Clear Channel dumps Howard Stern!

[CurtSibling]

Goodbye to Stern!

"WASHINGTON — Federal regulators Thursday proposed $495,000 in indecency fines against Clear Channel Communications (search) for broadcasts by Howard Stern (search), prompting the nation's largest radio chain to drop the country's best-known shock jock."

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,116594,00.html

San Antonio-based Clear Channel suspended Stern in February from its six stations that carry his program, which regularly features graphic sexual discussion and humor. It decided to make the move permanent after the Federal Communications Commission (search) cited the chain for 18 alleged violations from Stern's April 9, 2003, show.

"Mr. Stern's show has created a great liability for us and other broadcasters who air it," said John Hogan, president of Clear Channel Radio. "The Congress and the FCC are even beginning to look at revoking station licenses. That's a risk we're just not willing to take."

In a statement posted on his Web site, Stern said he was not surprised by the fine. He characterized it as furtherance of a "witch hunt" against him by the Bush administration.

"It is pretty shocking that governmental interference into our rights and free speech takes place in the U.S.," he said. "It's hard to reconcile this with the 'land of the free' and the 'home of the brave."'

The FCC investigation was prompted by a listener in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., who complained about a Stern program that included discussion of sex accompanied by flatulence sounds.

Federal law bars radio stations and over-the-air television channels from airing references to sexual and excretory functions between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., when children may be tuning in. The rules do not apply to cable and satellite channels or satellite radio.

The FCC imposed the maximum fine of $27,500 for each of 18 violations on six Clear Channel stations: WBGG in Fort Lauderdale; WTKS-FM in Cocoa Beach, Fla.; WTFX-FM in Louisville, Ky.; KIOZ in San Diego; WNVE in Honeoye Falls, N.Y.; and WSDS-FM in Pittsburgh.

The FCC fined each station for two specific incidents during a single program, the first time the commission has done so. Previously, the FCC levied fines for an entire program, no matter how many different indecent utterances occurred.

Commissioner Michael Copps, who usually dissents from indecency decisions because he says the penalties aren't strong enough, was part of a unanimous commission this time.

"I have long advocated that the commission use all of the tools it has to tackle indecency on the public airwaves," he said. "Today's decision is a step forward towards imposing meaningful fines."

Last month, the FCC proposed fining Stern's employer, Infinity Broadcasting, $27,500 for a Stern show broadcast July 26, 2001, on WKRK-FM in Detroit. The show featured discussions about sexual practices and techniques.

Infinity paid $1.7 million in 1995 to settle various violations by Stern. The Center for Public Integrity, a watchdog group, said fines against Stern accounted for almost half of the $4 million in penalties proposed by the FCC since 1990.

Stern has charged on the air that he's being punished for his criticism of President Bush. Clear Channel's political action committee and its employees have given $265,800 to Republicans for the 2004 election, more than any other broadcaster, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan research group.

"You've got to vote Bush out to send a message as a Howard Stern fan," Stern said during one recent broadcast. "There's a cultural war going on. The religious right is winning. We're losing."

A conservative advocacy group, the Parents Television Council (search), applauded the FCC's decision.

"Stern is a repeat offender of the most commonsense decency standards and we welcome the news that the FCC is moving to combat these patently indecent shows," said L. Brent Bozell III, the group's president.


So,
Is this indeed Mr Bush's attmepts to silence dissent?

And if so, is it un-American for a US government to squash the voice of critics?

Discuss...

 

[h4ppy]

No, its because Stern violated the law that he was dropped. (not that I am for dropping him, freedom of speach and all that)

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Howard Stern did NOT violate the law. The laws on indecency only cover certain words, such as sh#t, f#ck etc. At no time did Howard Stern or anyone on the show utter any of those 7 'dirty' words. The reason why Howard Stern was dumped by Clear Channel, and is now being fined by the FCC is because he is against George Bush and has been urging people to vote against him in November. Clear Channel, a heavy Republican contributor, is owned by the same guy that bought the baseball team from George Bush. The ties between Clear Channel, which has a virtual monopoly in some parts of the country, and the Republican party are no secret. Its because of heavy Republican media campaign contributors like Clear Channel that the FCC is attempting to deregulate the industry, and make it legal for media companies to own monopolies. Howard Stern was taken off the air in crucial, battleground states in the upcoming election, such as Florida, because he is vociferously against Bush, and wants him out of office. Interestingly, Clear Channel dumped Stern only a week after he went public on the air about his disdain for Bush.

Whenever somebody says to you that Stern was taken off the air because he broke the law, ask them to cite the law he violated. Like I said, the only speech that is illegal, are the 7 dirty words.

edit: oh yeah, Clear Channel also banned the Dixie Chicks from their air waves after they came out against the Iraq war. If you are against Bush or the Republican party, you cant be on Clear Channel.

 

[Stapel]

Stern will rise again! No law or conservative government will stop him, I guess.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

If only that were the case. Clear Channel has a near monoploy in lots of markets across the country. Its hard to rise again if the corporations refuse to give you air time. The problem with large corporations owning all the microphones in a radio market, is precisely what we're seeing with Howard Stern. Whether you like or hate Stern is besides the point. The fact that a corporate behemoth like Clear Channel, which controls the airwaves of so many markets, could silence political speech that is against the Republican party, should frighten everybody, including republicans. But the FCC of this administration, under the leadership of Colin Powells son, Jr., wants to remove the few remaining barriers to complete corporate monopoly control of the air. The FCC, Clear Channel, and Bush, are all working together to enable corporate monopoly control of the organs of free speech.

 

[LordKestrel]

Originally posted by Dumb pothead
Howard Stern did NOT violate the law. The laws on indecency only cover certain words, such as sh#t, f#ck etc. At no time did Howard Stern or anyone on the show utter any of those 7 'dirty' words. The reason why Howard Stern was dumped by Clear Channel, and is now being fined by the FCC is because he is against George Bush and has been urging people to vote against him in November. Clear Channel, a heavy Republican contributor, is owned by the same guy that bought the baseball team from George Bush. The ties between Clear Channel, which has a virtual monopoly in some parts of the country, and the Republican party are no secret. Its because of heavy Republican media campaign contributors like Clear Channel that the FCC is attempting to deregulate the industry, and make it legal for media companies to own monopolies. Howard Stern was taken off the air in crucial, battleground states in the upcoming election, such as Florida, because he is vociferously against Bush, and wants him out of office. Interestingly, Clear Channel dumped Stern only a week after he went public on the air about his disdain for Bush.

Whenever somebody says to you that Stern was taken off the air because he broke the law, ask them to cite the law he violated. Like I said, the only speech that is illegal, are the 7 dirty words.

edit: oh yeah, Clear Channel also banned the Dixie Chicks from their air waves after they came out against the Iraq war. If you are against Bush or the Republican party, you cant be on Clear Channel.

Frankly, you're full of ****.

Here is a link to the fcc page that describes the "obscene" rules.
http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/obscene.html

Based upon that, he (and many others) has violated that a number of times. Clear Channel has been penalized several million dollars over the last few years because of violations of this law, and they are finally cutting him so that they don't have to keep paying the fines.

No, I am not a conservative Republican, by I am by no means a liberal Democrat either. I think Howard Stern is stupid, so I'm not sad to see him go. I'd rather listen to music/news/whatever in the morning than him. He'll be picked up by a cable station before too long, so you won't have to spend precious time without him.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Originally posted by jimmydean
Frankly, you're full of ****.

Frankly, youre an idiot. So I'll try to explain it so even you can understand. As your link clearly states, theres is no clear definition of what indecency is. The FCC can recieve a complaint from one person, who thinks that a broadcast violates his community standards, and on that basis alone, can decide to levy huge fines on the broadcaster. Its completely arbitrary standard and depends on a judgement call by the FCC chairman, who is a political appointee. All the FCC has to do to drive someone off the air is claim that they decided that theyre indecent, and begin dealing out crippling fines. At no point is the FCC required to prove in court that the broadcaster has made indecent comments. The broadcaster has the option of fighting the fines in court, but the cases would take years and cost more in legal fees than the actual fines. Its much easier for them to throw people off the air than fight the case all the way to the Supreme Court.

 

[Unexpected]

What did Stern do?
Who are the FCC?

 

[Zarn]

I'm glad he is gone.

I don't care whether he broke the law or not, since he was a jerk and deserved it.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

This will give you a clear idea of what Clear Channel is all about.

Bush backer sponsoring pro-war rallies

Oliver Burkeman in Washington
Wednesday March 26, 2003
The Guardian

They look like spontaneous expressions of pro-war sentiment, "patriotic rallies" drawing crowds of tens of thousands across the American heartland.
In a counterpoint to anti-war demonstrations, supporters of war in Iraq have descended on cities from Fort Wayne to Cleveland, and Atlanta to Philadelphia. They wave flags, messages of support for the troops - and also banners attacking liberals, excoriating the UN, and in one case, advising: "Bomb France Now."

But many of the rallies, it turns out, have been organised and paid for by Clear Channel Inc - the country's largest radio conglomerate, owning 1,200 stations - which is not only reporting on the war at the same time, but whose close links with President Bush stretch back to his earliest, much-criticised financial dealings as governor of Texas. The company has paid advertising costs and for the hire of musicians for the rallies.

Tom Hicks, Clear Channel's vice-chairman, is a past donor to Bush's political campaigning. The two were at the centre of a scandal when Mr Bush was governor and when Mr Hicks chaired a University of Texas investment board that awarded large investment-management contracts to several companies close to the Bush family - including the Carlyle Group, on whose payroll Mr Bush had been until weeks previously, and which still retains his father.

"Should this be happening? No," said Dante Chinni, a senior associate with the Project for Excellence in Journalism, a Columbia University programme based in Washington. "What kind of company is Clear Channel? What's their mission? Are they a media company, a promotional company? For some people, Clear Channel's reporting, for want of a better word, may be the reporting that they're getting on the war in Iraq."

Amir Forester, a spokeswoman for Premiere Radio Networks, a subsidiary of Clear Channel, said the rallies - which the company calls "patriotic", not "pro-war" - were the idea of Glenn Beck, a syndicated talk radio host.

"He's paid to express his opinion, just like a newspaper columnist...There's no corporate mandate going on here."

The idea came about "when he had a caller on his programme saying, 'Gosh, I saw Tim Robbins making a comment on the war, and who elected him to represent me'?" Ms Forester said.

"Glenn Beck is not a journalist, he is a talk-radio host. He has a message that resonated with the average American, and he's out there showing support for our troops...what's amazing to me is that there's an effort to take away from the goodness of what Glenn Beck is doing for his listeners."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,922040,00.html

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Originally posted by Zarn
I'm glad he is gone.

I don't care whether he broke the law or not, since he was a jerk and deserved it.

Do you care that the FCC wants to let corporations own regional monopolies of the broadcast airwaves? Do you understand the danger to free speech that poses?

 

[Zarn]

Originally posted by Dumb pothead
Do you care that the FCC wants to let corporations own regional monopolies of the broadcast airwaves? Do you understand the danger to free speech that poses?

No, I don't.

As for the free speech, it doesn't. Talking about sex all the time on radio/ tv isn't free speech as its not approriate.

 

[MrPresident]

I thought Stern didn't talk about politics that much?

Originally posted by Dumb pothead
Do you care that the FCC wants to let corporations own regional monopolies of the broadcast airwaves? Do you understand the danger to free speech that poses?

Isn't satellite radio growing in popularity in America? I heard they were now putting them in new cars. You can say pretty much anything on that. And can I just say that Howard Stern would never get away with broadcasting that stuff over here in Britain, at least not on radio.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Mr P, satelite radio is growing, but its still a miniscule share of the market. Its a pay service like cable TV. The broadcast airwaves are free.

Howard Stern isnt for everyone. Heres an example: Recently on his E! cable show, he had two porn chicks competing for plugs (advertisements) for their pornsites. The competition involved them grasping quarters between their buttcheeks, shuffling over to buckets and dropping them in the bucket. At all times they could only touch the quarters with their buttcheeks Later Howard brought in a toilet (a clean, new never used toliet) filled with water and sausages. The girls had to bob for the sausages in the toilet, like bobbing for apples. The one that was able to take the most suasages from the toilet using only her mouth was the winner

Ok, to me, thats hilarious, I almost died laughing when I saw it. Maybe you think its terrible. The point is whether or not people have a right to broadcast something that may offend some people. Free speech can be offensive. Thats the definition of free speech.

@zarn, why dont you care about corporations owning monopolies of the airwaves?

 

[Archer 007]

I can answer the question for Zarn. He doesnt care because Republican backers are doing it.

 

[Zarn]

Originally posted by Archer 007
I can answer the question for Zarn. He doesnt care because Republican backers are doing it.

I don't care, because the company is dumping Stern (a step in the right direction). I don't like monopolies, but Bill Gates has my attention not corperations that control the airwaves.

 

[andrewgprv]

Let's not forget about CBS refusing to let moveon.org air their comerical during the super-bowl.

And people claim their is a liberal bias in the media....

 

[Zarn]

Originally posted by andrewgprv
Let's not forget about CBS refusing to let moveon.org air their comerical during the super-bowl.

And people claim their is a liberal bias in the media....

There is a liberal bias. Can you say Iraq? Lets say it together. E-rok!

 

[andrewgprv]

Originally posted by Zarn
No, I don't.

As for the free speech, it doesn't. Talking about sex all the time on radio/ tv isn't free speech as its not approriate.

And Who defines "appropriate" ? I myself think there is nothing wrong talking about sex. Considering sex is a very large part of what it is to be human.

So If I were the CEO of Clear Channel and I thought talking about God was inappropriate it wouldn't violate free speech if I fired all my emploees who talked about God?

 

[andrewgprv]

Originally posted by Zarn
There is a liberal bias. Can you say Iraq? Lets say it together. E-rok!

How is there a liberal bias in dealing with Iraq?