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.

[Beck_isright]

" Posted by Beck_isright to Indy Pendance
On News/Activism ^ 02/25/2004 9:59:56 PM EST #223 of 520 ^

Soon to come: Rush, Beck and Savage suspended for espousing conservatism which is insssssssssssssssensitive to the "poor" and "underlings" in society. This will happen of course when the new FCC Chairman, Chelsea Clinton, is appointed if Kerry wins...."

My, my. Am I glad Rush read my posting last night after the show he put on today. And Savage feels the same way. Either I'm a prophet or these guys see the handwriting on the wall:
When a liberal gets in charge, conservative websites and talk radio will be shut down.

[BobS]

"I don't want to hear anything that I wouldn't want to hear my children say in my presence or that I wouldn't say in their presence."

That's fine. But the target is wrong. You can immediately tell Stern and "Bubba the Love Sponge" and others are in pursuit of 'stupid crap'. Very juvenile things. Something needs to be done about cable TV. As a man, I don't need to see other people having pointless gratuitous sex. But that's what you get out of Hollywood since most of the script writers are homosexuals. The people responsible for THEM should be put through the wringer!

[jempet]

Clear channel was a 41 station nothing before they got Howard Stern. Now they have over 1200, therefore they are tossing Stern to the side. How many children are up at 5:30 am listening to the radio? No, it's entertaining idiocy to listen to on the way to work. Clear Channel used Stern, and I hope they get what they deserve. Stern's show has gotten for less distasteful over the last few years. I know, because I listen. Lets see, what's next? Fascism? Target radio, but let MTV show soft porn all day long on their videos....just doesn't add up.

[mhking]

Clear channel was a 41 station nothing before they got Howard Stern. Now they have over 1200, therefore they are tossing Stern to the side.

Stern was on exactly six Cheap Channel stations.

The world doesn't revolve around Stern. Get over it.

[FreeReign]

My, my. Am I glad Rush read my posting last night after the show he put on today. And Savage feels the same way. Either I'm a prophet or these guys see the handwriting on the wall: When a liberal gets in charge, conservative websites and talk radio will be shut down.

So we must have pornography on the public airwaves and pornography in the public square or else Rush will be shutdown?

I don't think so.

[Beck_isright]

"So we must have pornography on the public airwaves and pornography in the public square or else Rush will be shutdown?"

No. Enforce existing laws. But do not think for one moment that this will not be applied against conservative talk show hosts by the revival of the fairness doctrine. You keep believing that it won't happen. But Rush, Savage, Boortz, Beck, etc., no what will happen when the liberals return to full power.

[Question King]

Good for Clear Channel. Clearly this move is associated with our President. By the way they contributed quite largely to President Bush's campaign. I think the Whitehouse and Clear Channel are taking a clear directive and re-establishing moral fortitude in our country. Like the gay marriage thing, the President and his contributors are taking a stand, a stand which will put America back to higher moral ground

[FreeReign]

So we must have pornography on the public airwaves and pornography in the public square or else Rush will be shutdown?

No. Enforce existing laws. But do not think for one moment that this will not be applied against conservative talk show hosts by the revival of the fairness doctrine. You keep believing that it won't happen. But Rush, Savage, Boortz, Beck, etc., no what will happen when the liberals return to full power.

What to do?

Disband the FCC and their regulations; have Congress propose the obscenity laws that control the public airwaves; batten down the hatches.

BTW, when the liberals return to "full power", it won't matter what preceded. That's what having full power means.

Who's Beck?

[An American In Dairyland]

"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."

---

Not "solely" based on "complaints." Proof is supplied. Jackson provided physical evidence as did Stern. They are called tapes whether audio or video.

"Ridiculous" fines? What good is a punishment if it doesn't serve to inconvenience the offender and promote change?

Lots of industries are monitored by government rules and fined when they act outside the rules. The electric utility industry (which I worked in for 15 years) is one such example.

Using your 'logic,' I suppose I should wring my hands and whine over the anguish the CEO of Commonwealth Edison experiences in running that company under government regulation.

Your argument doesn't have legs. Howard Stern is vermin and he broke a company directive as well as government guidelines. Too bad, so sad for Stern but it was his choice.

[Question King]

Are you implying that Kerry will beat Bush in the election and Congress will change its majority?

[OldFriend]

I suspect you are misinformed.

Infinity Broadcasting is Stern's boss.

Clear Channel chose to carry Infinity's show.....they have decided they don't want to carry that show. Are you suggesting they haven't got that right?

If I remember correctly, Infinity paid a million dollar fine a few years ago for Stern's on the air talk.

Even with Infinity being the owner of Stern's show, do you feel they don't have any right to pull the plug on the show?

[OldFriend]

With Rush and Savage and Sean too for that matter, it's always about them.

Evidently our standards count for nothing as long as those three are on the air.

Sean professes to love listening to Stern. Guess he thought Stern's comments that Dylan and Klebold ought to have raped the girls at Colombine before they murdered them was something good to hear.

[jetson]

So be it don't listen. The point is he has an audience that wants to listen to him and now can't basically because the federal government said so.

And look at how screwed up our kids are ( and adults) due to exposure to people like Howard.

[Conservative4Ever]

His show is funny and entertaining, and if people can't get past that, they shouldn't ruin it for the rest of us.

Funny and entertaining is subjective. With that said, I detest the Howard Stern show. However, I dislike the knee-jerk reaction to the JJ peep show on the Super Bowl. I find equally disturbing the direction this whole fiasco is headed. If Clear Channel wishes to fire or suspend their hired help that is their business. When the government steps in to begin a censorship of sorts, then I begin to get nervous. The first amendment is not to be tampered with. If you don't like the smut change the channel or turn to another station. It is all about ratings and monies from advertising. If the shows are not listened too or the advertisers ignored, then let that be the voice of reason. Not the government. God, help me I can't believe I am in Howard Sterns court, but in this case, our freedom of speech is far more precious than the firing of a foul mouth, shock jock of Howard Sterns ilk.

Red

[FreeReign]

When the government steps in to begin a censorship of sorts, then I begin to get nervous. The first amendment is not to be tampered with. If you don't like the smut change the channel or turn to another station.

Government steps in from the very beginning and controls what is seen and heard on the public air waves when it grants a license to station ownership applicant A over station ownership applicant B. Applicant A gets to say things on the air and applicant B doesn't.

There is no right to free speech on somebody else's private property and there is no absolute right to free speech on public property, obscenity being a case in point.

If somebody wants to push pornography outside an elementary school, then laws prohibiting such are appropriate. And many such laws have been around since the days of our founding fathers.

[sawmill trash]

"The return of the League of Decency. A government shutting down speech and some Americans cheer. Some people don't understand what they might be giving up until they lose it."

This has nothing to do with the government or censorship by the government.

This was a decision by a company not to have Stern on their station any more.
If the government starts telling companies who they can or can not keep on their stations, THEN WE HAVE A PROBLEM !

[sawmill trash]

"Don't worry you big baby,"

Thats real cute Dead and such an effective way to argue your point.

As far as the government having anything to do with Howard losing a few stations I think, if you will take time to look, that it was a corporate decision on the companies part.

[JonathansMommie]

I personally don't like Howard stern so i choose to not listen to him.so if people don't like what he's saying then don't turn his show on and no one will have anything to complain about.

[Beck_isright]

" What to do?

Disband the FCC and their regulations; have Congress propose the obscenity laws that control the public airwaves; batten down the hatches.

BTW, when the liberals return to "full power", it won't matter what preceded. That's what having full power means.

Who's Beck?"

Your commentary deserves no response. It illustrates your ignorance of the subject matter. Have a good evening.

[sakic]

But you are correct, people would be up in arms because while much of Stern's material has been raunchy offensive and some 'obscene', you could not say the same thing about Limbaugh.

Who will be the arbiter of what is obscene? You just don't understand the implications of your government intimidating speech off the air.