Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: storch on June 22, 2004, 09:57:06 AM
-
Too nasty he needed to go. score is 1 good guys 10 to the tenth bad guys.
-
Gone where? I was just listening to the show a half hour ago.
Who are the "good guys"? "bad guys"
-
Originally posted by stiehl
Gone where? I was just listening to the show a half hour ago.
Who are the "good guys"? "bad guys"
Gone from my market and many others so I'm told. But it's ok if he is still in that NYC market, somehow they seem compatible to me. Yes and the lines between good and bad are decidedly blurred so I easily understand your confusion. Let me clarify it for you. good = anything GWB says or anything from the RNC, bad = anything from the DNC and Europe. hope that clears it up for you.
-
...And Bush said we had to squelch dissenting opinions, so Stern had to go.
-
Originally posted by Airhead
...And Bush said we had to squelch dissenting opinions, so Stern had to go.
Where did he say that?
-
Originally posted by Airhead
...And Bush said we had to squelch dissenting opinions, so Stern had to go.
There you have it the all powerful bush spoke and it became law just as it has always been in America, right?
-
Originally posted by Airhead
...And Bush said we had to squelch dissenting opinions, so Stern had to go.
Yeah it had nothing to do with the content of his shows and how he pushed the current laws of the FCC that have been in effect for years...
Blame it on Bush just like everything else...
Stern acts like a big boy but when the FCC came down on his raunchy performances he cried like a little baby, Hope Stern isn't your roll model?
IKON
-
Originally posted by storch
Gone from my market and many others so I'm told. But it's ok if he is still in that NYC market, somehow they seem compatible to me. Yes and the lines between good and bad are decidedly blurred so I easily understand your confusion. Let me clarify it for you. good = anything GWB says or anything from the RNC, bad = anything from the DNC and Europe. hope that clears it up for you.
Yes, we still have freedom of choice in NYC.
Thanks for the clarification, simple definitions from a simple mind.:aok
-
Originally posted by stiehl
Yes, we still have freedom of choice in NYC.
Thanks for the clarification, simple definitions from a simple mind.:aok
Could I conceal carry my pistol if I were a citizen of New York? Could I shoot and kill an intruder in my home without fear of prosecution? Could I be free from filth in public airwaves or on the streets? Wow I can't until we have freedom of choice like you do!! tell me truthfully could I ever become a deep thinker such as yourself?? say that there's hope.
-
Um... Bush is responsible for this... how?
I suppose we should be thankful... in their quest to find fault with anyone but the guilty, the local Libs have moved on from "ITS SOCIETY'S FAULT, CULTURE IS HITLER!" rally cry which could be heard daily circa 1996.
-
this has to be the worst troll ever
-
Actually unlike some of you I have listened to him for years and know that his shows are not offensive at all when you listen in context.
Opra had a show on teenage sex a while back that was far more explicit that any show of Sterns.
Bush is using the FCC to crackdown on radio personalities like Stern. The process is not fair democratic nor impartial. There are no clear rules written to guide broadcasters as to what is obscene or not.
All that has to happen is one listener complain to the FCC and they will start an investigation. Then they decide if what happened was obscene or not. Imagine if you neighbor calls the police to complain about the noise you make and the police then come and decide (not based on any law as to what is too loud) wether to charge you and fine you or not.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
this has to be the worst troll ever
tomorow is another day...
I'm wise ,I know ;)
-
Obscene Broadcasts are Prohibited at all Times
Obscene speech is not protected by the First Amendment and cannot be broadcast at any time. To be obscene, material must meet a three-prong test:
An average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;
The material must depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable law; and
The material, taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
Indecent Broadcast Restrictions
The FCC has defined broadcast indecency as "language or material that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community broadcast standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory organs or activities." Indecent programming contains patently offensive sexual or excretory references that do not rise to the level of obscenity. Indecent programming may, however, be restricted in order to avoid its broadcast during times of the day when there is a reasonable risk that children may be in the audience.
Consistent with a federal statute and federal court decisions interpreting the indecency statute, the Commission adopted a rule pursuant to which broadcasts -- both on television and radio -- that fit within the indecency definition and that are aired between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. are subject to indecency enforcement action.
Profane Broadcast Restrictions
Profane material is defined as including language that denotes certain of those personally reviling epithets naturally tending to provoke violent resentment or denoting language so grossly offensive to members of the public who actually hear it as to amount to a nuisance.
Like indecency, profane speech is prohibited on broadcast radio and television between 6am and 10pm.
First Amendment and Obscenity/Indecency
Expressions of views that do not involve a "clear and present danger of serious substantive evil" come under the protection of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The Communications Act prohibits the FCC from censoring broadcast material, in most cases, and from making any regulation that would interfere with freedom of speech. According to an FCC opinion on this subject, "the public interest is best served by permitting free expression of views." This principle ensures that the most diverse and opposing opinions will be expressed, even though some may be highly offensive. The Courts have said that indecent material is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution and cannot be banned entirely. Nonetheless, the FCC has taken numerous enforcement actions against broadcast stations for violations of the restrictions on broadcast indecency.
Enforcement of Indecent Broadcast Restrictions
Enforcement actions in this area are based on documented complaints received from the public about indecent or obscene broadcasting. The FCC’s staff reviews each complaint to determine whether it has sufficient information to suggest that there has been a violation of the obscenity or indecency laws. If it appears that a violation may have occurred, the staff will start an investigation by sending a letter of inquiry to the broadcast station.
If a complaint does not contain information sufficient to determine that a violation may have occurred, the complaint will be dismissed. In such a case, the complainant has the option of re-filing the complaint with additional information, filing a petition for reconsideration of the staff action, or filing an application for review (appeal) to the full Commission.
If the facts and information contained in the complaint suggest that a violation did not occur, then the complaint will be denied. In that situation, the complainant has the option of filing a petition for reconsideration of the staff action or an appeal to the full Commission.
Context
In making indecency determinations, context is key! The FCC staff must analyze what was actually said during the broadcast, the meaning of what was said, and the context in which it was stated.
-
Originally posted by Habu
Actually unlike some of you I have listened to him for years and know that his shows are not offensive at all when you listen in context.
Opra had a show on teenage sex a while back that was far more explicit that any show of Sterns.
Bush is using the FCC to crackdown on radio personalities like Stern. The process is not fair democratic nor impartial. There are no clear rules written to guide broadcasters as to what is obscene or not.
All that has to happen is one listener complain to the FCC and they will start an investigation. Then they decide if what happened was obscene or not. Imagine if you neighbor calls the police to complain about the noise you make and the police then come and decide (not based on any law as to what is too loud) wether to charge you and fine you or not.
I worked in a shop where Howard Stern played all morning long on 105.9 in Miami & Ft. Lauderdale. I found Howard Stern to be offensive and crude though at times humorous. I say good ridance just the same. It's about time that the FTC applied it's own rules. Howard Stern admitted on air that he did not allow his daughters to listen to his show. His demise came along on the heels of the exposed breast with an ashtray fastened to it during the superbowl halftime debacle. Janet Jackson's hideous titties are to blame. More correctly the national outrage that followed was the result of the tittie exposure. Janet Jackson's breast was the catalyst.
-
Originally posted by storch
Could I conceal carry my pistol if I were a citizen of New York? Could I shoot and kill an intruder in my home without fear of prosecution? Could I be free from filth in public airwaves or on the streets? Wow I can't until we have freedom of choice like you do!! tell me truthfully could I ever become a deep thinker such as yourself?? say that there's hope.
I believe that you can carry in NYC(within reason, this isn't Middle of Nowhere,Nevada).
What street filth do you mean?
As for radio/TV, nobody is forcing you, you CAN change the station. If you can figure out how to.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
this has to be the worst troll ever
C'mon don't be so cynical, it looks bad on your resume
-
Originally posted by straffo
tomorow is another day...
I'm wise ,I know ;)
yup, but for now this one is it ;)
-
Originally posted by stiehl
I believe that you can carry in NYC(within reason, this isn't Middle of Nowhere,Nevada).
What street filth do you mean?
As for radio/TV, nobody is forcing you, you CAN change the station. If you can figure out how to.
Ok then. Please obtain a concealed carry permit from New York. Post it for us when you get it.
I could change the station in my own vehicle but not in my place of employment where the lowbrows who enjoy bathroom humor had numerical sway over what was played in the shop. are your knuckles callused?
-
Storch
Are you saying you are more educated and enlightened than the average Stern listener?
You wish.
-
Originally posted by Habu
Storch
Are you saying you are more educated and enlightened than the average Stern listener?
You wish.
I'm uneducated and am in fact illiterate, hold on while I find my flashlight.
-
Originally posted by storch
Gone from my market and many others so I'm told. But it's ok if he is still in that NYC market, somehow they seem compatible to me. Yes and the lines between good and bad are decidedly blurred so I easily understand your confusion. Let me clarify it for you. good = anything GWB says or anything from the RNC, bad = anything from the DNC and Europe. hope that clears it up for you.
Stern is a Republican...
-
Originally posted by Red Tail 444
Stern is a Republican...
Dowses redtail with holy water, throws handfuls of garlic at him and clubs him with heavy wooden crucifix. No way!!! I'd have to see the membership card and he would have to flawlessly perform the secret hand shake.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
this has to be the worst troll ever
LOL...I spat the hook with storch's "good = anything GWB says or anything from the RNC, bad = anything from the DNC and Europe."
:eek:
way over the top on that one...the bait's not stinky, it's putrid....:rofl :lol
-
Originally posted by storch
Dowses redtail with holy water, throws handfuls of garlic at him and clubs him with heavy wooden crucifix. No way!!! I'd have to see the membership card and he would have to flawlessly perform the secret hand shake.
No thanks, Buffy. I'm not really interested in cybering with you, but thanks for offering it...
As I recall, (I might be wrong) but when he ran for governor of NY state, he ran as a Republican. I am confident that he's always been staunch supporter of GOP-centered philosophy, as well as Rudy Giuliani, and the NYPD, especially in the cases against Amadou Diallo, and the guy who was sodomozied by members of the 72nd Precinct.
Stern is hardly a liberal, but he is a supporter of first amendment rights. I support his right to make a fool of himself, actually. I get some entertainment form him.
-
Originally posted by Habu
Storch
Are you saying you are more educated and enlightened than the average Stern listener?
You wish.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Do you listen to the same Stern I do? Just because the callers are above your intellect, doesn't make them rocket scientists.
-
Troll aside, I'm wondering if anyone can really connect the dots between the FCC crackdown on obscenity and GWB. Seems to me this is a direct result of the "Super Bowl costume malfunction", and public outrage over the incident.
-
Originally posted by 1K0N
Obscene Broadcasts are Prohibited at all Times
Obscene speech is not protected by the First Amendment and cannot be broadcast at any time. To be obscene, material must meet a three-prong test:
An average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;
The material must depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable law; and
The material, taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
Indecent Broadcast Restrictions
The FCC has defined broadcast indecency as "language or material that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community broadcast standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory organs or activities." Indecent programming contains patently offensive sexual or excretory references that do not rise to the level of obscenity. Indecent programming may, however, be restricted in order to avoid its broadcast during times of the day when there is a reasonable risk that children may be in the audience.
Consistent with a federal statute and federal court decisions interpreting the indecency statute, the Commission adopted a rule pursuant to which broadcasts -- both on television and radio -- that fit within the indecency definition and that are aired between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. are subject to indecency enforcement action.
Profane Broadcast Restrictions
Profane material is defined as including language that denotes certain of those personally reviling epithets naturally tending to provoke violent resentment or denoting language so grossly offensive to members of the public who actually hear it as to amount to a nuisance.
Like indecency, profane speech is prohibited on broadcast radio and television between 6am and 10pm.
First Amendment and Obscenity/Indecency
Expressions of views that do not involve a "clear and present danger of serious substantive evil" come under the protection of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The Communications Act prohibits the FCC from censoring broadcast material, in most cases, and from making any regulation that would interfere with freedom of speech. According to an FCC opinion on this subject, "the public interest is best served by permitting free expression of views." This principle ensures that the most diverse and opposing opinions will be expressed, even though some may be highly offensive. The Courts have said that indecent material is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution and cannot be banned entirely. Nonetheless, the FCC has taken numerous enforcement actions against broadcast stations for violations of the restrictions on broadcast indecency.
Enforcement of Indecent Broadcast Restrictions
Enforcement actions in this area are based on documented complaints received from the public about indecent or obscene broadcasting. The FCC’s staff reviews each complaint to determine whether it has sufficient information to suggest that there has been a violation of the obscenity or indecency laws. If it appears that a violation may have occurred, the staff will start an investigation by sending a letter of inquiry to the broadcast station.
If a complaint does not contain information sufficient to determine that a violation may have occurred, the complaint will be dismissed. In such a case, the complainant has the option of re-filing the complaint with additional information, filing a petition for reconsideration of the staff action, or filing an application for review (appeal) to the full Commission.
If the facts and information contained in the complaint suggest that a violation did not occur, then the complaint will be denied. In that situation, the complainant has the option of filing a petition for reconsideration of the staff action or an appeal to the full Commission.
Context
In making indecency determinations, context is key! The FCC staff must analyze what was actually said during the broadcast, the meaning of what was said, and the context in which it was stated.
Stern has 8 million listeners who think that he is not indecent. The FCC has 2 or 3 people that decide if he is.
Stern is much less indecent that Spanish radio stations who have been left alone.
Your radio has a dial. You don't have to listen to him.
Stern was dropped from Clear Channel stations after he came out against GWB and Clear Channel's owners are huge GWB backers.
The FCC is a political tool that is being used to enforce an agenda that has noting to do with what the average american feels is indecent.
-
Originally posted by Habu
Stern was dropped from Clear Channel stations after he came out against GWB and Clear Channel's owners are huge GWB backers.
The FCC is a political tool that is being used to enforce an agenda that has noting to do with what the average american feels is indecent.
How does Clear Channel dropping Stern based on philosophical differences and market conditions have anything to do with the FCC?
I'm not saying that the FCC has acted fairly or rationally with respect to the fines it has levied against Stern, but if market forces made it worthwhile, Stern wouldn't have been yanked.
Clear Channel's decission to pull Howard Stern - however misguided it may be - is simply a corporate entity excercising its will in a free market. There's nothing untoward about that and it certainly can't be called censorship.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Do you listen to the same Stern I do? Just because the callers are above your intellect, doesn't make them rocket scientists.
:rofl
-
Originally posted by Habu
Your radio has a dial. You don't have to listen to him.
Stern was dropped from Clear Channel stations after he came out against GWB and Clear Channel's owners are huge GWB backers.
I think generally the FCC guidlines/laws are written to protect children from being able to listen to obscene material.
Clear Channel dropped Sterns after the Stock holders started to worry about thier portfolio's values falling... That was easy to pick up the first day it happened....
The Stock holders are big GWB fans but not big enough to watch thier life savings plummet in a few days time..
Though in retrospect those same stock holders will miss Sterns earnings for Clear Channel.. It seems that John Boy And Billie yuck fest just doesn't do that well in the NEw York market...
Just an opinion though, we both going to believe what we want..
-
Originally posted by Samiam
How does Clear Channel dropping Stern based on philosophical differences and market conditions have anything to do with the FCC?
I'm not saying that the FCC has acted fairly or rationally with respect to the fines it has levied against Stern, but if market forces made it worthwhile, Stern wouldn't have been yanked.
Clear Channel's decission to pull Howard Stern - however misguided it may be - is simply a corporate entity excercising its will in a free market. There's nothing untoward about that and it certainly can't be called censorship.
Good points but the issue is not so clear cut.
Clear channel had a number of on air personalitys that were being investigated by the FCC. Many are still on the air. The FCC fine addressed all the issues outstanding with Clear Channel (not just Howard Stern) although Clear Channel and the press are painting it like the fine was a result of Howard Stern only.
Stern was huge in the 6 markets they dropped him from. Clear Channel justified dropping him by saying it was due to indecency but it was only after he came out against GWB that they dropped him.
Even though it is in his contract that he can re enter the markets he was dropped from Clear Channel knows if he does it will kill their stations so they are sueing him to keep him out. This is against the contract they signed.
In a nutshell they dropped him from swing political markets when he started coming out against GWB. The FCC fine was not just due to his show so that was not a reason to drop him. They kept on air other DJ's who were fined under the blanket fine. They are fighting to keep him out of the markets they dropped him from as they know that the audience for him in those markets is huge.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Do you listen to the same Stern I do? Just because the callers are above your intellect, doesn't make them rocket scientists.
You are confusing Stern callers (or any radio station caller) with his average listener.
The demographics on his listeners is that they are better educated and richer than the average American.
That is why his show is popular with advertisers.
Martlet I can't help how smart or not I am. God made me that way. However you chose to support Bush all on your own. That is like asking to be put in the special ed class at school. :p
-
Just a thought, and I could be wrong...Weren't those decency codes written by the FCC in the 1950's? Back then good decent citizens has their own clean drinking fountains and schools and the negros had seperate. The times, they have changed. Maybe it's time to update those codes to fit into the next century.
-
Originally posted by Habu
You are confusing Stern callers (or any radio station caller) with his average listener.
The demographics on his listeners is that they are better educated and richer than the average American.
That is why his show is popular with advertisers.
Martlet I can't help how smart or not I am. God made me that way. However you chose to support Bush all on your own. That is like asking to be put in the special ed class at school. :p
Could you provide me with that demographics poll?
-
5.6 million people listen to Howard Stern every week.
74 percent of his audience is 25 to 54, the most coveted demographic in radio.
64 percent of his audience is 25 to 44.
57 percent of his audience has a household income of $50,000 or more.
33 percent of his audience has a college degree.
61 percent of his audience is employed in white-collar occupations.
Source: Scarborough Qualitative Research for Howard Stern CBS-owned affiliates/Howard Stern Ad Network.
-
Stern hasn't been funny in years.
-
Actually if you're looking for someone to blame, that would be Ms Jackson, and MTV for their halftime special. They're the ones that got the FCC all riled up. Stern just got nailed in the backwash.
-
Originally posted by AKWeav
Actually if you're looking for someone to blame, that would be Ms Jackson, and MTV for their halftime special. They're the ones that got the FCC all riled up. Stern just got nailed in the backwash.
Ms. Jackson hasn't been funny in years,.
-
Originally posted by Habu
5.6 million people listen to Howard Stern every week.
74 percent of his audience is 25 to 54, the most coveted demographic in radio.
64 percent of his audience is 25 to 44.
57 percent of his audience has a household income of $50,000 or more.
33 percent of his audience has a college degree.
61 percent of his audience is employed in white-collar occupations.
Source: Scarborough Qualitative Research for Howard Stern CBS-owned affiliates/Howard Stern Ad Network.
So with 33% having a college degree, that makes the "average" listener more educated and enlightened?
-
How long will Letterman be allowed to show his Bush funnies?
-
Now, now, Weav... don't interrupt a good GWB bashing in progress...
BTW, I suggested the same above. Apparently shortterm memory loss is a problem for some of the people who post here (not you, I am speaking of the events from earlier this year regarding the Super Bowl and its aftermath).
-
DETH TO BOOSH DETH TO AMREEKA GREAT SHAITAN!!!
-
Originally posted by Martlet
So with 33% having a college degree, that makes the "average" listener more educated and enlightened?
Yes.
How many Americans do you think have college degrees and make more than 50K a year?
You are just on the defensive and shooting in the dark. Post some facts that contradict what I said if you have some. You may not like what I have said but that does not make it wrong.
-
Originally posted by Habu
Yes.
How many Americans do you think have college degrees and make more than 50K a year?
You are just on the defensive and shooting in the dark. Post some facts that contradict what I said if you have some. You may not like what I have said but that does not make it wrong.
No, you said: "the average Stern listener".
I'm merely pointing out that your "facts" don't support your assertion.
33% definately isn't the "average".
-
Originally posted by stiehl
I believe that you can carry in NYC(within reason, this isn't Middle of Nowhere,Nevada).
What street filth do you mean?
As for radio/TV, nobody is forcing you, you CAN change the station. If you can figure out how to.
Unless NYC has changed its laws regarding private ownership and possession of firearms, and the carry of same concealed, no you cannot carry in NYC unless you are connected to someone with serious pull.
-
Holy crap, did anyone read Habu's post?
-
Originally posted by Habu
5.6 million people listen to Howard Stern every week.
74 percent of his audience is 25 to 54, the most coveted demographic in radio.
64 percent of his audience is 25 to 44.
57 percent of his audience has a household income of $50,000 or more.
33 percent of his audience has a college degree.
61 percent of his audience is employed in white-collar occupations.
Source: Scarborough Qualitative Research for Howard Stern CBS-owned affiliates/Howard Stern Ad Network.
And 9 billion flies (or more) eat ch!t every day. What is your point? That somewhat wealthy and intelligent individuals have exceptionally poor taste in many cases? No surprise there. P.T. Barnum once said "No one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the public".
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
"No one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the public".
A Simple Life 2 anyone?
Third Season of MTV's Punk'd?
How about Vince Niel's Extreme Makeover--coming soon.
I'm gonna propose a reality show entitled:
"Celebrity Bowel Movements"
-
habu... how many would listen to a cleaned up stern? to hear his views? all about his parents and himself for hours? if he played by the rules he wouldn't have an audience. and...
I listen to him on and off in my work truck... I am not gonna vote for kerry... If stern goes away for because he can't compete I am not gonna get upset... In fact... His endless crybaby rants and butt smooching lackies are really getting to be boring and over the top. mostly boring tho.
stern with a cause is just a no talent bore... stern with naked women and a potty mouth is mildly funny at times. you are less bright than I had previously given you credit for... or.. very young or... worse... a big city dweller or a woman.
lazs
-
Actually I don't like when Stern has porn stars and he is pretending to pick them up and is sucking up to them. I do like it when he has them on and asks them about their life and how they got into such a thing. When it is real his interviews are the best. If he is not being real I just switch another station on.
When he is interviewing a rap star who says that he is the pimp for a bunch of hookers I really am interested in hearing what he has to say. Fascinating to see another side of life. I also like when he goes to town on people for hypocrisy, even though he is at times the biggest hypocrite around.
I guess people listen to him on different levels. I don't expect you to understand the level I listen to him at because you seem fixated on the juvenile stuff. I don't apologize for my taste in radio TV movies or anything else. I find most TV and Radio is just a total waste of time. Stern is not. So sue me.