
He's not that funny any more.
He's not that entertaining any more.

He's done it all and defecated on it.

Maybe it's time for him to go bye bye.

Howard, walk away with dignity.
Don't let them drag you away while you shriek hysterically like a woman...
posted by Trik at 7:57 AM on March 12, 2004

Howard ain't jumping to XM. It's partly owned by Clear Channel. Sirius maybe, but look for the vast majority of his listeners to say "Eh, oh well." and for the show to be off the air within a year. There simply isn't enough market share in satellite yet.
posted by Dreama at 8:04 AM on March 12, 2004

Is the Gubmint really trying to bring him down? Other than the Clear Channel situation, what has happened? Is he just trying to blow this out of proportion to drum up some publicity?

He's just a big boring whiner.
posted by bondcliff at 8:07 AM on March 12, 2004

I've been listening to Howard for almost 20 years, and have always been afraid of the day he was going to retire. I didn't think (and hope) it would end like this.
posted by armacy at 8:10 AM on March 12, 2004

I've always been surprised that Stern's gravy train ran for this long, especially after actually listening through a couple of his shows. Personally I just find it really boring as it lacks pretty much everything I tune in to radio to get (news and music).
posted by clevershark at 8:18 AM on March 12, 2004

If Howard jumps to satradio, it will create the market share.
posted by o2b at 8:27 AM on March 12, 2004

I dunno, the lack of outrage on the part of Howard's audience has been sort of stunning. It's as if few really care, which says maybe Howard's ride is over.
posted by kgasmart at 8:38 AM on March 12, 2004

whatever happens to Howard, the reason that this is important are those oppressive FCC fines soon to be available to Chairman Powell in his battle against free speech.
posted by Domain Master 666 at 8:40 AM on March 12, 2004

not a derail... these new fines are the reason that Howard is packing it up. He knows that the hammer is coming down, and that no over-the-airwaves, "free" media will be able to afford the punishment.
posted by Domain Master 666 at 8:42 AM on March 12, 2004

Funny ... I had guessed the "CC" in the front page post would link to the Christian Coalition, but instead it linked to Clear Channel. What's the difference, really?
posted by Holden at 8:52 AM on March 12, 2004

Howard is a has been.
posted by crunchland at 8:59 AM on March 12, 2004

The one radio personality I heard backing Stern in the news was Rush Limbaughm, yet would that count with any weight?
posted by thomcatspike at 9:00 AM on March 12, 2004

posted by dvdgee at 9:03 AM on March 12, 2004

I expect that Howard Stern is going to end not only broadcasting on Sirius but owning a big chunk of it, too. They could never afford his salary in cash ... I bet he gets a huge stake, greater than 10% (maybe even 20%), of the equity in options or restricted stock, in exchange for a 7-year contract.
posted by MattD at 9:15 AM on March 12, 2004

You mean not everyone listens to NPR 24/7?
posted by bshort at 9:18 AM on March 12, 2004

It's ironic that people don't see the forest through the trees on this one. First, W and his Christian friends are going to "regulate" what you hear on the radio and see on TV through large fines. Once they've cleaned up both mediums they'll come for your precious little internet and your porno DVD's.

Just keeping talking about how Stern sucks. That's what they hoped you'd do.
posted by photoslob at 9:19 AM on March 12, 2004

Whether you like him or not (I don't really) shouldn't be relevant to this issue. I'd argue for Limbaugh to remain on the air if they were railroading him.
posted by callmejay at 9:21 AM on March 12, 2004

photoslob, stop scaremongering. That'll never happen.
posted by Blue Stone at 9:29 AM on March 12, 2004

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I don't even see how existing laws that exact fines on broadcasters are constitutional. They certainly seem arbitrary. Howard should take this to the courts, and follow in the footsteps of Larry Flynt.
posted by joecacti at 9:40 AM on March 12, 2004

You mean not everyone listens to NPR 24/7?

bshort, there are actually people who never listen to NPR. I have Karl Kassel's voice on my home answering machine, mocking them mercilessly.
posted by Hildago at 9:50 AM on March 12, 2004

yeah, i've never found Howard Stern very funny, though i definitely appreciated that someone out there was offending people left and right.

what's significant in this story is that Clear Channel pulled him from their stations 2 days after he endorsed Al Franken's book and spoke out against GWB for the first time, and that the FCC is going to use "decency fines" to homogenize radio discourse (and as others point out, online pr0n is probably next) in America. very scary. go Howard! i'm listening now. well, kind of ...
posted by mrgrimm at 9:50 AM on March 12, 2004

i listened to howard for a few years and loved it, the brutal honesty was what i dug so much, not the contests or sound bytes that got him his 'shock jock' rep, he's still head and shoulders above the standard clear channel 'bob and dumbass' morning show.

i dont know what i could see howard doing next, i cant see him being successful in satellite or internet radio, and he seems to have lost so much relevance that he probably couldn't pull off a show on cable (and lord never let him have a skit comedy show ever again)
posted by yeahyeahyeahwhoo at 10:17 AM on March 12, 2004

I don't care for Howard Stern, but the govt and clear channel are behaving in a despicable manner toward him. After him, who's next, Al Franken?
posted by Slagman at 10:21 AM on March 12, 2004

Howard is going after GWB.

I've always dismissed Stern as one would rude ten-year-old. Silly me, I never realized he could have so much influence.
posted by orange swan at 10:23 AM on March 12, 2004

First they came for Janet Jackson's boob and I did not speak out because I thought a boob was dirty.

Then they came for Howard Stern and I did not speak out because I was too busy debating whether or not he was funny.

Then they came for me and my internet porn and there was no one left to speak out for me. Well, save the "good christians" that were more than happy to legislate morality.
posted by photoslob at 11:06 AM on March 12, 2004

I think Howard Stern is a tool.

That being said, I don't think the government should be legislating what he can or cannot say. Indecent, obscene, or otherwise. Seems to me that Clear Channel handled it just fine themselves, as a private organization, by choosing not to carry his show. Problem solved. If someone else wants to carry him, they can, and we can listen to him, or not.

I don't particularly like Janet Jackson or her boobs.

That being said, I don't think the government should be legislating whether or not her or her boobs can be shown on television. Seems that public outcry and CBS handled that one too. You can be darn sure it won't happen again any time soon. Again, problem solved. And again, there was no need for the government to step in.

Just tossin' in my $.02
posted by Lafe at 11:45 AM on March 12, 2004

For several years Howard has been saying that he will retire (from radio at least) as soon as his current contract runs out. I think there's like 2 years (maybe less) left on it now. If all of this censorship gives him an excuse to cut out early, I think he definitely will. I don't see him going to all of the trouble of switching to satellite.
posted by rorycberger at 11:56 AM on March 12, 2004

I think what's happening is a shame. This is just a way to silence people who don't comform to what a small minority think shouldn't be on the radio. Fining individual jocks (not the companies that reap the ad revenue) $500k is insane!

I do think that Stern is being singled out, probably because of his millions of listeners rather than his newfound contempt for Bush. But Clear Channel dropping him when they have other jocks doing stuff just as bad, and right after Stern turned against Bush? Kind of suspicious. Still, they are a private company and its up to them what they want to do. But the new regulation is a joke, a sham, and totally against the first amendment.
posted by chaz at 12:02 PM on March 12, 2004

Howard should take this to the courts, and follow in the footsteps of Larry Flynt.

I listen to him from time to time and he brought this up. He was fined about ten years ago and chose to fight it. While it was in court, Infinity Broadcasting could not renew their licences or buy/sell radio stations. Paperwork would be held up or disappear if they fought the fines. In the end, it would cost less for Infinity to pay the fine than lose money in that fashion.
posted by dr_dank at 12:49 PM on March 12, 2004

« Older Deep Sea Critters   |   Briscoe and Curtis go fishing Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments