“Really, I’m a really big fan, but….”, have always been the famous words of Howard Stern haters just before they let one loose on the air against Howard. Much to my chagrin, count me in.
Over the years, I have grown to love the relationships described and displayed on the air between Howard and his wife, kids, family and co-workers, as well as the correspondence between the other characters on his programs (apart from Stern). There has always been such a raw edge to the everyday reality of these people and you can not only appreciate but in most cases agree with what they had to say.
In addition to the intimacy of his life, Howard has always been a great interviewer - actually, one of the most underrated interviewers on the air including television. From strippers to movie stars, dwarves to musicians, Howard has always asked the questions that dared to be asked and has always fleshed out the shallowness of stardom. Yes, even a governor or Oscar winner will be asked if they like the smell of their farts or how many times they masturbate.
(Here it comes) Really, I’m a big fan, but … Howard has been really going overboard. I think it all started with the non-stop coverage (on air) for his books, movie (which I loved) and television programs. I am as curious as the next about what Howard is working on, but during those times it became a bit much hearing about it for the majority of the show.
Then it came to, I guess, the real big issue, for myself at least. This would be the subject of President Bush and his bid for reelection. The everyday hate mongering for a man who at the very least should be respected because he is the president of our country was more than I could bear. I did turn off (as he always suggested) his program for long periods of time, checking in every now and then. Then it turned into every few days. Still, the non-stop badgering of the President went on and finally Howard presented this as only a freedom of speech issue. The President was out to get Howard and shut him down. This was the rallying cry heard for months. The sky was falling, the sky was falling, yet to date the show remains on the air.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Eric Olsen
super job Richard - makes a lot of sense and has a lot more impact coming from a fan and regular listener. I did like his movie pretty well and find him amusing and/or interesting now and then when he is on someone else's show, but I have always despised his radio show, I have to admit.
Thanks and welcome!
2 - Mark Saleski
well, in fact...part of this is indeed the government's fault.
the fcc has supposed 'rules' on indecency but will not spell them out in detail.
further, they are not applied with any consistency. opra can talk about 'tossed salads' (look it up) but howard brings up similar material and is fined.
it's a screwed up 'system'.
and you're right. he did do it for money. because if/when the fcc has its way, the radio personality can be directly fined for every supposed infraction.
3 - Richard Porter
Look Mark, I appreciate your passion for this man. But the reality is that we all have rights under the first amendment that we should always look to protect, but with it there should be some common sense and reason. Just as you shouldn't shout "fire" in a crowded movie theatre, you should some some restraint and common sense with some of the bits. You shouldn't need the Government to hold your hand every step of the way.
Finally, Howard is a smart and shrewd business man. Trust me when I say he knows the rules. He likes to manipulate the audience to make them think he is naive and an underdog, but he wouldn't roll the dice so often unless he knew what to say and sometimes what does not say.
4 - Dawn
I don't know how well HS will do after the move to Sirius, but I think few can deny his longevity and impact on commericial radio.
Plus, I can honestly say if I were given the chance to show him my *bleepers* I would. You just can't get that kind of exposure for free anymore!
No pun intended.
5 - Mark Saleski
it's not so much as a passion for howard as a passion against government intervention.
the fcc is supposed to be upholding standards of 'decency'...but refuses to actually define what they are.
6 - Wally
Of course, Stern ignores the fact that Michael Powell was a Clinton appointee and that the main proponent of decency on the FCC, Michael Kopps, is a Democratic and former aide to former Senator Fritz Hollings. This FCC is not a Bush creation, it is a remainder of the Clinton administration.
7 - Eric Olsen
even many hardcore Howrd fans I know thought his whole anti-Bush crusade was self-serving, disingenuous and over the top in a not-fun way
8 - Ralph
You said yourself that you barely tuned in once Howard started giving W the hard time...so I would hardly consider you any authority of what transpired over those months. Obviously, you've gleaned your information from third party sources.
When you have GOP hacks like Sam Brownback pushing to fine TALENT up to $500,000 for each infraction (based on who knows what guidelines) you can't say that Howard's griping is all for show.
Can you?
9 - Mark Saleski
exactly.
10 - Eric Berlin
I agree fully with Mark and Ralph: Stern did what he does best -- exposed faults in the system with his unique blend of self-promotion and comedy.
There is really no defense for the Oprah / Tossed Salad argument. The FCC, spurred on by the Janet Jackson incident, tried to make an example out of Stern.
This was a big mistake. Say what you want about Stern, but you never want to get in his crosshairs.
11 - mike g
I don't see anything wrong with bashing a president (AGAIN who wasn't even elected president the first time) who conducts his own hate mongering (not to mention war mongering) of his own.
It's clear to anyone Bush installed his own people (or his own people's people) in various government bureaucracies to push his unmandated agenda.
And what's so WRONG with talking dirty anyway? Most people do it everyday. Why shouldn't people be allowed to talk like they do normally, just because its on the radio? Because kids MIGHT be listening? Ever been to a schoolyard? Ever watch MTV?
Howard Stern has a listening audience of roughly 10 million people everyday. That's 10 million people that CHOOSE to hear his brand of entertainment. They don't tune in to hear him swear. Even when the show goes to satellite i doubt there will be much swearing for the sake of it. People like former FCC Chairman Michael Powell don't understand this. They wanna clean up everything and disneyfy TV. People don't want it. They want the freedom to choose and not too be given some vague definition of what is obscene. I hate to say it, but like is obscene. Don't censor the ability to talk about it.
12 - Richard Porter
I believe the President has been in office for quite some time now (four years). So Ralph, when I say I checked in every few days this is over the span of 3-4 years, so I believe I can speak honestly when I say that Howard basically put on a Bush-bashing, pro-liberal infomercial for hours at a time. There is no denying this and I chose not to listen. Howard has always blamed everyone for holding him back and trying to "take him down". Aren't you tired of get spoon-fed that great lie? How could all of these people hold the same agenda? Howard, like the media (especially of late) will only tell you what he wants you to hear, which is really what serves Howards best. As I said before, he always plays the "underdog" card and it has grown old quick.
Finally, I an not against using some colorful words every now and then, but as I described earlier, the best parts of his show in the past did not involve any clever bits or racy dialogue. Rather, it was the one on one human interaction. We felt what he felt during the birth of his children, his divorce, and the launch of his success into Hollywood.
And there is no argument when it comes down to children and the media. I do not believe it is a matter of protecting children from "dirty words". Mike, your argument of hearing worse in a schoolyard does not give the green light to say anything and act irresponsibly on the air or in public. Should we then sell beer and cigarettes in school, since adults smoke and drink and eventually the children may too? My suggestion to you Mike, is to stop hanging around schoolyards.
13 - mike g
But that's where the best looking girls are!
14 - david
Richard, you are missing the point. It is absolutely your right to bash Howard, turn him off, and stop listening if you don't like his content. That is called freedom of choice. But giving the government a blank check to fine people for a very nebulous area of "indeceny" to the tune of millions of dollars constitutes a platform of censorship.
The market won't bear what people don't like. Whether you like it or not, the market says that Howard Stern is a great DJ that entertains millions of people. This country (and the first amendment) is not there for "majority rules." Popular speech doesn't need to be protected, by definition. Its the minority opinion that should be defended by the constitution.
Otherwise, at what point do we decide "acceptable morality" and "indecency?" At a 70/30 split? a 60/40 split? How about 55/45?
The problem is that you cannot legislate morality. And I don't buy the "fire in a crowded theater" argument as a defense - no one is in imminent danger of being physically harmed by words coming over the airwaves. No one is going to start a riot based on a Stern rant. If people took more time to discuss things with their children, took and active interest in parenting, then there shouldn't be a problem. God forbid we treat children as people with minds and intelligence, rather than pets.
15 - SFC SKI
"And what's so WRONG with talking dirty anyway? Most people do it everyday." Most people defecate everyday, it does not mean I want to see it done in public.
16 - Angela Chen Shui
Great post, enjoyable thread...
Thanks for the sexy pic! ;-)
17 - Barry
No offense dude, but no one cares what you want to see in public. Howard has 10 million listeners that want to hear him talk about farts and screwing pornstars, that's their right to hear that on the radio, there is (or shouldn't be) anything illegal about it.
18 - Eric Berlin
Yes, that's where the ability to change stations or simply not listen comes in handy.
19 - Patrick
Look folks, there are several things that need to be straightend out here.
1. The current FCC Gestapo is nothing more than a legitimate offshoot of the P.M.R.C. crusade of the late 80's. That was Tipper Gores baby, supported and given legitimacy by her husband and future vice president Al Gore. This FCC agenda is as much a DNC created monster as it is anyones. Al Gore more than anyone was and is a crusader for "decency" and it was his pull that got Powell the job.
2. Howard hasn't been as funny since he got divorced and became the very thing he used to lampoon so effectively. Namely an Ass kissing, brown nosing, get famous and hook up with your daughters friend, hollywood sell out. Now he is more interested in being one of the hollywood insiders that making fun of them.He has become tabloid fodder, the very thing he rallied against.
3. Sirius is going to sink, Howard or No Howard. I have it, it is ok for one reason only, because there are no commercials. But now Mel Karmazin is saying that will change, that commercials are coming.
Personally I am not going to pay 14$/month to listen to commercials when standard radio is almost as good and free. I can hear F**k and S**t without paying 14$/a month.
20 - david
Patrick, let's straighten out a few more things:
1) Nobody in this post is talking DNC vs. RNC - we all know it's a bi-partison group. It still is an appointed group that has a huge amount of power when it comes to broadcasting issues. And it does listen to the directives of whatever administration is in office.
2) Howard Stern being funny or not is not the issue. Fine people/companies millions of dollars for unpopular speech is the issue. Stern is just the flashpoint of the controversy. Led Zepplin's later albums suck too, but it doesn't mean their whole existance should be derided.
3) People pay hundreds of dollars for tv cable, with commercials. People are going to pay for edgy/interesting content. Whether its Sirius or XM or whatever, a subscription radio service is the future of radio.
21 - craig
Indecency, which the FCC broadly defines as discussion of sexual acts and excretory acts in a non-serious manner, has been illegal to broadcast from 6am to 10pm for years. Between 10pm and 6am there are no indecency rules on broadcast radio and TV.
That rule exists because "indecency" is protected by the 1st Amemdment, but the courts have also held that the government has an interest in shielding children from it.
Howard's bosses realized that they could get away with ignoring the time of day restrictions on airing "indecent" material, do an "adult" show in the mornings, and treat the fines provided by the law as a minor nuisance. The only thing that is changing is the government is giving the law some teeth by raising the fines.
Stern could have moved his broadcast show to 10pm at night and the FCC indecency rules would not apply to his show at all.
But then his audience wouldn't be stuck in traffic, he'd have to compete with prime time TV and his ratings would be much lower, so his advertisers would pay less, and he'd make less money.
Making less money is the only thing that bothers Howard Stern.
22 - sean
I'm a listener. As far as the Bush-bashing goes, there is truth to both sides of what you all are reading here.
BUT, please note that he was a PASSIVE SUPPORTER of Bush from 9/11/01 all the way on the road to war. Where Bush lost Howard - and half of this country - was with the Iraq war. He could have garnered just as many if not more new listeners if he towed the GOP line, couldn't he? Surely. But he was honest and brazen. I thank God for dissenters like Stern. They fullfill the constituion by taking on corrupt government actors. Without them, our Democracy would be less.
And c'mon, you must assume any million dollar businessman - whether his appeal is that of the 'common' fella or more like Trump'a - is in this for money. Would you do your job for free?
23 - chief
while the article here is well written and the author is entitled to whatever opinion he might have, i believe it can be mostly resolved by looking at the last paragraph. While Howard obviously is going to satallite for the money, it does not mean that in light of recently transpiring events that he does not feel threatened by first amendment issues and that these are not legitimate, highly threatening grievances.
"I believe in freedom of speech, but Howard, you don’t need to talk dirty to protect the integrity of the show" ?
It's not about taling dirty to protect integrity -- it's about being able to talk dirty (whatever that may mean) when the situation arises, and ahving to hop-skip-jump all around whatever point or description he's trying to make.
To me, it sounds like you're upset at him for being anti-Bush, and would not listen to his arguements. Your choice. Don't dismiss his thoughts so easily, one day you may be forced to tow the party line.
24 - Ray
My main problem with Stern isn't indecency or vulgarity but his constant degrading of women and some of his racist stuff.... but that's another story.
Where was Stern when Dixie Chicks were banned from so many radio stations?
He goofed on their music and ofcourse duly made fun of Natalie Maines' weight --- one of Stern's expertise.
A previous poster said Stern turned against Bush after the Iraqi invasion. I distinctly remember a Robin news item about weapons inspector David Kay's report about non-existent WMD. Stern sarcastically said that he never believed the existence of WMD to begin with (and still supported the war). The truth is that he could hardly find any fault with Bush before his own interests were threatened. And ofcourse he put any anti-Bush garbage (along with some legitimate stuff) he could find on his website. The guy has absolutely no integrity.....
25 - Eric Berlin
You sound like a pretty consistent listener there, Ray.