RateItAll: The Opinion Network

Hey ladyshark Clearchannel owns stern's show and the stations it's broadcast on so if they want to pull him off the air they can. It's not about what he did or didn't do. But then I guess a pinhead liberal like you wouldn't understand the concept of ownership because you think you and your left wing pals are entitled to everything under the sun.

Seriously, I am no fan of Howard Stern, but he has freedom of speech. Does Howard Stern deserve to be pulled off Clear channel? No. For one thing, Howard Stern did not shoot anyone or kill them or molest them. He only cracked a few stupid jokes. That's his schtick. Last time I checked, Howard Stern did NOT commit any federal crime.

It's unfortunate that a no-talent has-been like Janet Jackson had to do something stupid to rejuvinate her failing career, and hurt many other people in the process. George Bush had no choice but to crack down on Howard Stern because of all the negative hype the public created over Janet Jackson and anything else indecent. So of course Howard had to look out for his own best interests and the interests of his show and his listeners, so he decided to support John Kerry and the Democrats. Unfortunately, John Kerry is not President now and Bush has the final say on whether Howard will stay or go. He's still safe as of right now, however on Thursday Clear Channel was fined another $490,000 and decided to cancel Howard on many of it's major markets. It's sad but I feel that the end is near for Howard Stern and free speech in general, at least on public radio.

Update: sounds like it's over. Stern is off the air. Bush is the winner by TKO. **This one actually is pretty compelling. GWB trying to win an election by appealing to people's values and 'decency.' Shock Jock Howard Stern with 16 MILLION listeners nationwide, many of whom are fiercely loyal. Something tells me that Stern will not be pulled off the air... GWB will not risk 16 M voters, however 'indecent' they might be, just for the sake of his principles. If Janet Jackson is the Iraq of the culture wars, Howard Stern is the North Korea. Armed, dangerous, and just crazy enough to fight back.

The George W. Bush v. Howard Stern feud isn't that big of a deal as some people claim. Howard Stern is not going to decide the election by a long shot. For one thing, most of his audience isn't exactly politically engaged, in fact, most of them are too young to vote. His case might inspire the anti-Bush vote to turn out more. These are the ones who are concerned about the conservative Clear Channel Corporation's domination of many local markets. The potential for one company to dominate programming doesn't portend well for us, especially when it's difficult to define what's sexually explicit, which is the issue at hand here. It shouldn't be the government's position to police the media. It isn't good when the market becomes limited in terms of the free exchange of ideas. The individual should be able to decide for him/herself whether or not programming is decent or not. Advertisers and programmers after all listen to the demands of an audience. A person like Stern or even Bill Maher shouldn't be taken off the air because a vocal minority who never listens to the programming at any rate demands that it be removed. That's wrong and I would even say slightly tyrranical. I find Stern boring and predictable, but still, if people want to listen to him, network executives shouldn't be compelled to take him off because a small group doesn't like what he has to say. As Howard Stern said, this isn't a theocracy. The FCC and the politicians are just posturing for political points by raising indecency standards.

The listener numbers for Stern range from 7 to 18 million per week. Let's say the 16 million is a fair number. Let's also agree that his audience age group is 14 to 24 year olds. A weekly audience of 16 million does not mean an equal number of votes because the numbers are based on a five day broadcast week. With this in mind roughly 3.2 million people listen to Howard each day. This is not talk radio and the stats indicate half of Sterns' audience are kid's that can't vote and are of little value(as votes) to any political party. The other half are Howard Stern faithful that, well, actually listen to this guy. I could be wrong,but I'd bet some of his listeners of voting age are the 50% of potential American voters that just don't really care 'dude'. Contrast this with Limbaugh and other talk radio hosts. 92% registered voters and most are 'politically engaged'. In the political arena Stern is a pip squeak. As an entertainer though, not bad.

Magellan makes a good point in his post. Stern appears to be as crazy as an outhouse rat, and with nothing to lose this might get interesting. There are damn few politicians that will risk alienating a motivated audience of this side. Strategic regrouping or other diversion may be on the horizon here.