Howard Stern being silenced?

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by Toxick
I would personally draw the line where it was drawn a few weeks ago.

Which was where?

Maybe if we eliminate all interpersonal contact with other human beings, we can finally stop people from being offended at all times.

Hey, I tried that but nobody else would go for it. :shrug:

Maybe the boys' father's are jerks, and they emulate their fathers in school - maybe we should ban fathers.

When they're talking about the same things Howard has talked about, I think we can safely determine where they're getting it. As far as fathers, I would support an Amendment to ban parents who aren't properly raising and supervising their children. Write it up and I'll sign it.

 

[Toxick]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
And who decides these standards, hmmm?

Perhaps you're missing my point.

I am not saying that anything goes.

The MPAA decides these standards. They do not apply limits to what can and cannot be shown in movies - they just make the content known. If something in NC-17, you can bet that it's something you probably don't want your kids to watch.

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Why shouldn't "artists" be able to release a CD with anything they want on it and market it to Kindergartners if they want?

Here you go again.

How could it be that a 5 year old is listening to Stern. If it's on the schoolbus, the busdriver should be exerting control. If it's in school, the faculty should be exterting control. If it's at day-care, you should bitchslap your day-care provider before choosing another one. If it's at home, you should bitchslap yourself for allowing it.

No way should a kindergartener even have access to the Howard Stern show. And it most certainly isn't marketted toward them.

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Do you see where I'm going with this?

Yes I do. You're going totally slippery-slope, and instead of making me think about your arguments and what you're saying, you're making me want to roll my eyes.

Your arguments are along the lines of:


Me: I drink milk.

You: How could you force your own children to drink rancid poisonous milk laced with cyanide before pummeling them with a shovel?

 

[Tonio]

Originally posted by Toxick
The MPAA decides these standards. They do not apply limits to what can and cannot be shown in movies - they just make the content known. If something in NC-17, you can bet that it's something you probably don't want your kids to watch.

I generally support movie ratings, although I wish Jack Valenti was more open about the ratings process. Supposedly, one F-word is worth a PG13 while two is worth an R. As a parent, I would revise the ratings to reflect content, not age. Something like a V for violence, an L for language and a S for sexual content that's about the level of the current R rating.

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by Toxick
You're going totally slippery-slope

The slippery slope has already been at work in the media. They let one thing go, then the envelope gets pushed further and further.

If it's at home, you should bitchslap yourself for allowing it.

Why? If it's my kid and my house and I say my 5 year old can get drunk and listen to Stern, why is that your business?

I'm not getting my point across here. Or maybe I am and you're just refusing to acknowledge it. :shrug:

Garbage in - garbage out. So if Howard is being taken away, it's for your own good because you don't have enough maturity and sense to know what's good for you. (I'm using that "you" as a generalization, not meaning you, personally)

 

[Toxick]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Why? If it's my kid and my house and I say my 5 year old can get drunk and listen to Stern, why is that your business?

It's not. Heh-heh.

What I meant was that you were the one raising hell about it. So if you don't like it, don't allow it, or don't whine about it.

Originally posted by vraiblonde
I'm not getting my point across here. Or maybe I am and you're just refusing to acknowledge it. :shrug:

Your point seems to be that you see the Stern show as obscene, (whereas I do not) and therefore nobody should be able to hear it - or at least that it should be regulated and censored to meet the standards du jour that have been deemed acceptable by Big Brother.

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Garbage in - garbage out. So if Howard is being taken away, it's for your own good because you don't have enough maturity and sense to know what's good for you. (I'm using that "you" as a generalization, not meaning you, personally)

Well, I didn't take it personally, since I don't listen to Stern's garbage, anyway.

I'm just unwilling to relinquish my freedoms and the freedoms of others just so that I don't have to worry about ever facing anything in my life that I don't like.

And I really hate when things are done for me or to me because someone else decides it's for my own good. It goes right along with motorcycle helmet laws - seatbelt laws, and all the pampering warm-fuzzy crap like that.

If I want to die, or rot my brain, I should be allowed to.

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by Toxick
I'm just unwilling to relinquish my freedoms and the freedoms of others just so that I don't have to worry about ever facing anything in my life that I don't like.

But we relinquish our "freedoms" every day. It's part of sharing our country with so many different people.

And I'm not willing to turn my kids into hermits and hover over them 24/7 just so someone else can listen to 7th grade lesbian fantasies. To me it's like, is this a good message to send to our young people? Do we want them emulating this person? Do we want them repeating the things he says? If the answer is "no", then he's not fit for public broadcast.

 

[Toxick]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
If the answer is "no", then he's not fit for public broadcast.

And I disagree.

And I also disagree that displaying tolerance, and compromising various aspects of your daily rough and tumble, so that you can live in a world with others is the same thing as relinquishing freedom.




And this argument is making as much progress as it did last week - which is none whatsoever.

 

[http]

If you all would allow me to interject into your conversation full swing, I think you all are talking about a couple of different things at once that are related, but not exactly the same.

First of all, on Howard and the FCC, that is a VERY specific situation that should not be confused with the goings-ons in radio stations and broadcast houses. I can't remember the last time the FCC has actually pulled someone off the radio, usually their STATION gets to them first so as to avoid hefty fines such as with Rush, or Opie and Anthony or the Greasman. So I believe Larry is correct, Howard is probably going to be ok, I think he is exaggerating a lot, and just doesn't have much else to talk about right now. To his defense, he has not done anything much different the week of the Paris Hilton whatshisface interview that he has done in the past 20 or whatever years. Clearchannel pannicked and Infinity did not. Big deal.

As far as Howard and kids, I can't speak much to this but I really don't believe that MANY young kids listen to Howard. Most of his jokes are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over my head and I have been listening to him since he was at DC101 and I was but a pup myself. Most of his content surrounds events that take place in NYC and when they get rambling, I just can't stand them at all to even stay on the channel. Also, I listen to him about 1 hour or so a morning, and the amount of offensive material you hear in that time period at any time during the 6-10 broadcast may be once every 2 or 3 days or so.

And lastly, when it comes to Howard abusing the law, you all are right, he will have to face up to his interpretations and his taking advantage of them (FAIRLY!!!). I really don't think he will have a problem, remember the FCC does not actively monitor stations, they never have (FAIRLY!!!!). They have public numbers and email addresses for people to write in when they hear offensive material. Not only does Howard have the largest radio listening audience of all time for one person in the WORLD, I don't really think many people listen to him for 5 hours a day just to wait for him to slip. Remember, he's been at this longer than ANYONE in the business, by far.