Replies

I can see this being used by a democrat president to try and get Rush, Mancow Muller, Hannity, Savage, or many others off the air.
Censorship by government is wrong.

First .. Stern is not being censored by the government .. Clear Channel doesn't want to pay for the fines they know Howard will bring.

Stern can always pay the fines out of his own pocket ..

And yes I can understand your point about a Dem president

Look ... as much as I hate Democrats/Liberals and I will defend their right to be on the air.

However, Stern is a rude, crude and obnoxious pig and I cannot and will not defend him .. is it at all possible for Stern to do a show without describing on air in detail about all the sex acts happening in his studio???

First .. Stern is not being censored by the government .. Clear Channel doesn't want to pay for the fines they know Howard will bring.

I think it's fairly obvious that Clear Channel is dumping them because of pressure from the FCC. Clear Channel was fined recently by them for "Bubba the Love Sponge". It's a CYA effort. If Clear Channel did this on their own free will completely, I wouldn't have said what I said since I'm a firm believer in "their stations, their rules". My beef is more with the FCC, which was created not to regulate content, but to make sure signals didn't interfere with one another.

I don't listen to Stern much so I don't know all that's there outside of what I've read about him, but I know how morning radio is in general, and some probably have the same arguements for "Drew and Mike" which I sometimes listen to.

If I don't like it, I don't listen to it. If it is so bad that I think it shouldn't be on(usually out and out liars or anti-freedom hit pieces tend to get me going that way), then I go for the advertisers and call the station.

But content regulation, especially with subjective matters such as 'indecency'(even what's obscentity is 'debateable', but it isn't QUITE as objective) is a disaster waiting to happen.

My eyes opened up here when AOL banned pro-gun websites calling them pornography. Their servers, their rules, but if a John Kerry(who is as anti-2nd Amendment as it gets) appoints Henry Waxman to the FCC? Fairness Doctrine? If the Internet gets regulated by them? Or Pay TV? Satellite?

It's that law of unintended consequences.