Howard Stern suspended from Clear Channel stations

Forbes ^ | 2-25-04

[Indy Pendance]

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Shock jock Howard Stern's show was yanked Wednesday from Clear Channel Communications Inc. radio stations after an incident on his show Tuesday, the first casualty of its zero tolerance policy on indecency.

"It was vulgar, offensive and insulting, not just to women and African Americans but to anyone with a sense of common decency," Clear Channel Radio Chief Executive John Hogan said in a statement.

"We will not air Howard Stern on Clear Channel stations until we are assured that his show will conform to acceptable standards of responsible broadcasting," he said.

Clear Channel has about 1,200 stations in the United States though it was not immediately clear how many aired his show.

Stern's show is syndicated by a unit of Viacom Inc.

[An American In Dairyland]

>>I'm on Howard's side. Not the censor's side.<<

The censor in this case is the station owner. The program, the money for operating the program, and the equipment used to broadcast the progarm ALL belong to the station owner.

Meaning that, like any other employer in the US, the station owner has the right to tell Stern (the employee so to speak) what the owner wants done with his property.

Any other employee in America risks being disciplined or fired if they refuse to comply with the employer's decisions relative to running a business.

THIS is how this should work and I'm glad it is working that way in Stern's case.

It would be wrong to ask the government come in and shut down Stern's speech because if the government can do it to Stern, they can next shut down Rush Limbaugh because someone is offended by his speech.

THIS is how it should not work.

Anyone who doesn't like Stern's show (and I am one such person) has the duty and obligation to get out there and complain to Clear Channel, Stern's advertisers, and other people to educate them and garner more support against Stern.

Most of us are either too lazy to do these things or can't get together cohesively as a group or movement. In other words, it is so much easier for many of us to cry to Big Daddy Government to make bad boys like Howard Stern go away. Then we are shocked when Big Daddy Government turns around and tells us to shut up, too.

Again I'm glad Clear Channel took the lead (thanks to Janet Jackson's naked nipple) and things are moving along the Right way.

[An American In Dairyland]

>>Ah, I see. And it's within the proper scope of government to define who is a "pus bag" and remove them from the air?<<

You need to get up to speed here. The government DID NOT pull Stern off the air. The station OWNER (Clear Channel) did. As the owner and employer of Stern so to speak, Clear Channel has the same right to discipline Stern that your employer has to discipline you.

Everything is working as it should with Stern right now. I suggest we all write or email or call Clear Channel and congratulate them on the wise and decent move they made WRT to Stern.

[babbabooeyToYall]

>>Ah, I see. And it's within the proper scope of government to define who is a "pus bag" and remove them from the air?<<

You need to get up to speed here. The government DID NOT pull Stern off the air. The station OWNER (Clear Channel) did. As the owner and employer of Stern so to speak, Clear Channel has the same right to discipline Stern that your employer has to discipline you.

I am afraid that you need to get up to speed. Clearchannel was under pressure from the government. The FCC is threatening to lob ridiculous fines at stations based solely on complaints of "idecency." Complaints. No proof. Just complaints. Can you imagine what it's like as a station owner to face this? If you can't see the government's role in this, please look again.

[babbabooeyToYall]

>>Ah, I see. And it's within the proper scope of government to define who is a "pus bag" and remove them from the air?<<

You need to get up to speed here. The government DID NOT pull Stern off the air. The station OWNER (Clear Channel) did. As the owner and employer of Stern so to speak, Clear Channel has the same right to discipline Stern that your employer has to discipline you.

I am afraid that you need to get up to speed. Clearchannel was under pressure from the government. The FCC is threatening to lob ridiculous fines at stations based solely on complaints of "idecency." Complaints. No proof. Just complaints. Can you imagine what it's like as a station owner to face this? If you can't see the government's role in this, please look again.

[Ol' Sparky]

What correlation is there between regulating obscenity on the public airwaves -- which has always occurred -- and surpressing political speech?

Rush wasn't censored on EPSN by the government. EPSN made a business decision, albeit a bad one.

[Ol' Sparky]

Obscenity over the public airwaves is and always has been regulated. Few people disagree that porn movies shouldn't be allowed on prime time TV.

It's a totally different thing trying to censor political speech.

[Ol' Sparky]

Okay. Let's remove all government censorship and allowing porn movies on Saturday morning on the local broadcast channels...

[Ol' Sparky]

No, obscenity laws aren't wrong. We've always had them and we always will have them over the broadcast airwaves. That is, unless you think the government should allow porn movies and anything else over the public airwaves.

Stern has free speech. He can peddle his trash on CD or on a pay channel.

[dead]

I doubt that there's any sort of a market for that, but if that happened, there wouldn't be a television in my house.

Of course, in your perfect world, the government would probably be strong enough to mandate that I own one and I watch it.

Throw out your television, Sparky, and all your problems will be solved.

[olde north church]

Actually, you want to know what the problem is? It's when the people who poke a stick in the tiger's cage and wind up getting their arm bitten off blame the tiger. Grow up.

[babbabooeyToYall]

Excuse, me, but what exactly is your point? I'm enjoying how some posters in this thread have settled into a pattern of juvenile name calling and schoolyard lines like, "grow up." That's certainly a coherent argument. A handful of posters, throughout this thread, have pointed out how Stern's cancellation in six markets is due to government action and some of us do think that this censorship is a matter that should be questioned. We've received little more than name calling and childish responses.

[mhking]

It's funny to see throughout this thread how the voices of decency and conservatism result to ad hominum attacks and infantile name calling, while at the same time bemoaning adolescent behavior more suited to the locker room.

This coming from someone with a Stern-centric name.

If Stern is that concerned, XM/Sirius beckons.

[mhking]

Complaints. No proof. Just complaints.

Wrong example. Stern wrote the book. He's crossed the line more times than can be counted over the past 20 years. His hand has been slapped so many times that he probably can't even feel the slaps any more.

As for CC, their motivation was tied to one man: Bubba the Love Sponge.

Getting fined more than three-quarters of a million dollars will do that to you.

Oh. And while we're at it, as of this afternoon, The Regular Guys at 96 Rock (WKLS) in Atlanta are gone as well, the next victims of CC's new-found "decency."

[mhking]

News of new victims of Cheap Channel's new-found "decency":

ALL ACCESS hears there's another CLEAR CHANNEL morning show off the air, as WKLS (96 ROCK)/ATLANTA morning stars THE REGULAR GUYS will be off the air FRIDAY (2/27) and until further notice.

The GUYS (LARRY WACHS and ERIC VON HAESSLER) want clarification from the company about Pres. JOHN HOGAN's comments that CLEAR CHANNEL hosts will be personally liable for the financial repercussions of any alleged on-air indecency. HOGAN included that provision in his "zero tolerance" policy unveiled on the eve of his Congressional testimony.

Just damn.

If you want on the list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...

[babbabooeyToYall]

It's funny to see throughout this thread how the voices of decency and conservatism result to ad hominum attacks and infantile name calling, while at the same time bemoaning adolescent behavior more suited to the locker room.

This coming from someone with a Stern-centric name.

I can't really tell if you're trying to be funny there, but I suspect that you are serious and have provided another example for my earlier post.

[CalifornianConservative]

The government has always had the right to "censor" content in media, and that's why the Supreme Court in 1915 declared motion pictures (read: films and what would be tv and radio) DID NOT have First Amendment protections.

Again, this is because it is difficult to rebut or respond to smut or immoral behavior in media unless you are a billionaire.

Again, this is why the first media moguls at the Hollywood Studios hired a Republican lobbyist to smooth over their cause with Congress after a series of scandals in the 1920's with Hollywood stars. (Fatty Arbuckle was their biggest problem). The studios were scared stiff of the government's power over them.

The studios VOLUNTARILY hired, staffed and submitted their content, from publicity to final cut, to their own men at the Production Code offices in Hollywood.

The result of this "self-censorship" by the studios? Only the Golden Age in Hollywood, radio, and music in America.

Clear Channel is acting in an appropriate manner, by SELF REGULATING before the Government steps in. The Government holds their licenses, after all.

Maybe now some people with real talent, not dirty old men peddling anal sex, incest, lesbianism, voyeurism, masturbation, etc., will be given Stern's time slots.

Again, I'd just like to see Stern without the black-dyed Tiny Tim hair, in a short cut with his real gray hair showing and glasses.

Put him in a trench coat with that haircut and I don't think many people would be willing to tune in.

Nor do I think many porn queens would willingly strip and pose for him as he slobbers all over the mic because he'd look too much like your stereotyped

DIRTY OLD MAN.

Bye Howard! It's been real degrading knowin' ya.

[Robert_Paulson2]

No, obscenity laws aren't wrong. --STRAWMAN... I never said they were. They can be however selectively interpreted and enforced to control free speech. It's simple, all you need is someone to define for law enforcement, ONE person's speech as obscene using a vague "community standards" interpretation, whilst ignoring another person's speech, even though it also violates community standards.

That is, unless you think the government should allow porn movies and anything else over the public airwaves.--Some folks confuse the government with God. As stated in the great nannystate prayer regarding censorship: "Our nannystate, which art in Washington DC, deliver us from the evil of our own freedom to turn OFF what is in our view immoral... and while you are at it, PLEASE oh great nannystate, stop others from doing all the things that we find offensive too. Find it within your great wisdom to forever define "community standards" vaguely for the purpose of selective enforcemtt against those evil ones who say things we don't approve of. For thine is the POWER, not me and my feeble fingers on the remote control that lyeth in mine own lap..."

Stern has free speech. He can peddle his trash on CD or on a pay channel.Finally I can agree with you. Howard will continue to do it on the public airwaves as he always has, because sponsors are ALREADY paying BIG money to pay for broadcasting his show to a demographic that buys their products. And Clear Channel, who buckled to the moralistic attempts to make a point with the so-cons, by the FCC, will end up losing a big cash cow, as listeners who actually LIKE THAT TRASH you and I consider "obscene" will simply retune their dials to "Infinity" broadcasting, eventually putting the folks at clear channel who buckled into a smaller market share.

The republican party had a policy of terminating with extreme prejudice, the FCC during the republican revolution... when the current spending orgy in Washington DC is over it's infatuation with larger expenditures on government programs to make us "safe" from every freedom we have... there will be a return to the quest for ever smaller, less intrusive governance. and the FCC will either morph into what it originally was, a bandwidth distribution monitor, or become extinct.

[Robert_Paulson2]

hmnn...
very very interesting.
thanks for posting it.
nipplegate expands evermore.

however I sense lawsuits and legal confrontations over contractual agreements on the horizon.

General question: Roger Ailes = Clear Channel?
(does he work for Clear Channel?)

[mhking]

General question: Roger Ailes = Clear Channel?

(does he work for Clear Channel?)

Nope. Ailes is head of Fox News Channel.

[Robert_Paulson2]

thanks...