I know that Stern pushed for his listeners to complain about Oprah Winfrey (?). Oprah got away with saying things about vaginas and sexual practices that Stern was fined for
The most fucked up thing about the HS/OW situation is that Stern was fined for reading the transcript of the Oprah show! The one she didn't get fined for!
Whatever happened to rational thought? Anybody know? Is it just uncool to think these days?
This is exactly where the problem of non-enforcement has brought us. Because Oprah gets away with it, Stern thinks he can do it too. However, in reality Oprah was just not caught because none of the complainers were looking at her show, and had somebody complained the stations airing her show would have gotten fined.
The problem is that the FCC doesn't have the resources to watch every channel all the time, and the PTC doesn't either so they just target programs where they expect to find something...
the problem is that after stern brought the issue up, a LOT of people filed complaints about oprah, many orders of magnitude more than complained about stern. the fcc even admitted this!
and STILL oprah hasn't been fined. only stern has.
oprah is loved so she can break the rules however and whenever she likes, while stern is reviled and gets severely punished for the tiniest infraction.
Oprah contributes to the correct political campaigns (Repubs and Dems). Stern did not do this and therefore made a convenient target for the bible beaters. This, by the way, is the same reason Martha Stewart went to jail for what was barely stock fraud but Bill Gates got a slap on the wrist for monopolistic activities.
Howard Stern stays exactly within the narrow lane of behavior with which he has been assigned. Namely, he is to appeal to the 'rebel' demographic by himself being a 'rebel' against the very system which permits his survival. This reminds me of the skinny dork I knew in 8th grade who was talking about all the advantages of survival of the fittest and anarchy, and how mad he got when my very intelligent friend asked him if it had occurred to him that he would in all l
When I've heard Stern (which is rarely), I have heard things that I would agree meet the 3 criteria that the FCC uses.
Oprah fails to meet the third: in general, you can reasonably argue that there is a valid educational purpose in what she (or her guests in most cases) are discussing (e.g. the above quoted salad-tossing and rainbow party examples).
That's just my opinion, and I don't agree with banning things that match the 3 criterea anyway, but the FCC does seem to be following the rules that the law and
Knowing Stern, any mention of this topic is most likely done in a degrading, derogatory manner, with absolutely no intrinsic value other than to titilate/stimulate his brain-dead listeners
I see quite a difference between this aproach, and approaching the subject with a sense of intellectual or educational value. Perhaps it's not so much the "what" that matters here, so much as the "how".
You are misinterpreting how the FCC polices indecency. It doesn't watch channels. It responds to complaints that provide transcripts of the alledgedly offensive broadcasts. The PTC and other American Moralists have been streaming complaints against Howard Stern for over a decade. That's why he's been getting fined.
The Oprah Winfrey example clearly illustrates the hypocrisy in how the FCC arbitrarily chooses to levy fines. If you're a friend to the mainstream, you're safe. If you're outside the status quo, watch out.
Here's a link to the transcripts [howardstern.com]. Judge for yourself if the FCC is being fair.
This is exactly where the problem of non-enforcement has brought us. Because Oprah gets away with it, Stern thinks he can do it too. However, in reality Oprah was just not caught because none of the complainers were looking at her show, and had somebody complained the stations airing her show would have gotten fined.
That does raise the question of why a whole bunch of upstanding Christians were listening to Howard Stern. I mean, come on, are you really telling me that the people that are getting offended by Stern are otherwise usual Stern listeners? It's like that other group lobbying radio stations not to play Skinny Puppy or else they'll boycott the station... because as we all know the impact of the hordes of fundamentalist christian right wing nutjobs that actually listen to any radio station ever that plays Skinny Puppy is enourmous. These people are deliberately going out looking for trouble and looking to be offended. That's the reason that people that make their name off shock tactics (Stern etc.) are getting targetted, but people doing equally graphics things that aren't known for it (Oprah) get away with it. It's all just silly.
people have come to the incorrect conclusion that these upstanding Christians were actually listening to stern
the fact is, they aren't. the PTC writes up some draft letter, and they send it out to their 'members', who basically just change the signature. there was an article in the nypost (i think?) about this just a few weeks ago
people have come to the incorrect conclusion that these upstanding Christians were actually listening to stern
the fact is, they aren't. the PTC writes up some draft letter, and they send it out to their 'members', who basically just change the signature. there was an article in the nypost (i think?) about this just a few weeks ago
Which is even worse! They are being told that it's offensive, and just going along with it. There seems to be a dire lack of critial thinking in the US today. The number of
I used to listen to Howard Stern on my way to seminary. Does that count? I wasn't offended though, only mildly amused. I mean all the morning radio guys were trying to be LIKE Stern so why not just listen to the original?;-)
Thanks! Some fan I am: I didn't know there was a new album, _AND_ I saw them at the Ballroom in San Francisco back in the fall!
Awesome show. I hadn't been to an industrial concert since I saw NIN/Manson in NY in Novmber of 1994 (shush, you!;-). This time I sat in the balcony and let the young-ins tear it up on the floor. In such a small venue, the sound was brain rattling, but I had to go back to the car and leave all my studed bracelets and belts behind... what's the world coming to these days...
Thanks! Some fan I am: I didn't know there was a new album, _AND_ I saw them at the Ballroom in San Francisco back in the fall!
Yeah, I didn't know about the new album till the concert either. I wasn't that into skinny puppy before. My girlfriend loves them so I went with her... but after hearing more of their old stuff than she usually plays, I found that I like a lot of it. And I love the new stuff. We ordered the new album a week after the concert.
In such a small venue, the sound was brain rattling
That does raise the question of why a whole bunch of upstanding Christians were listening to Howard Stern.
Thats just it. They werent listening to Howard and they never will listen to Howard or Opie and Anthony.
What happens is some organization catches wind of something and then they scramble their christian family group ninjas into action. They start letter campaigns that are based on lies. In other words they have individuals who havent even seen the program to write complaints.
I hate to defend the Christian Right, but in fairness I must say that even if you're just scanning the dial, half the time you land on the Howard Stern show you're bound to hear something that would be offensive to a great many people, be it baiting the mentally challenged or lewd commentary re: strippers etc.
Context is everything. Now I don't know the contexts for those two incedents, but I can guess. Oprah was probably being discussed with a doctor about women's health issues or something like that. Stern was probably making dirty jokes instead of doing some kind of information piece like Oprah was (again, my conjecture, I don't know for sure). In that case that's perfectly fine. Now if they were both making leud jokes and one got fined and the other didn't, that would be unfair. But you just can't discuss som
And I need the government to judge the "contexts" for my media consumption because...?
The legal system considers context all the time. Consider, if you touch a stranger's ass in the subway, if you did it for sexual gratification, it's a sex crime. If you did it accidentally, well, it's an accident. If you did it to remove a scorpion, you're a hero. Same act, different context.
Stern, et al have valid complaints (namely, being fined by the FCC) but his then demanding Oprah be finded is childish and his
Who gets to arbitrate what context makes things appropriate? The Oprah show was actually teenagers talking about sex and sexual terms. Here's the transcript: [howardstern.com]
The Oprah Winfrey Show Transcript
Thursday, March 18, 2004
Clip One
Oprah: Lets talk about that secret language Michelle.
Michelle: Yes
Oprah: I didn't know any of this
Michelle: I have yea, I have gotten a whole new vocabulary let me tell ya
Oprah: I did not know any of this
Michelle: Salad tossing, cucumbers, lettuce tomatoes ok
Oprah: ok so so what is a salad toss?
Michelle: ok a tossed salad is, get ready hold on to your underwear for this one, oral anal sex, So oral sex with the anus is what that would be.
Clip Two
Michelle: a rainbow party is an oral sex party it's a gathering where oral sex is performed and
rainbow comes from all of the girls put on lipstick and each one puts her mouth around
the penis of the gentleman or gentlemen who are there to receive favors and makes
a mark um in a different place on the penis hence the term rainbow
Who gets to arbitrate what context makes things appropriate?
Indeed. The tendency in any established beauracracy is towards "fixing" the "system", regardless of the parent system's necessity or effectiveness. So we think about how the FCC does and should handle things, rather than about doing away with governments altogether, which would make a lot more sense. Wouldn't both sides be happier settling the "moral values" issue with guns? I know I would. I'm inclined to say that only the individual has the ca
You can guess, but then you would be wrong. Oprah was talking about the rise of oral sex in American high schools and some of the terms the kids are using. Howard was talking about the rise of oral sex in American high schools and some of the terms the kids are using.
The only difference is Oprah was talking about it in a "this is so terrible, can you believe it" type of way, and Howard thought it was funny.
If only it was as pure as you make it out to be. As you can see by the transcript below it's not about context. The things they were talking about are just as titillating as what goes on on Sterns show. It's not about context, it's about viewership and perception.
It's OK for Oprah to talk about it because she's perceived as a caring, loving black woman who gives out free cars. Her viewership is mostly middle aged suburban white woman who think of her as some kind of saint. Titillating lesbianism among hot teenage girls? Oh no, not on Oprah! It's uh.. educational! These damn kids and their hot hot descriptions of rampant sex!
It's NOT ok for Stern to talk about it because he's perceived as a perverted white guy. His listeners are young men.. crass bastards.
I guess you can call all of that context, but it's a LOT more twisted kind of context than you're making it out to be.
I'm sick of this stupid crap about "indecency". The whole thing is just a fight about the so called "culture war". The christian right doesn't want anyone exposed to things they don't like because they believe it'll turn everyone evil. They cloak the whole thing in a "protect our children" wrapping because a lot of people seem to lose their brains at any mention of the world children.
Hell, I'm offended by most of reality TV and I think its rotting peoples brains and beliefs. I don't however think the solution is banning it from the airwaves. Unfortunately the moral crusaders of the Christian right think they're the only ones with a moral system, (or at least the only possible "correct" moral system) and wish to enforce it on everyone else.
The whole "different context" idea has nothing to do with the race of the TV personality, or the demographics of the audience. The difference in context is right there in the content of the two shows.
The difference between hot lesbian teenage oral sex on Oprah vs. Stern is simple: Oprah is discouraging that type of behavior and Stern is encouraging it. It is very different thing to bring teenagers on your show and tell them not to do such things (Oprah style) as opposed to bringing teenage girls on your s
Dont know how many of you have read the transcript to the show that howard stern got fined for but it the timeframe of the complaint the only thing that came anyplace close to indeasent was a session where Howard Stern was talking about a cream to clean the anal area
Your sig doesn't match your post.
Read the transcripts, it will take you less than 10 minutes, much less time than reading a book to become "intelligent" .
Not when it comes to enforcement, its not. Either you broke the law or not. And another whole problem with the completely arbitrary enforcement by the FCC is, nobody knows whats safe. Just look at all the tv stations that refused to air Saving Private Ryan because they might be fined by the FCC.
What about Howard Stern (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:1)
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:1)
Chris Rock
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:1, Interesting)
Whatever happened to rational thought? Anybody know? Is it just uncool to think these days?
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:1)
The problem is that the FCC doesn't have the resources to watch every channel all the time, and the PTC doesn't either so they just target programs where they expect to find something...
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:5, Interesting)
and STILL oprah hasn't been fined. only stern has.
oprah is loved so she can break the rules however and whenever she likes, while stern is reviled and gets severely punished for the tiniest infraction.
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:4, Interesting)
"Do you see Al Franken being fined?"
Not yet. But it will happen soon I am sure.
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
That would imply that he has listeners.
Al Franken (Score:2)
it's only a matter of time.
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:1)
Howard Stern stays exactly within the narrow lane of behavior with which he has been assigned. Namely, he is to appeal to the 'rebel' demographic by himself being a 'rebel' against the very system which permits his survival. This reminds me of the skinny dork I knew in 8th grade who was talking about all the advantages of survival of the fittest and anarchy, and how mad he got when my very intelligent friend asked him if it had occurred to him that he would in all l
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
Oprah fails to meet the third: in general, you can reasonably argue that there is a valid educational purpose in what she (or her guests in most cases) are discussing (e.g. the above quoted salad-tossing and rainbow party examples).
That's just my opinion, and I don't agree with banning things that match the 3 criterea anyway, but the FCC does seem to be following the rules that the law and
Re:You can't see the difference? (Score:2)
Knowing Stern, any mention of this topic is most likely done in a degrading, derogatory manner, with absolutely no intrinsic value other than to titilate/stimulate his brain-dead listeners
I see quite a difference between this aproach, and approaching the subject with a sense of intellectual or educational value. Perhaps it's not so much the "what" that matters here, so much as the "how".
that's not how the FCC operates (Score:5, Interesting)
You are misinterpreting how the FCC polices indecency. It doesn't watch channels. It responds to complaints that provide transcripts of the alledgedly offensive broadcasts. The PTC and other American Moralists have been streaming complaints against Howard Stern for over a decade. That's why he's been getting fined.
The Oprah Winfrey example clearly illustrates the hypocrisy in how the FCC arbitrarily chooses to levy fines. If you're a friend to the mainstream, you're safe. If you're outside the status quo, watch out.
Here's a link to the transcripts [howardstern.com]. Judge for yourself if the FCC is being fair.
I think (Score:2)
Just a thought...
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:5, Insightful)
That does raise the question of why a whole bunch of upstanding Christians were listening to Howard Stern. I mean, come on, are you really telling me that the people that are getting offended by Stern are otherwise usual Stern listeners? It's like that other group lobbying radio stations not to play Skinny Puppy or else they'll boycott the station... because as we all know the impact of the hordes of fundamentalist christian right wing nutjobs that actually listen to any radio station ever that plays Skinny Puppy is enourmous. These people are deliberately going out looking for trouble and looking to be offended. That's the reason that people that make their name off shock tactics (Stern etc.) are getting targetted, but people doing equally graphics things that aren't known for it (Oprah) get away with it. It's all just silly.
Jedidiah.
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:1)
the fact is, they aren't. the PTC writes up some draft letter, and they send it out to their 'members', who basically just change the signature. there was an article in the nypost (i think?) about this just a few weeks ago
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
the fact is, they aren't. the PTC writes up some draft letter, and they send it out to their 'members', who basically just change the signature. there was an article in the nypost (i think?) about this just a few weeks ago
Which is even worse! They are being told that it's offensive, and just going along with it. There seems to be a dire lack of critial thinking in the US today. The number of
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
What station was boycotted and when?
Just curious.
An SP fan.
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
They released a new album this year. They've also been on tour this fall. You should see them if you still can, very good show...
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
Thanks! Some fan I am: I didn't know there was a new album, _AND_ I saw them at the Ballroom in San Francisco back in the fall!
Awesome show. I hadn't been to an industrial concert since I saw NIN/Manson in NY in Novmber of 1994 (shush, you!
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
Yeah, I didn't know about the new album till the concert either. I wasn't that into skinny puppy before. My girlfriend loves them so I went with her... but after hearing more of their old stuff than she usually plays, I found that I like a lot of it. And I love the new stuff. We ordered the new album a week after the concert.
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:1)
Thats just it. They werent listening to Howard and they never will listen to Howard or Opie and Anthony.
What happens is some organization catches wind of something and then they scramble their christian family group ninjas into action. They start letter campaigns that are based on lies. In other words they have individuals who havent even seen the program to write complaints.
This turns out a large n
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
Who is more likely to shoot themself in the face?
Put a well raised kid in a room alone with a gun, and then put a teased, abused, mentally damaged child alone in a room with a gun....
Who is likely to blow their brains out?
Actually, you might be surprised...
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:1)
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
The legal system considers context all the time. Consider, if you touch a stranger's ass in the subway, if you did it for sexual gratification, it's a sex crime. If you did it accidentally, well, it's an accident. If you did it to remove a scorpion, you're a hero. Same act, different context.
Stern, et al have valid complaints (namely, being fined by the FCC) but his then demanding Oprah be finded is childish and his
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:1)
If you check his website as well I believe the shows transcripts are still there for review.
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:5, Informative)
The Oprah Winfrey Show Transcript
Thursday, March 18, 2004
Clip One
Oprah: Lets talk about that secret language Michelle.
Michelle: Yes
Oprah: I didn't know any of this
Michelle: I have yea, I have gotten a whole new vocabulary let me tell ya
Oprah: I did not know any of this
Michelle: Salad tossing, cucumbers, lettuce tomatoes ok
Oprah: ok so so what is a salad toss?
Michelle: ok a tossed salad is, get ready hold on to your underwear for this one, oral anal sex, So oral sex with the anus is what that would be.
Clip Two
Michelle: a rainbow party is an oral sex party it's a gathering where oral sex is performed and rainbow comes from all of the girls put on lipstick and each one puts her mouth around the penis of the gentleman or gentlemen who are there to receive favors and makes a mark um in a different place on the penis hence the term rainbow
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:1)
Indeed. The tendency in any established beauracracy is towards "fixing" the "system", regardless of the parent system's necessity or effectiveness. So we think about how the FCC does and should handle things, rather than about doing away with governments altogether, which would make a lot more sense. Wouldn't both sides be happier settling the "moral values" issue with guns? I know I would. I'm inclined to say that only the individual has the ca
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2, Informative)
The only difference is Oprah was talking about it in a "this is so terrible, can you believe it" type of way, and Howard thought it was funny.
But, exact same context.
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:5, Insightful)
Context is everything.
If only it was as pure as you make it out to be. As you can see by the transcript below it's not about context. The things they were talking about are just as titillating as what goes on on Sterns show. It's not about context, it's about viewership and perception.
It's OK for Oprah to talk about it because she's perceived as a caring, loving black woman who gives out free cars. Her viewership is mostly middle aged suburban white woman who think of her as some kind of saint. Titillating lesbianism among hot teenage girls? Oh no, not on Oprah! It's uh.. educational! These damn kids and their hot hot descriptions of rampant sex!
It's NOT ok for Stern to talk about it because he's perceived as a perverted white guy. His listeners are young men.. crass bastards.
I guess you can call all of that context, but it's a LOT more twisted kind of context than you're making it out to be.
I'm sick of this stupid crap about "indecency". The whole thing is just a fight about the so called "culture war". The christian right doesn't want anyone exposed to things they don't like because they believe it'll turn everyone evil. They cloak the whole thing in a "protect our children" wrapping because a lot of people seem to lose their brains at any mention of the world children.
Hell, I'm offended by most of reality TV and I think its rotting peoples brains and beliefs. I don't however think the solution is banning it from the airwaves. Unfortunately the moral crusaders of the Christian right think they're the only ones with a moral system, (or at least the only possible "correct" moral system) and wish to enforce it on everyone else.
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:2)
You don't understand. Indecency harms "human decency". That's why it must be stopped.
You're overcomplicating this (Score:2)
The difference between hot lesbian teenage oral sex on Oprah vs. Stern is simple: Oprah is discouraging that type of behavior and Stern is encouraging it. It is very different thing to bring teenagers on your show and tell them not to do such things (Oprah style) as opposed to bringing teenage girls on your s
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:1)
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:1)
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:1)
context smontext (Score:1)
Not when it comes to enforcement, its not. Either you broke the law or not. And another whole problem with the completely arbitrary enforcement by the FCC is, nobody knows whats safe. Just look at all the tv stations that refused to air Saving Private Ryan because they might be fined by the FCC.
Re:What about Howard Stern (Score:1)