…so now that I’m living in St. Louis, I’m listening to radio quite a bit more than I was able to over the past few years. Therefore, I’m now getting exposed to Howard Stern on weekday mornings as I drive to class. As many of you may know, Stern’s show draws a great deal of FCC criticism (among others…) and, thus, he’s leaving “terrestrial radio” and heading to Sirius satellite radio beginning in early January. Therefore, he’s being replaced by a few different personalities depending on the listening region (Adam Carolla and David Lee Roth, among others).
Stern, in the past few weeks, has been really laying it on thick for how glad he is to be moving to satellite, and how much easier it will be to do his own thing, keeping the FCC and conservative groups off his back, etc. All this discussion has gotten me thinking about my thoughts on the subject, generally relating to free speech…which also spills over to video games and TV, I think.
In my opinion, which is generally correct, Stern shouldn’t be censored as much as he is. He’s being censored because the FCC and various groups don’t want children listening to his program. Stern’s show is (primarily…I think…) a morning show, beginning at 7:00 or 8:00 and going to 10:00. When will children listen to it? They’re supposed to be in school! And if they aren’t in school, they’re supposed to be supervised by an adult! During summer is the only time I could think when children would listen to the stuff…and even then, I’m pretty sure that kids would either a). not be awake yet or b). would (read: should) be under supervision of an adult.
Of course, the same thing goes for video games and TV. If you aren’t willing to raise your own kids and keep an eye on them, then you shouldn’t be complaining. If kids are “exposed” to such things, it’s (more often than not) the fault of the parents, not the fault of the person broadcasting/producing the game).
I listen to Stern ’cause there isn’t much else on. There are many times when I’ll switch to something else since I’m not being entertained anymore… There are times when it’s funny and there are times when it isn’t so funny… Stern is a very arrogant person and it shows almost every minute of the show. There are people who love the show and listen to it religiously, and I have no problem with that. But I believe that he has a right to say what he wants if he wants to under the First Ammendment to our Constitution, just like the rest of us. I can write anything I want here and not be regulated. I can actually type out everything that he says and not be regulated. It’s very easy to access…arguably more accessible since a website can be viewed from anywhere in the world, while Stern can only be heard on the radio in certain venues. The fact that he’s moving to satellite is bad not because I like his radio, but because the man is giving up and laying down before The Man. Granted, he put up a good fight over the years, but it’s finally coming to this. The FCC will only begin to regulate satellite radio as it becomes more prevalent. They’ll continue to regulate the internet and censor it. They’ll continue to regulate TV. They’re currently trying to regulate video games as well. This isn’t stopping anytime soon. Mark my words, by the time I’m 40, the face of broadcast television, radio, etc. will change dramatically to the proverbial “right” and our children will be so “protected” that they won’t be able to think for themselves. These kids will be mindless and void of creativity. Just like everything else, there need to be liberals and conservatives, good vs evil, Spider-Man vs Green Goblin… You can’t have one without the other. Howard Stern is a “necessary evil,” of sorts, to allow for the rest of us to think for ourselves and to put ideas out there that cause contention and debate.
Reading over this, I realize I’m not making a whole lot of sense, but I think the basic idea has been presented. I summarize with a good quote from a great movie: “Damn the Man.”
So yeah, any thoughts?
never watched/listened to howard stern…but i’ve seen the show in my channel surfing and roll my eyes. at the same time, he should be allowed to be on. but maybe just at hours that kids generally aren’t around.
what happens is the christian moms get upset and say they are protecting their kids when actually they are thinking it’s a good excuse to keep their husband from watching it and to stop feeling exploited. blah
…while it is IDEAL for parents to be watching their kids all of the time, including times when stern is on the radio, it is not realistic. even my own experiences growing up were full of opportunities for me to do whatever i wanted, had i wanted to-and i had very good parents. does it make sense for us as a society to allow those children who aren’t privileged enough to have caring parents to watch/listen to/play whatever they want? personally, i don’t think this attitude is healthy for the eventual well-being of the u.s. i don’t think that the first amendment necessarily applies to those who cannot make the right choice based on age, experience, or ability. a child still has to go to school and be taught the curriculum chosen by members of the community without any and will be in serious trouble if he or she does not make the choice to go. is this also violating freedom of expression? its similar for other parts of the public domain like tv and radio-sometimes what is best for the whole overcomes the rights of the individual so that anarchy never becomes a problem (but that’s a whole other marxist comment). oh, and just so you know, the fcc is a self-regulating non-governmental organization that also has the right to freedom of speech and non-speech and unless howard stern is being played on a station completely funded by tax dollars, he is also subject to the wishes of advertisers (yes, part of “the man”).
Your opinion that kids should just not listen to it is the typical Liberal answer. The Conservatives say to take it off the radio stations (think of the kids) and the Liberals (and the Libertarians) ask that you not listen to it, reasoning that free speach trumps all. It’s an over-done argument and this is why I don’t talk politics with friends.
But with Howard Stern, he’s broadcasting on someone else’s radio waves. Sure you might think they are all “our” radio waves, but you would be wrong. The FCC (despite having Federal in it’s name) is an independent body with it’s own rules. Instead of being constituants to them, we are their customers so they only have to cater to us so much as to whatever business logic enables them to profit. You can’t write a transcript of Howard Stern’s radio show on the wall of my apartment complex, but you can sing it to the heavens on your own website.
Basically the FCC said “It’s my place and it’s my rules, and if you don’t like it, I’m taking my ball and going home.”
P.S. You should listen to MJ in the morning on 107.7. I really don’t care for Howard Stern, so I listen to him in the morning.
Thanks for pointing out the FCC stuff, you two…always glad I can point out misconceptions by getting caught up in them myself…
So, along these lines:
a). Can you name an example of a non-FCC regulated medium/alternative?
b). By now, shouldn’t we consider television/radio/telephone services to be a right? I mean, we’re getting to the point of considering the internet to be a right, allowing anyone access for free as long as they have a computer. Shouldn’t our telephone services be free by now? And by “free,” I mean “as in beer” as well as “do what you want with it,” just like the internet.
I dunno…
I agree with Mike, I really like MJ’s morning show.