Don't bet on Howard

HCI

SatelliteGuys Pro
Original poster
Jun 19, 2005
2,580
1
land of the ice and snow
This is sure to stir things up.

http://online.barrons.com/public/main

January 23, 2006 -- Howard Stern may be coming down with a Sirius case of the bleeps.

High-level executives of the satellite broadcaster are developing an internal standards-and-practices document that will set boundaries for Stern and other shock jocks, The Post has learned.

“It’s something that’s being taken very seriously," a Sirius source said.

Stern's new show also is being broadcast on a time-delay, giving him the opportunity to censor the program — which he already has done.

Stern moved to Sirius in part because satellite-radio services such as Sirius and XM — unlike free terrestrial radio — are not policed by the FCC, which spent years waging an indecency war against him.

The battle resulted in big-bucks fines against Stern and his former employers at Viacom.

XM, which is now home to shock jocks Opie and Anthony, confirmed that it has had its own guidelines in place for some time, but declined to provide details.

The standards of the private satellite broadcasters can be far looser than those imposed by the FCC on the public airways.

Sirius' move toward self-censorship comes as pressure continues to mount in Congress to regulate programming on cable and satellite radio and TV.

For years, cable executives have resisted government threats of regulation, claiming that self-policing has been sufficient.

It's a move satellite radio seems to be getting ready to emulate.

But even with Stern safely out of the FCC's reach, his foes, including self-appointed anti-obscenity crusaders like John B. Thompson, argue that other government agencies should take up the cause.

"The DOJ [Department of Justice] now has the chance to make amends for its laxity during Stern's criminal conduct on terrestrial radio for 25 years," the Florida lawyer wrote to Bruce Taylor, who oversees the DOJ's Criminal Division in a Jan. 9 letter obtained by The Post. Meanwhile, Stern himself has asked for some restraint on his show, encouraging his staff not to use profanity too often.

On one occasion last week, Stern even "dumped" out a minor bit of his own broadcast to protect the identity of a staff member's family.

On Stern's old show, the dump switch was controlled by station officials, who frequently bleeped out racy material.

It's not clear whether Stern knew he'd be subject to any limitations when he signed on with Sirius, which is paying him about $100 million a year.

He also was awarded $220 million in stock after the company reported that it had signed up more than 3 million new subscribers, boosting its total to 3.3 million. XM has more than 6 million subscribers.

Sirius officials did not return calls for comment on the proposal.

The imposition of loose standards is not likely to put much of a dent into Stern's free-for-all broadcasts or scare off any of his advertisers, an expert said.

"I believe this is just an attempt to put things in place if and when [the government] turns up the heat on satellite radio, much like it has with cable from time to time," said Robert Thompson, director of the Center for the Study of Popular Television at Syracuse University.

"In the end, it won't mean much to the average listener or advertiser."

Advertisers are paying less for Stern's spots on Sirius than they did for his show on traditional radio — especially since there is no way to verify how many Sirius subscribers are tuning in to his show.

Sources said it may be as little as half of the $20,000 per 30-second spot that had been floated when he signed up.

http://www.xm411.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=423423#423423
 
Pretty tough and creditable evidence against him right now.

Stern wants you to think that he will not be censored but until Sirius has some type of channel blocking in place he IS at risk. He will tell you this and probably will not fight it because of his paycheck.
 
And on the Devil's advocate side, it is very easy for "haters" or backers of the rival XM to toss out false reports and allegations to thwart migrations and new subs to Sirius which have been growing at a faster rate than XM.

So while I think there may end up being some internal document, it may be only to derail FCC talks about getting into paid services monitoring, or anything they want to call it. Similar to the self regulation and rating of video games. Mess with people's paid programming and the FCC and its political backers will feel the wrath of voters.
 
I believe what it is all going to come down to in the end is like I said earlier, channel blocking is the key here. Its like cable with TNT, TBS, USA, MTV, etc. these are paid services and you still have censoring with these.

I also think in the end the two companys will also have differant packages. Like 2 or 3 per company with differant music and talk in each so people who want only music can have it and not have the treat of Stern and O&A being the at risk of their children hearing them.
 
I wouldn't mind blocking like my DBS box as 100% opposed to censorship. Keep in mind those services you mentioned are basic tier services and in TBS aren't the a local ATL independent / superstation. Non of these are paid premiums. Can satellite radio be deemed as a paid premium service in entirety? That would be a nice argument.
 
I think its how you view satellite radio if it is a paid premium or not. Your right it is a nice argument. I don't think you can call of it it a paid premium cause if you have xm you still can get the XL channels " the ones uncensored" with the service alone. Then you have the option to block these channels from your receiver.

I don't think the FCC can do much with them "atleast right now" with the rules they have cause if you don't want those channels you can do something about it.
 
The Tate said:
I think its how you view satellite radio if it is a paid premium or not. Your right it is a nice argument. I don't think you can call of it it a paid premium cause if you have xm you still can get the XL channels " the ones uncensored" with the service alone. Then you have the option to block these channels from your receiver.

I don't think the FCC can do much with them "atleast right now" with the rules they have cause if you don't want those channels you can do something about it.


Actually the FCC can do something, not every subscriber is paying (some do get it for free) and this is going to cause the same issue that cable has when they allow themselves to be packaged in with an apartment complex when all you have to do is plug in a TV and watch.

There is some rumbling that hotels may have an issue soon if they don't do channel blocking. Say you check in to a hotel with the kids and while channel surfing they come by HBO's "Real Sex" series?

Another strike against Sirius:


TERMS AND CONDITIONS

e) Parental Control. Some programming may include explicit language. It is your responsibility to impose listening restrictions that you consider appropriate on your family members and guests as you feel appropriate. We are not responsible for content that you or anyone else may find inappropriate. Please contact Customer Care to discuss options for channel blocking.


Problem is they can't do it; they can block every channel that has objectionable language or none (bascially its their business plan); their fall back is that you can make the channels not cycle through on you receiver for channels you choose but that is not secure enough for a child as it is easy to get around.

That is what the FCC is looking at and why Sirius is censoring Stern, regardless to what he says he is being censored; even his fans have stated they have heard dump outs.

With XM, even though there are people with free access (sellers who sold so many units got free access when it was a very new service) their ability to block out any one channel so it is not even accessible by your unit makes them safe from the FCC.

Where have we seen this before? A few years ago when cable TV stopped showing porn until they were able to block the channel so you couldn't even get a scrambled image with some sound.

Sirius is in it deep now, Stern fans are complaining that the show isn't what was promised and they are so far behind XM tech wise it is scary. This from a stock holder of both XM and Sirus and a recent convert from Stern to O&A.
 
Just a question while we are on Howard:

Has he announced the terms of his contract yet to his listeners? I'm talking about the 4 day work weeks and 3 months of vacation time a year?

I know he has to do 5 days for a few months, but they never really made it known to the average buyer how little he will be on the air soon.

Wonder what kind of feedback they will get when Friday becomes a replay of the week and he starts taking those long and many vacations?

Kudos to him, but another bad move by Sirius.
 
ona,

I was talking about Sirius being censored "not xm". Thats what the whole post thread is about. Also I have already talked about Howards 4 day 9 month deal in another post.

Wake up CHARPER!! :D
 
Stern has been excellent so far and the show has been everything expected/promised. Stern and Sirius are excellent and worth every penny. And I know plenty of Stern fans with the service, NONE of whom are complaining.

And knock it off with the O and A stuff. They aren't fit to carry Stern's jock.
 
http://radiouncensored.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2006/1/20/1716418.html
Apparently Stern is afraid of something. Why would he want to have a dump button anyway. This is his dream to be able to say anything he wants on the radio and now that he has it he is censoring himself. That does not make sense to me. He has always been for the freedom of speech even on the VH1 showing of Private Parts last week he first started saying he had a fight with them about certain parts for censoring then admitted to being a sell out. He also stated he has been doing sub par radio for 10 years.

Let me make a point I am an O&A listener but I do like Stern. They both annoy me at times but I like anything that is funny. Stern was the one that paved the road for any of todays shock jocks but he does get caught up in himself alot.
 
{Howard Stern has a dump button for his program at Sirius Satellite Radio and is not afraid to use it. During this morning's "revelations" segment, Stern dumped part of a statement by Sal The Stockbroker and admitted to doing so immediately as it happened.

"It would harm someone," explained Stern to a listener that called him out for the abrupt edit. "You have to understand, there are still some things [not for the airwaves]," intimated Stern.}

and since when did Stern care about "harming someone"?
 
Its called slander, and Howard could probably be sued if someone came on his show and started spewing hurtful lies about someone without proof to back it up. They have already said on the show that they had to go to a slander and liable law conference to get straight some things that shouldnt be said, not because the FCC wont let them, but because it is against the law. The dump button is merely there to protect the show from slanderous guests or stupid co-workers (sal) who forget to think before they speak. Howard dumped out of Sal because Sal was bringing unknowing family members into his perverted discussion. The only thing dumped out was the specific name of the family member.
 
I have had Sirius for a couple of years now and have listened to Stern maybe 4 or 5 times since he started (just haven't been in my car much during his shows and left my speaker setup stored in my camping gear for portable). Anyway, I never listened to him before but all this sounds absolutely silly. Howard seemed to always get in trouble for saying or doing things that were gross or too sexual for the public IIRC. I saw no facts in any of the articles except that apparently he bleeped his own show. The Barrons article is reporting that there are rumors that there are guidelines and that no one from Sirius will confirm? Geez - so everyone should jump on the bandwagon that Howard is dissing his audience and lying to the public simply because Barrons has heard a rumor! Even if true - so frickin what - get a life and worry about important things like your frickin' children that are stumbling through school b/c you are more worried about what Howard may or may not say over satellite and who may control it. This is just getting to far out there in the Who the Heck cares!
 
Slander?
Are you talking about the same slander that Leno uses on Bush everynight?

FCC?
Right now the FCC cannot touch Howard, thats what we are talking about. He is suppose to be able to say anything he wants.
 
cableman265 said:
Its called slander, and Howard could probably be sued if someone came on his show and started spewing hurtful lies about someone without proof to back it up. They have already said on the show that they had to go to a slander and liable law conference to get straight some things that shouldnt be said, not because the FCC wont let them, but because it is against the law. The dump button is merely there to protect the show from slanderous guests or stupid co-workers (sal) who forget to think before they speak. Howard dumped out of Sal because Sal was bringing unknowing family members into his perverted discussion. The only thing dumped out was the specific name of the family member.


I just have to say, Will Ferrell doing Harry Carrey is one of the funniest things EVER!
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Top