Shock Radio

Discussion in 'Texas Bikers' started by ßjay jøhñ§øñ, Oct 9, 2004.

  1. can ya'll believe that Howard Stern is worth a half billion, to the
    Satelite Radio Nuts. I heard this week, he signed with them......Shock
    Radio? hmmm? I guess that means, bad language, filthy language, immoral
    subjects,obsencity...blah-blah and blah.....you reckon? I know he was
    cited by FCC about a 100 times here lately for his Mouth. BUT, have to
    say.
    he's a lucky SOB.......500 million...ya know......I've never tuned in on
    him, we don't get that kinda stuff over here in the Bible
    Counties.......And I woodnt pay a monthly fee to have Radio Satelite.
    10-09-04@1025am Sat.

    <>haveAgoodDay-Bjay<>
     
    ßjay jøhñ§øñ, Oct 9, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. ßjay jøhñ§øñ

    Bownse Guest

    Actually, he was cited for shows that had gone out BEFORE the FCC
    crackdown. They reviewed OLD tapes and started hammering the show for
    those old bits; while letting pro ball players and music personalities
    drop the F-bomb on open mics without batting an eye. The head of the
    FCC has a grudge for some reason. If the bits were that bad, why
    didn't the FCC say something when they originally airs years ago?

    I'm neither a Kerry nor a Bush fan right now. Bush has done more to
    return sanity to the US in some areas (gun control) but negated all of
    that by signing the Patriot Act into law. Kerry, on the other hand,
    would rubber stamp every liberal wet dream handed to him.

    But Stern is gettin a bum rap while others are given a pass for the
    same or worse - and retroactively at that. The FCC should butt out and
    let people choose with their on/off button. All the shows that have a
    shread of creativity to them will migrate to subscription radio like
    happened with broadcast TV. What will be left will be bland,
    cookie-cutter mediocrity for the mindless masses who want the
    government to choose for them. The end result will be a glut of the
    radio equivalent of TV's plethora of "reality shows". [SNOOOooooooze....]
     
    Bownse, Oct 9, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. ßjay jøhñ§øñ

    fullstate Guest

    Well personally, I like Stern. not all the time, but for the most
    part, I do. And I like Russ Martin.

    And...if you don't like, you don't have to listen.

    And...I don't think the govt. should be able to dictate what I listen
    to or watch.


    --Fullstate

    Me and Mah 'Priller!
     
    fullstate, Oct 9, 2004
    #3
  4. bownse sez....in part)
    ~~~~~The FCC should butt out and let people choose with their on/off
    button. All the shows that have a shread of creativity to them will
    migrate to subscription radio like happened with broadcast TV. What will
    be left will be bland, cookie-cutter mediocrity for the mindless masses
    who want the government to choose for them. The end result will be a
    glut of the radio equivalent of TV's plethora of "reality shows".
    [SNOOOooooooze....]
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    WOW, I think I agree with ya. I think?
    Not ever hearing Stern on my radio, hard to say. But, I do know he acted
    like a
    idiot, the times I've seen em on TV here and there.( a rich en idiot)..
    I am a Don Imus in the morning kinda guy.
    sat.10-09-04@620pm

    <>haveAgoodDay-Bjay<>
     
    ßjay jøhñ§øñ, Oct 10, 2004
    #4
  5. ßjay jøhñ§øñ

    Bownse Guest

    But you can choose. The FCC is taking that away from everyone because
    some chuckle heads can't figure out how to change stations.
     
    Bownse, Oct 10, 2004
    #5
  6. ßjay jøhñ§øñ

    Bownse Guest

    But, in spite of all that, would you support the FCC dictating content
    instead of allowing adults to choose? If so, why?
     
    Bownse, Oct 10, 2004
    #6
  7. ßjay jøhñ§øñ

    Brian Walker Guest

    Would this be the same "chuckle heads" that can't seem to figure out
    how to click the next thread?
     
    Brian Walker, Oct 10, 2004
    #7
  8. ßjay jøhñ§øñ

    Bownse Guest

    So you think it's the government's job instead of the kid's parent?
    Interesting. I would think any parent, worth their salt, would not
    flip to that station when hauling little poop machines around (at
    least if they were concerned about it). If they aren't concerned about
    it, then what business is it of the governments? Surely kids aren't
    property of the state (yet).
    Morning and afternoon drive times are premium slots in radio. Late
    night is for the schlocks that can't draw enough of an audience to
    sell ad space.
    It's not my place (nor the government's) to quash ideas or speech.
    However I'm not obligated to listen to stuff I don't like. I have
    choice and want to retain it. I am unwilling to shirk my duty as an
    adult and free "man" no matter how difficult it may be. Abdicating
    that duty and being so lazy as to expect the government to do it for
    me is a nauseating idea IMO.

    You're straw man of the AN guy if specious and was fabricated to
    justify your desire to impose your sensibilities on others. I would
    censor neither of them and leave the choice of listening to the
    individual.
     
    Bownse, Oct 10, 2004
    #8
  9. ßjay jøhñ§øñ

    Bownse Guest

    what you propose is why we aren't a democracy; oppression by the majority.
    GOod point. If people *really* don't want something it won't turn a
    profit and will die of natural causes. Clearly enough people listen to
    Stern to make it profitable. If someone doesn't like it, then they
    don't listen. If they don't listen then why are they so bothered by
    something they never hear in the first place? Many complaints come
    from locations where the show doesn't air. Why? Because they can't
    stand the idea of someone (and we're talking a LOT of someone's in
    these cases) enjoying something that they don't like. Forcing one's
    sensibilities on another is abhorrent and smacks of the same mentality
    as that of those Muslim extremists.
    WRONG. We are NOT in a democracy and that's why your argument fails. A
    democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner; which
    is exactly what you're suggesting. We are a representative republic
    specifically because the Founders knew the pitfalls of democracy.
    Incorrect again. It *is* different because they blurred out anything
    not seen in a soap or swimming pool commercial. YOU turned it into
    something more in your mind. In case you didn't know, Stern is a radio
    show. How the hell can someone listening to the radio see any of that
    stuff anyway? Are you saying that what E! airs on their tv segments
    should affect the radio show? That's insane.
     
    Bownse, Oct 10, 2004
    #9
  10. But, in spite of all that, would you support the FCC dictating content
    instead of allowing adults to choose? If so, why?
    --
    Mark Johnson
    I'm trapped in remodeling hell
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    <> Well, I kinda agree...but, there's gotta be some kind of regs on any
    kind of airway stuff.....internet..what have ya...
    to an extent.......Stern got to thinking he was some kinda‘
    Great’.....and said & repeated most of the "forbidden" seven
    words...remember them...by Carlin.........

    <>haveAgoodDay-Bjay<>
     
    ßjay jøhñ§øñ, Oct 11, 2004
    #10
  11. Would this be the same "chuckle heads" that can't seem to figure out how
    to click the next thread? BRIAN
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~It'It's hard being a "chuckle
    head"....it's a lotta pressure tying to
    maintain...chuckleheadedness.....heehee

    <>haveAgoodDay-Bjay<>
     
    ßjay jøhñ§øñ, Oct 11, 2004
    #11
  12. Bounse...in...part)
    So you think it's the government's job instead of the kid's parent?
    Interesting. I would think any parent, worth their salt, would not flip
    to that station when hauling little poop machines around (at least if
    they were concerned about it). If they aren't concerned about it, then
    what business is it of the governments? Surely kids aren't property of
    the state (yet).
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    First, let me tell you how funny you saying ...'poop machines'......LOL
    <>none of those Mom's are listening to
    Little Howard talking trash in the family station wagon......no doubt in
    my mind.
    <>The issue is......parents not having the worry of Little Howard being
    on the airways P_E_R_I_O_D......he's saying his shit, high in the sky
    thru sattelite...and ya have to pay to hear the low life..(dogGoneIT)
    whatChaThing about that?

    <>haveAgoodDay-Bjay<>
     
    ßjay jøhñ§øñ, Oct 11, 2004
    #12
  13. ßjay jøhñ§øñ

    Bownse Guest

    But, in spite of all that, would you support the FCC dictating content
    instead of allowing adults to choose? If so, why?
    -- Mark Johnson I'm trapped in remodeling hell
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ <> Well, I kinda agree...but, there's
    gotta be some kind of regs on any kind of airway
    stuff.....internet..what have ya... to an extent.......Stern got to
    thinking he was some kinda‘ Great’.....and said & repeated most of the
    "forbidden" seven words...remember them...by Carlin.........
    <>haveAgoodDay-Bjay<>
    ....
    Why? I challenge that assumption. Why does there have to be a "reg"
    about free speech that affects only those who choose to listen to it?
    I would suggest that type of mentality leads to begging for increased
    governmental incursions into personal choice.
     
    Bownse, Oct 12, 2004
    #13
  14. ßjay jøhñ§øñ

    Bownse Guest

    Why do they have to worry about it? That's what I don't understand. No
    one is holding a gun to their head and making them listen. You imply
    that they don't listen anyway. If that's the case, then why are those
    who don't hear something upset about things being said? They may or
    may not agree with the discussions but how would they know? They don't
    listen. They've heard someone else talk about how awful it is and,
    like good little sheeple, bleat aloud with the rest of the flock in
    dismay about something they aren't affected by.

    Is it not blatantly clear what's wrong with such an attitude? What If
    I say that the discussions going on in a nearby church offend me and
    should be governmentally controlled? I could go elsewhere but since I
    don't go there anyway and all I know about what is said there is what
    someone else told me then I have every right to insist that the
    government get involved. Where does it stop?
     
    Bownse, Oct 12, 2004
    #14
  15. ~~~~Why? I challenge that assumption. Why does there have to be a "reg"
    about free speech that affects only those who choose to listen to it? I
    would suggest that type of mentality leads to begging for increased
    governmental incursions into personal choice.
    --
    Mark Johnson
    I'm trapped in remodeling hell
    http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org/house/hou
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    There are exceptions to all rules and regs.. I agree about having enuff
    sense to
    use buttons & switches & turn the station, or turn off stuff, just don't
    listen..but kiddos, don't have the gumption...10-12-04@515pm

    <>haveAgoodDay-Bjay<>
     
    ßjay jøhñ§øñ, Oct 12, 2004
    #15
  16. ßjay jøhñ§øñ

    Bownse Guest

    Why? I challenge that assumption. Why does there have to be a "reg"
    about free speech that affects only those who choose to listen to it? I
    would suggest that type of mentality leads to begging for increased
    governmental incursions into personal choice.
    -- Mark Johnson I'm trapped in remodeling hell
    http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org/house/hou
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ There are exceptions to all rules and
    regs.. I agree about having enuff sense to use buttons & switches &
    turn the station, or turn off stuff, just don't listen..but kiddos,
    don't have the gumption...10-12-04@515pm <>haveAgoodDay-Bjay<>
    ....
    So when did the idea of having the government do the work of the
    parent become so palatable? Children as property of the state used to
    be something everyone in the US railed about when talking about China
    and the USSR. When did it become something some people seem so intent
    to embrace?
     
    Bownse, Oct 12, 2004
    #16
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.