# Sirius "S" Bomb Garners Desired Attention, Outrage



## Nick

*Controversial Ad Pulled From Sirius*

A commercial developed to run on Howard Stern's Sirius Satellite Radio channels was
pulled this week after garnering attention from other media sources. According to SiCap
Industries, the company that made waves with its "Sinus Buster" ads, decided to pull the
controversial spot despite an "extreme spike in sales."

In the commercial, Albany, N.Y. radio talk show host J.R. Gach endorses the benefits of
SiCap's "Sinus Buster" by saying the product is "The best sh*t that ever was... Sinus Buster."

Sirius began airing the commercial in its uncensored form but starting using an edited
version bleeping out the questionable language. A SiCap press release said Sirius 
"has been forced to censor the spot thanks to a calculated negative publicity campaign
perpetrated against them by the media."

SiCap President Wayne Perry said he didn't want to give Sirius' "enemies a venue for
complaints" because "management has been very supportive concerning this commercial."

The company said it will continue to run other spots on Stern's Sirius channels. Sirius did
not comment for the story.

www.SkyReport.com - used with permission


----------



## Kapeman

Boy, talk about much ado about NOTHING!

Holy crap, what has this country come to?


----------



## outerub

We're all so PC now it's pathetic !


----------



## SamC

PLEASE NOTICE ME!!! I say dirty words on the radio. Its my only trick.

PLEASE NOTICE ME!!!!! PLEASE.


Umm, Mr. Stern, your time is over.


----------



## Richard King

I sure hope so, along with all the Stern wannabes out there.


----------



## dpd146

Love him or hate him, his time is far from over. He has single handedly pulled Sirius out of the abyss and is giving Sat radio a chance.


----------



## wipeout

Stern RULES!


----------



## penguin44

Like Stern himself says, if you don't like him, don't listen. there are hundreds of stations on xm and sir, and even free radio. turn it off. sometimes he bugs me, I jsut turn it off. Usually listen though most of the time. If you don't listen to him, then why do you care what he or the station does? You think I care what some DJ in sticksville, ohio says about this or that? No. because I don't care about him. Also, obviously you don't listen to him as he is more then just saying dirty words. on the air.


----------



## Steve Mehs

Yeah I never understood it either. A few years ago I was flipping though the FM (puke) dial, this is before satellite radio came about. One of the DJs on one of the stations said that super evil 'S word' and didn’t realize what he said until after the fact. I said to myself ‘cool he said (that word) on the radio. I guess no one ever reported it to the Federal Censorship Corporation because the station was never fined for it.

Satellite radio is about freedom, Stern is the savior for Sirius. I’ve been getting into his show lately, I listen during lunch, some of it can be boring, I hate when he rips on O&A, but I laugh a lot. If I can get into it more, I might even start subscribing to Howard TV for $13 month. On his show the other day he said the NAB or FCC or one of those alphabet soup idiot organizations starting attacking him because of the free preview on Sirius. HBO does free previews on satellite and cable where are all those ‘save the chchchiiiiildern’ wacks when it comes to that. How can anyone honestly say they support content restriction on INTERNET audio. Anyone who supports that, you don’t deserve oxygen. It’s bad enough TV and radio are censored due to completely asinine reasons like ‘obscenity’ and political correctness, the internet is all that’s left.


----------



## SamC

Every three months, right on schedule, SSR releases yet another variation on the theme of "I can't believe he said THAT on the radio. PLEASE NOTICE ME!" 

Once you get over the fact that this 60 year old teenage boy will say anything on the radio, there is nothing there. 

Is this about "censorship" and all of that? No. Its about a one-trick act. He has a "right" to do whatever. Part of his one trick act is to pretend that there are people that want to shut him up. The reality is, as shown by the microscopic effect he had on SSR's bottom line, most people could not care less.


----------



## Nick

What Sam said. 

Stern has his own little band of mentally-challenged juvenile pukes who think
saying naughty words out loud is "kewl". I just hope and pray that God doesn't
judge America on the likes of that foul-mouthed slug. The cops should arrest
Stern's wife for sleeping with an underage boy.


----------



## Richard King

> I said to myself 'cool he said (that word) on the radio.


I've never understood why people think it's "cool" to use four letter words on the radio, or anywhere else for that matter. It shows a real lack of an ability to express oneself without sinking to the lowest common denominator.


----------



## deraz

Nick said:


> What Sam said.
> 
> I just hope and pray that God doesn't
> judge America on the likes of that foul-mouthed slug. The cops should arrest
> Stern's wife for sleeping with an underage boy.


Exactly, let us hope that he/she judges America on the likes of some of our past and present elected officials.

What are you talking about?.... Stern is single!


----------



## deraz

Richard King said:


> I've never understood why people think it's "cool" to use four letter words on the radio, or anywhere else for that matter. It shows a real lack of an ability to express oneself without sinking to the lowest common denominator.


So, do you only watch "G" rated films? And this from the person who posted a huge list of curse word filled "R" rated films in "HDTV Programming." Gee, what was your favorite part of "Deliverance"?


----------



## Steve Mehs

Richard King said:


> I've never understood why people think it's "cool" to use four letter words on the radio, or anywhere else for that matter. It shows a real lack of an ability to express oneself without sinking to the lowest common denominator.


Why? They're just word, words are nothing more then the meaning we put in them. The whole idea that words can be bad is so funny. How can a word be bad? It can't! Murdering some one is bad, saying that evil 'F word' when your favorite hockey team loses their first game of the year is not.


----------



## Richard King

> So, do you only watch "G" rated films? And this from the person who posted a huge list of curse word filled "R" rated films in "HDTV Programming." Gee, what was your favorite part of "Deliverance"?


I post what they pick to show over the covered time period. As for "Deliverence" I saw it when it first came out in the theaters many years ago. While I stayed for the whole thing and enjoyed the movie, there have been some movies that I have also walked out on, "Clockwork Orange" being one that I recall. I left in the first 10 minutes along with about 20% of the theater. I may have stayed if not for the company that I brought along. It's not a "date" film. :lol:



> Why? They're just word, words are nothing more then the meaning we put in them. The whole idea that words can be bad is so funny. How can a word be bad? It can't! Murdering some one is bad, saying that evil 'F word' when your favorite hockey team loses their first game of the year is not.


You still haven't informed me of why it is "cool" to use four letter words though. What's "cool" about being able to wiggle your vocal chords to make sounds that some people feel are offensive?


----------



## Steve Mehs

Because it’s unusual to hear that ‘awful’ language on the FM airwaves, due to the uptightness of this country. Maybe we should just ban everything that everyone finds offensive? That way all the chchchiiillldern will be protected and we won’t hurt the widdle feelings of those that want government organizations to be their safety blanket from hearing this pure evilness.


----------



## Richard King

> Because it's unusual to hear that 'awful' language on the FM airwaves


So would farting or belching into the microphone. But then, those who are impressed by four letter words would probably be impressed by that also. . None of that tells me why it is "cool" though. Neither saying four letter words, belching or farting takes any special ability or talent, unless of course you can do it on key with a song. THAT I would be impressed by.


----------



## James Long

Stern's program is right where it belongs ... on subscription radio. If he wants to air commercials not fit for terrestrial radio fine. It just reminds us of why he's not fit for terrestrial radio --- when all else fails they go for the cheap laugh of using a vulgarity.

I'm sure he's had some valid content on his shows ... kinda like the articles that people buy Playboy for. But his whole life seems to be wrapped up in a package of "you can't do this on terrestrial radio". The days he does something that could be done on terrestrial radio he isn't the real Howard Stern - he's just another talk jock. Lesbian's describing sex, guests getting naked in the studio, descriptions of body parts and functions - that's Howard Stern at his best.

So let him live on Sirius --- let people pay for the priviledge of hearing his act. Let people pay more for more Howard Stern content as he turns into the Hugh Heffner of the 21st century. It is fine with me.

The only downside is with the lesser 'talented' shock jocks that he inspires. Those who don't have half billion dollar contracts who seem to think Howard is cool and push to the limits of their FCC licensed stations trying to be the next Howard Stern. Jocks that have to go a step further to be "more shocking than Howard Stern" just to make a name for themselves - instead of being better all around DJs who don't have to go below the belt to find "humor".

BTW: In case you want to ask be the question put to Richard ... No, I don't just watch G rated movies. Most of the movies I watch end up in the PG/PG-13 range and I often wonder why the creators felt that they needed to "juice up" the movie with so much crap when the story would be better without the "shocking words" and content. There are R rated films that are better when aired on TNT with most of the crap removed.

Of course I've also seen a few PG-13 movies where the crap was the entire movie - the plot wasn't deep enough to create an infomercial. But hire the right stars, give them one "tasteful" nude scene, some off screen sex and plenty of induendo and "shocking words" and you have a blockbuster. (Until the next crapfest film comes along.)

Unfortunately it is 'unusual' to hear a creative DJ who connects with their audience on the radio nowadays. There are a few ... but too many try to connect by sinking to the base subjects of sex and bodily functions than raising their audience up to a level of higher understanding.


----------



## penguin44

Not to turn this into a what is better then what forum, but you said you don't like people using bad words. Your post above has the word 'crap' four times including the best, crapfest. Now I don't mind that word, but some do. Some consider any word like that bad. Like saying Penis or Poop. It's not bad, it's a word. I am of the opinion that people can listen and watch what they want when they want. Don't like it, move on. Like it, great. You don't even have to like what I like. I don't care. What i do care is people telling other people what to do and listen and watch. Before stern I was hearing horrible talent on FM morning, they talk about nothing, play no songs and say 'funny' things like, fart, or something like that. Now when HS came along and started to let us in on peoples personal stuff, like movie stars, it was great. He didn't ask fluff questions, he dove right in and asked the hard questions. You are right, people will pay to listen to HS on radio, internet, tv, books, dvd etc and we will until it stops being funny. I am not juvinile, nor are many of his fans. yes, some are. BTW he is 50 not 60. I mean I saw some stuff in my life that was shocking and then I saw soemthing on HS that I would never thought possibe. Someone actually coming to terms in real-time with their own emotions about a drug problem that many never knew. That is real. BTW, some of the articles in Playboy are actually interesting to read about. Not the sex stuff, I mean the stuff they ask important people like lawyers and judges. And for someone claiming to be against that stuff, how would you know what is in playboy?

End of Rant.


----------



## James Long

Buying Playboy "for the articles" is probably an older saying that you.
Listening to Stern for the non-sex/shock related content is the modern equivalent.

Howard isn't alone ... Comedy Central is right there with him fighting for their right to offend some or many for the sake of telling a joke, no matter how lame. (South Park lampooning Steve Irwin? How dumb.) Comedy Central makes use of the censor tone beep on occasion (more during the daytime than during late night) so they have a line. SNL on NBC has also gone below the belt for funny - but when Hugh Laurie sang his song this weekend he hummed through the words they would have had to beep on network TV. Just because there is a multitude of people crossing the line doesn't mean that there isn't a line. At least on Comedy Central and network TV we know they think they have crossed the line because it IS bleeped.

Take a look at ratings for the shows. You will likely find younger audiences for the raw stuff. Perhaps the ratings are good - many watching - but the ratings fall off as you get to the higher age ranges (and perhaps more mature audience).

BTW: How do you know what murder is unless you have killed someone? There are other ways of learning.

Many things have crossed my path. I'm happy to say that many things have kept crossing and have not stayed in my path. It's always good when the skunk makes it across the road before your car hits it and ends up stinking. I know what a skunk is and what one smells like. I don't need to hit another one with my car to remind me of that.

Sorry if the word 'crap' offends you. Sometimes the best way of describing a program that relies on four letter words is to use one.


----------



## penguin44

I didn't say crap offends me. I just said it may offend others. Like using the s or f bomb, crap may be just as offensive.

You are right, I don't watch some of those above mentioned shows. But not because of the below the belt humour, just for the fact they aren't funny to me. If it's bleeped, then who cares. It's not like they say the actual word. But funny you should mention it. I watch some movies late and find it amusing what is cut and what isn't. I was watching a movie and they were talking about how to kill a man using only your car keys and it was pretty detailed, but, they also had a shot of a mans butt for about 3 seconds that was blurred. Hmm. Also, i find it funny they bleep words like "a_s_s" but keep in way more 'offensive words like "d*ckhead" People like you get so uptight about things. Just let loose. If you don't like it, flip the station. Your tv has an off switch, use it. If you find the show to juvinile for you, watch something else. I mean I don't call up stations because someone said ass or something equally dumb. There are a lot worse things in the world then someone swearing or showing a butt. I mean the news is way more graphic. Do you censor kids from watching the news and not learning about the world we live in? I mean I was watching the news since I was 8 and reading the papers since i was 12. I grew up with the Iran issues in the 80's. The hijackings and car bombs. My family lived the holocaust (grandparents). Should I not show that to my kids? To show them what people are capable of doing so they won't make the same mistake or how to recognise when something like that may happen. 
No. If my kids think they can handle the images on tv news then great. If they have questions, I am here. If they are scared, they should be but I don't force them to watch it nor do I shield them from it. My kid, wanted to see a movie but it was pg-13 so I took her. She loved it, she asked me about some things in the movie and we talked about it and then she understood, it's entertainment, not real. She knows the news is real. Not fake like a movie. I mean really. I saw Clash of The titans when I was a kid, the only offensive thing in that movie was a boob. For about 3 seconds. I remember laughing out loud and pointing and saying "boob!" and understood it wasn't dirty. It was a movie!


----------



## James Long

Most of the time I do flip the station. I can only stand to watch Comedy Central via DVR where I can skip the commercials for worse programs than the two I watch.

There is a difference between news and entertainment. News presents what is going on in the world for a different purpose - it may be harsh. They may have to ask young viewers to turn away. They may even cross the line and show burned bodies and other graphic details. But (in most cases) they are not showing these things for entertainment value. (Some TV stations do show graphic news for entertainment. That's sad.) Entertainment shows may show or describe graphic content but they do it "for fun". Great if you want the next generation to be Beavis and Butthead - not so great if you don't want a general disrespect for human life and dignity being instilled into the next generation.

Howard Stern's graphic descriptions are real --- and done for entertainment. He may get altruistic and quote what was said by a medical doctor on another program and claim that he's no worse than the other program but he conveniently forgets the PURPOSE. His purpose is to titillate and entertain.

A well written movie with a good plot doesn't have to go for titillation.


----------



## Gcbldr

Hmmm, that's interesting.


----------



## Steve Mehs

> It just reminds us of why he's not fit for terrestrial radio ---


You talk as if terrestrial radio is actually a good thing. If you like used car dealers yelling at you, then I suppose it is, otherwise...



> Howard isn't alone ... Comedy Central is right there with him fighting for their right to offend some or many for the sake of telling a joke, no matter how lame. (South Park lampooning Steve Irwin? How dumb.) Comedy Central makes use of the censor tone beep on occasion (more during the daytime than during late night) so they have a line.


It only offends the thin skinned. South Park is one of the greatest shows ever on TV because Matt and Trey are equal opportunity offenders. They make fun of everyone and every situation and in the end make us laugh at ourselves. Howard and South Park are not for the uptight and thin skinned who can't take a joke, cannot take criticism and cannot admit faults. If you don't like Comedy Central or South Park then don't watch. Personally I can't wait to see that episode you mentioned. I love how they play on current events. Writing is top notch, humor is incredible.

I can't remember that last movie I saw that wasn't R Rated, oh yeah I do, Crash from 1994 or whatever, that was NC-17. I guess I don't share the 'sophisticated' style of entertainment you guys do. Give me a good car chase, a kickass shootout, a decent body count, lots of blood and a naked chick and I'll watch it.

In the movie Home Alone (rated PG btw) near the end when Macaulay Culkin's character says 'Are you horses-ass coming to get me' or something to that effect why is that changed to 'horses-butt' on TBS or any cable channel here in the US, but it's not changed when shown on Canadian over the air TV? This country is way too F'ing uptight about something as stupid as words. Simple as that. I cannot imagine what some of you would do if The Soprano's were shown on ABC instead of HBO, look at the controversy NYPD Blue caused. Isn't it something a show with sex, nudity, profanity and violence is on OTA up north, but is on a premium cable channel in Uptight States of America. I'm surprised some free speech hating group has never gone after the Canadian broadcasters for 'poisoning the chchchiiiiiiiiiiildern' in border cities. I'm not defending the CRTC, they're just as screwed up as our Federal Censorship Corporation, but in different ways.



> I mean I don't call up stations because someone said ass or something equally dumb.


Ass is allowed to be used on dinosaur radio in any context, jackass is allowed to be said on dinosaur radio in any context. As*hole cannot be said. That's the Federal Censorship Corporation for ya. If they really cared about the chchchiiiiiiiiiiildern and 'protecting the airwaves' then they would come up with crystal clear guidelines on what can be said and what can't be said. They haven't. If these words are so 'offensive' and 'terrible' then it shouldn't matter the context. Because *WORDS HURT*  If I get stabbed with a Swiss Army pocket knife in the leg or a machete in the chest, it doesn't matter where I got stabbed or with what, that's irrelevant, I'm still feeling pain. If these babies get pain from words it shouldn't matter how they're said, as long as they're said that should be bad enough.


----------



## pez2002

xm-sirius rule 

Im thinking about getting Howard stern on demand I miss watching the show 

I uesd to watch it everynight on E!


----------



## James Long

The FCC's judgement is based on community standards. Find the community that accepts the content you want to air without considering it offensive and you won't have to worry about the FCC. In fact, it seems that the FCC is less likely to fine a station than you would let on. Most problems are solved by the stations knowing their community and not offending just for the sake of offending.

It is obvious the effect of constantly listening to "offensive" content. It becomes normal and the listener becomes just another insult comic in their daily speech.


----------



## Steve Mehs

How does saying ‘Are you horses-ass coming to get me’ differ from Upstate NY to I don’t know San Diego. It doesn’t. If words do infact hurt, offend, blah blah blah and all that other nonsense, then they should hurt no matter where you reside.

I don’t have to worry about the Freedom-hating Censorship Corporation, even though they want to, they can’t touch cable TV or satellite radio, or even the internet. I’m just pointing out the hypocrisy, and general stupidness of that origination that feels they should baby sit the entertainment of the nation. I don’t listen to dinosaur radio, so it doesn’t affect me. The more they screw up terrestrial radio (more then it already is, if that’s even possible, which I doubt) the more people will flock to satellite radio, a truly superior form of audio entertainment. 

While many cable TV stations self censor to appease advertisers so their products don’t get boycotted by the PTC and ilk, that’s why I have 44 channels of HBO, Cinemax, Showtime, The Movie Channel, Starz and Encore, 2 subscriptions to each XM and Sirius. The Freedom-hating Censorship Corporation cannot touch my entertainment sources. They can go screw, because they suck. They want to control, while I give them the middle finger.


----------



## James Long

Thanks for another example of the effect of Howard Stern on his audience.
Do remember that DBSTalk is a family forum in your next post. Thanks.


----------



## Steve Mehs

This is very comical :lol:


----------



## James Long

And yet, mostly clean.


----------



## Steve Mehs

Squeaky, shiny and crystal.


----------



## Staszek

Nick said:


> What Sam said.
> 
> Stern has his own little band of mentally-challenged juvenile pukes who think
> saying naughty words out loud is "kewl". I just hope and pray that God doesn't
> judge America on the likes of that foul-mouthed slug. The cops should arrest
> Stern's wife for sleeping with an underage boy.


You guys crack me up. Does his show get juvenile at times, sure it does along with many other shows out there.

Your comment alone shows you are just like the masses who all think alike without listening.

Infact if you had listen you would know that he rarely uses "naughty words" and has made it a point not to because that was not what moving to Sirius was ever about.

Little band of juvenile pukes, ha that is a muture statement, I also doubt that you ever took the time to look at his audiences demographics.

The average household income of a Stern listener is double the US per capita, infact in the recent 2006 numbers Sirius is pulling more listeners then XM in the $100,000 plus household income level. One of the main reason they are getting these listeners is because of Stern

The average of Americans with a bachelors degree is around 20% while Sterns audience is closer to 50%

Whether you like him or not, he has been on the air successfully for well over 20 years, if all he was about was bad words his show would have been old a long time ago and he would have never pulled the numbers he did. Also the Sirius deal would have never happened if he could not have pulled the number of people over that he has.

Like it or not its a pretty impressive feat to bring that many listeners to a pay service.


----------



## pez2002

when they rip on howard its funny :lol: 


I did not like it @ first but now i laugh


----------



## bluedogok

I listened to Howard when he first came on the air in Dallas in 1992, after a month I figured out it was a SSDD broadcast and quit listening. I see no need in the use of 4-letter words on the music channels, but on Stern and his ilk it seems appropriate and expected. So I could care less if he uses them or not but I would prefer on most music channels they don't use them (which they don't) because you never know who is listening. I know which ones (on Sirius) typically have those DJ's and listen at the appropriate times. Those that want to listen to Howard should be able to in all his "glory" but I have learned what channels NOT to listen to for me. It is ultimately our choice, just the way that it should be.

I just think the "need" to use those types of words is juvenile and unnecessary but I guess the mental midgets get off on it


----------



## Staszek

bluedogok said:


> I just think the "need" to use those types of words is juvenile and unnecessary but I guess the mental midgets get off on it


Again if you read my statement above the use of curse words are fairly low on the station. In fact if one of the staff members curse to much Stern has been well fairly stern with them.

Since you havent listened since 1992 you dont listen so you are kind of like all the other people who condem something they have never listened to.

As for the mental midget comments, that is unnecessary, those "Mental Midgets" are one of the main reasons why Sirius is still in business considering there whopping 600,000 customers before his arrival.

I am a pre-Stern subscriber, but I am glad he is here because I would hate to see Sirius go down the tubes.


----------



## James Long

You're the one that woke up an old thread (37 days) to restart the arguement. 

Stern's selling point is "uncensored". If he really was that clean why would he need the label? It isn't about "the S bomb" - it is about the day to day level of conversation.


----------



## Staszek

James Long said:


> You're the one that woke up an old thread (37 days) to restart the arguement.
> 
> Stern's selling point is "uncensored". If he really was that clean why would he need the label? It isn't about "the S bomb" - it is about the day to day level of conversation.


Haha didnt realize it was that old, this forum doesnt seem to get the traffic that some of the others do because this was near the top still.

As for being uncensored that is a big selling point, but he was successful for years being censored.

His censorship woes were not really about curse words, quite possibly in the past but the last few years it was way more then that.

He was getting fined for things that were every day topics on Oprah and a few other News station, and they were not curses. He was basically fined for reputation of daring topics which I can see from some of the posts is all you need to condem someone.

I personally dont like the cursing, and I am glad that they dont have it on most of the stations. I rarely ever curse in my own life (unless I drop something very heavy on my foot) yet I enjoy listening to Stern from time to time, so if I am not there for foul language there must be a little more to the content. Half the time he is talking out his rear and his view on things are very skewed, but its entertainment and meant to be taken lightly. I wouldnt think it should be someones main source for the daily news.

I am not saying it should be everyones cup of tea because its just not for some people. What I take offense to as well as some other highly educated listeners I assume would, is being called a mental midget or a juvenile puke because I find some humor in something.


----------



## James Long

As I said, it isn't about the S bomb ... it is about the day to day level of conversation.

There is a reason why some words and discussion is acceptable on one program and not on another. To understand that one must understand the FCC rules. Howard made a career out of knowing where the line was and knowing how to cross it in ways that did not lose the support of his listeners. That way when he got fined the audience response was supportive of him, as a martyr, instead condemning - as in "it serves him right!"

Poor baby! Risking a fine by quoting Oprah! But that isn't the end of the story. The purpose of airing the content is part of the FCC rules. For example, you can have a program on TV that describes how to give yourself a medical exam. What to look for and feel for, etc. Presented as cold science the FCC would leave it alone. But the same words presented in order to shock and titillate is a violation of FCC rules. The on air reaction to the presentation goes a long way toward the FCC's decision of whether or not a particular presentation is a violation or not.

Howard knew the rules ... he also knew when to get out. A few low $$ fines compared to advertising revenue kept Howard (and more shocking people) on the air. When congress and the FCC started stepping up enforcements and began to raise fines he knew that the game was probably played better from the relative safety of satellite radio.

Now all he has to do is hope that there is a big push to apply "decency standards" to satellite radio. As long as what he says is "controversial" he has a show. As noted in the title of this thread ---

Sirius "S" Bomb Garners *Desired* Attention, Outrage​
He truly is "asking for it".


----------



## Staszek

James Long said:


> As I said, it isn't about the S bomb ... it is about the day to day level of conversation.
> 
> There is a reason why some words and discussion is acceptable on one program and not on another. To understand that one must understand the FCC rules. Howard made a career out of knowing where the line was and knowing how to cross it in ways that did not lose the support of his listeners. That way when he got fined the audience response was supportive of him, as a martyr, instead condemning - as in "it serves him right!"
> 
> Poor baby! Risking a fine by quoting Oprah! But that isn't the end of the story. The purpose of airing the content is part of the FCC rules. For example, you can have a program on TV that describes how to give yourself a medical exam. What to look for and feel for, etc. Presented as cold science the FCC would leave it alone. But the same words presented in order to shock and titillate is a violation of FCC rules. The on air reaction to the presentation goes a long way toward the FCC's decision of whether or not a particular presentation is a violation or not.
> 
> Howard knew the rules ... he also knew when to get out. A few low $$ fines compared to advertising revenue kept Howard (and more shocking people) on the air. When congress and the FCC started stepping up enforcements and began to raise fines he knew that the game was probably played better from the relative safety of satellite radio.
> 
> Now all he has to do is hope that there is a big push to apply "decency standards" to satellite radio. As long as what he says is "controversial" he has a show. As noted in the title of this thread ---
> 
> Sirius "S" Bomb Garners *Desired* Attention, Outrage​
> He truly is "asking for it".


While I agree some of what you are saying, the topic was started for an ad rub on his show by a sponsor, it was not about Stern saying it.

I have listened to several of the "medical" clips, and many were far from that.

If it is all about controversy and foul language how come O&A flopped on XM?

Yes its a big part of his act, but there has to be more to it, just shocking people all the time only works for so long. I say 20+ year track record says that he finds a way to entertain.

Agree to disagree.


----------



## James Long

Staszek said:


> If it is all about controversy and foul language how come O&A flopped on XM?


Not everybody is as talented as Howard.  As noted - he knows the line and how to straddle it. O&A didn't.


----------



## Staszek

James Long said:


> Not everybody is as talented as Howard.  As noted - he knows the line and how to straddle it. O&A didn't.


Haha agreeded, he is not the funniest thing alive but he has enough talent to keep him near the top for all these years, just being a "shock jock" gets old ala O&A, (although they can be funny at times).

Thank you for the cordial discussion.


----------



## Richard King

Actually, he's only being cordial so that you will post your avatar a few more times.


----------



## Nick

Richard King said:


> Actually, he's only being cordial so that you will post your avatar a few more times.


 . . . . :thats: !rolling :lol: . :hurah: . 

Two points on which we can all agree. :grin:


----------



## oldave

I'm not one who cares for Stern, but then, I never cared for that whole Morning Zoo concept that came along well before anybody'd heard of Howard Stern. I just don't like the whole concept... it's not entertaining to me. But that's me. The whole crowd of folks and the sound effects and other stuff during morning shows has been a ratings success for... geez... about 25 years. I realize that.

But I don't listen to 'em... I prefer the single morning guy, playing songs, a little news and weather, hit the net news at the top of the hour, state news net at the bottom... <shrug> I'm also a Sirius subscriber, and don't listen to Stern. Just not interested. I couldn't care less how many "dirty words" he uses or doesn't, and at the same time, I think that everybody who wants to listen to him should be able to.

I do realize that Howard's made a LOT of money, made a LOT of people mad and has a WHOLE LOT of listeners who think he walks on water. I also realize that if he told 'em to drink the Kool-aid, many would.

There's no question that Stern has a talent, but I think that talent lies in going *just* far enough to make a few upset, and then that generates publicity and gets that whole cycle going... and keeps it going. I don't think he's any more talented as a show host than a lot of other folks who're doing it and have done it... he's just better at stunting.


----------



## James Long

Richard King said:


> Actually, he's only being cordial so that you will post your avatar a few more times.


I'be been thinking of getting a bottle of white out for that picture, actually.
If my wife was the avatar police it would be gone. :lol:
(See, I'm the nice guy.)


----------



## bluedogok

Staszek said:


> Again if you read my statement above the use of curse words are fairly low on the station. In fact if one of the staff members curse to much Stern has been well fairly stern with them.
> 
> Since you havent listened since 1992 you dont listen so you are kind of like all the other people who condem something they have never listened to.
> 
> As for the mental midget comments, that is unnecessary, those "Mental Midgets" are one of the main reasons why Sirius is still in business considering there whopping 600,000 customers before his arrival.
> 
> I am a pre-Stern subscriber, but I am glad he is here because I would hate to see Sirius go down the tubes.


I was a pre-Stern Sirius sub, so it didn't matter to me whether he came there or not. I just don't understand the popularity, but then I don't understand the popularity of "professional" wrestling either. Great if he is on there if you like him, I have a channel changing device so I don't have to listen to him which is what all those other twits out there who complained for years about him never did figure that out.

I was not referring to Stern specifically, I know that for all of his anti-censorship ranting that he did prior to being on Sirius, he does it less than most expected. I was mainly referring to some of the channels where it is really unnecessary, I expect it on Raw Dog and a few others, it is fine there. I just don't see the need on Buzzsaw and some of the other music stations.

The "mental midgets" that get off on gratuitous curse words everywhere is who I was talking about. I guess I outgrew that stage of my life many years ago and i know some much older who never did


----------



## Richard King

oldave said:


> I'm not one who cares for Stern, but then, I never cared for that whole Morning Zoo concept that came along well before anybody'd heard of Howard Stern. I just don't like the whole concept... it's not entertaining to me. But that's me. The whole crowd of folks and the sound effects and other stuff during morning shows has been a ratings success for... geez... about 25 years. I realize that.
> 
> But I don't listen to 'em... I prefer the single morning guy, playing songs, a little news and weather, hit the net news at the top of the hour, state news net at the bottom...


Agree 100%. The thing that really gets to me is when these guys force laughter when things just aren't that funny. It's so easy to tell that the laughter (from them) is forced and phony.


----------



## oldave

Richard King said:


> Agree 100%. The thing that really gets to me is when these guys force laughter when things just aren't that funny. It's so easy to tell that the laughter (from them) is forced and phony.


At least when we get to hear the "For what it's worth..." bits from *the* broadcast news legend (reckon how many won't have a clue?), there's an occasional chuckle from said legend... and usually the story's worth about that... a chuckle.

No forced laughter, etc.

And when it comes to "bad words," one need go no further than Master George Carlin... words can't be bad. Only thoughts can be.

If I hit my thumb with a hammer, it doesn't matter whether I say shoot, dadgum it or let loose with a stream of blue invective... the thought/emotion behind it is exactly the same.

And the same holds true for all those other words... the meaning is the same as the putatively "clean" word...

Nobody objects to "frack"... yet. But it's used in place of an age-old four letter word that generally means "to have sex." So why's frack ok, but the F-bomb gets people all upset? Oh, because "they" (whoever "they" are... I've asked, but nobody seems to know) haven't declared it to be a bad word.

I'm reminded of an English teacher I had... he'd get livid if he heard one of us use the word "ain't," because it could not be a word - it wasn't in the dictionary. It is now, and I bet there ain't a person here who's upset by that word.

Use of a "dirty word" by a DJ on a music channel is nothing to get upset about. If that's the biggest problem in your life (and I don't mean anyone specific, but the generic "you"), I'd like to express my sympathy for your incredibly dull existence.

Yes, I do understand that "we have to think of the _*children*_ and keep them safe from anything at all that might not be what any morally upstanding right wing ultra conservative Christian would understand to be pure and wholesome."


----------



## Staszek

oldave said:


> At least when we get to hear the "For what it's worth..." bits from *the* broadcast news legend (reckon how many won't have a clue?), there's an occasional chuckle from said legend... and usually the story's worth about that... a chuckle.
> 
> No forced laughter, etc.
> 
> And when it comes to "bad words," one need go no further than Master George Carlin... words can't be bad. Only thoughts can be.
> 
> If I hit my thumb with a hammer, it doesn't matter whether I say shoot, dadgum it or let loose with a stream of blue invective... the thought/emotion behind it is exactly the same.
> 
> And the same holds true for all those other words... the meaning is the same as the putatively "clean" word...
> 
> Nobody objects to "frack"... yet. But it's used in place of an age-old four letter word that generally means "to have sex." So why's frack ok, but the F-bomb gets people all upset? Oh, because "they" (whoever "they" are... I've asked, but nobody seems to know) haven't declared it to be a bad word.
> 
> I'm reminded of an English teacher I had... he'd get livid if he heard one of us use the word "ain't," because it could not be a word - it wasn't in the dictionary. It is now, and I bet there ain't a person here who's upset by that word.
> 
> Use of a "dirty word" by a DJ on a music channel is nothing to get upset about. If that's the biggest problem in your life (and I don't mean anyone specific, but the generic "you"), I'd like to express my sympathy for your incredibly dull existence.
> 
> Yes, I do understand that "we have to think of the _*children*_ and keep them safe from anything at all that might not be what any morally upstanding right wing ultra conservative Christian would understand to be pure and wholesome."


Great Frackin post! No one even was upset about that word the first time it came around.


----------



## James Long

We have learned to live with euphanisms. Although the overuse of euphanisms on radio could still lead to an FCC fine. The FCC doesn't say you have to swear.


----------



## sampatterson

What a fracking long sbomb thread this has become


----------



## N5XZS

You want to get free and uncensered uncut radio transmission? :lol: 

Go to CB radio channel 19, 27.185 MHz AM mode, and any other 39 channels plus freedband below channel 1 and above channel 40.

You can get all the F words in the world and enjoy it!!

Funny thing is the FCC tends to bust CBer's for running to much transmit power but not the F's words.

It's a licences free radio hobbies band for anyones wants to get on the air.

That is true free speech radio band!:icon_bb: 

12-14-06


----------



## koji68

Richard King said:


> Neither saying four letter words, belching or farting takes any special ability or talent, unless of course you can do it on key with a song. THAT I would be impressed by.


You must be a Mr. Methane fan! :lol:

http://www.amazon.com/Mr-Methane-Co..._bbs_sr_1/105-9465067-5224437?ie=UTF8&s=music


----------



## Richard King

koji68 said:


> You must be a Mr. Methane fan! :lol:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Mr-Methane-Co..._bbs_sr_1/105-9465067-5224437?ie=UTF8&s=music


I have never heard of this guy. I have a real problem with this though. Having at one time been in the recording studio business, ages ago, when I listen to "music" I often imagine how they would have mic'd a particular "instrument" in what I am listening to and how the recording session was put together. I don't even want to imagine how a recording such as this would have been "put together". "Hey, you... in the control room.... put on another plate of beans, I think I am depleted." :barf: :lol:


----------



## jrbdmb

At the rate things are going Howard will not be able to "hide out" on Sirius for much longer ...



> Cable television shows packed with sex and profanity, such as HBO's "Deadwood," FX's "Nip/Tuck" and Comedy Central's "South Park," would be subject to the same indecency regulations that govern over-the-air broadcasts if the chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee has his way.
> 
> Currently, the Federal Communications Commission has the authority to fine only over-the-air radio and television broadcasters for violating its indecency regulations, which forbid airing sexual or excretory material between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., when children are most likely watching.
> 
> But Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) told a group of broadcasters yesterday that he wants to extend that authority to cover the hundreds of cable and satellite television and radio channels that operate outside of the government's control. In addition to basic cable channels such as ESPN, Discovery and MTV, *that would include premium channels such as HBO and Showtime and the two satellite radio services, XM and Sirius.*
> 
> "We put restrictions on the over-the-air signals," Stevens said after his address to the National Association of Broadcasters, according to news reports confirmed by his staff. "I think we can put restrictions on cable itself. At least I intend to do my best to push that."


----------



## Steve Mehs

That will never happen, especially in a Democratic Controlled congress. Notice he told the NAB that, the biggest anti satellite radio group around. The weenies in the NAB throught no one would pay for radio, they were proven wrong, very wrong, 12.5 million times over, and now that a lot of sheeple arn't listening to their lame product they want to hurt satellite radio and get rid of one of the main appeals of it. 

It will be one sad day in America if HBO ever is forced to censor. Viacom, Starz/Encore, Time Warner, XM and Sirius are corporations and do not operate on the so called 'public airwaves', how can some Nazi argue against that is beyond me. These politicians need to get a life and not worry about what I watch on TV or listen to on the radio.

Adolf Stevens needs wake up and realize that the first amendment also protects the things you don't want to hear. 

But we Protect the Chchchiiiiiiilderm at all costs :roll:


----------



## agreer

James Long said:


> Most of the time I do flip the station. I can only stand to watch Comedy Central via DVR where I can skip the commercials for worse programs than the two I watch.
> 
> There is a difference between news and entertainment. News presents what is going on in the world for a different purpose - it may be harsh. They may have to ask young viewers to turn away. They may even cross the line and show burned bodies and other graphic details. But (in most cases) they are not showing these things for entertainment value. (Some TV stations do show graphic news for entertainment. That's sad.) Entertainment shows may show or describe graphic content but they do it "for fun". Great if you want the next generation to be Beavis and Butthead - not so great if you don't want a general disrespect for human life and dignity being instilled into the next generation.


There is an old saying amoungst journalists; blood leads. The situation doesnt matter. If you have a city councilman caught red handed stealing millions from the city, it would be below the fold it someone committed a graphic suicide and there were photos.


----------



## agreer

Steve Mehs said:


> That will never happen, especially in a Democratic Controlled congress. Notice he told the NAB that, the biggest anti satellite radio group around. The weenies in the NAB throught no one would pay for radio, they were proven wrong, very wrong, 12.5 million times over, and now that a lot of sheeple arn't listening to their lame product they want to hurt satellite radio and get rid of one of the main appeals of it.
> 
> It will be one sad day in America if HBO ever is forced to censor. Viacom, Starz/Encore, Time Warner, XM and Sirius are corporations and do not operate on the so called 'public airwaves', how can some Nazi argue against that is beyond me. These politicians need to get a life and not worry about what I watch on TV or listen to on the radio.
> 
> Adolf Stevens needs wake up and realize that the first amendment also protects the things you don't want to hear.
> 
> But we Protect the Chchchiiiiiiilderm at all costs :roll:


They can not regulate sat radio! AM/FM were never intended to be a mass-market-clone from coast to coast. It was about a way to, in a verry clean and non-offencive way, inform and entertain, the principles of broadcast havew been *******ised by the NAB and Clearchannel/ and he other big radio COs. It was built to be compleatly ubiquitis and free to the consumer and thus needed regulation to in a sence, protect sencitive listeners who may not know what exactly 101.9 is...

Satalite radio is a private signal, a pay-to-play service; they can not censor it, just like the FCC cant censor HBO or Comedy Central (basic cable is self-edited to keep the pussy advertisers from jumping ship)


----------



## oldave

agreer said:


> They can not regulate sat radio!


Sure they can. Did you sleep through Civics classes?



agreer said:


> Satalite radio is a private signal, a pay-to-play service; they can not censor it, just like the FCC cant censor HBO or Comedy Central (basic cable is self-edited to keep the pussy advertisers from jumping ship)


Doesn't mean they can't regulate it.

Now, I seriously doubt that a Democratically controlled Congress would go there... but when they play the "we have to protect the _children_" card, all bets are off.

After all, we do have to keep the children from hearing any "bad words" and we have to keep them from ever seeing a bare female breast on television. Words that are deemed to be bad and naked people are things that absolutely must be kept away from every person, because if we do that, it will stop the use of drugs, alcohol, tobacco and maybe even stop terrorism. 'cause everybody knows terrorism is actually caused by children hearing bad words and seeing naked people.


----------



## AVITWeb

oldave said:


> Sure they can. Did you sleep through Civics classes?
> 
> Doesn't mean they can't regulate it.
> 
> Now, I seriously doubt that a Democratically controlled Congress would go there... but when they play the "we have to protect the _children_" card, all bets are off.
> 
> After all, we do have to keep the children from hearing any "bad words" and we have to keep them from ever seeing a bare female breast on television. Words that are deemed to be bad and naked people are things that absolutely must be kept away from every person, because if we do that, it will stop the use of drugs, alcohol, tobacco and maybe even stop terrorism. 'cause everybody knows terrorism is actually caused by children hearing bad words and seeing naked people.


Yeah we plan on having a child soon and you can bet that I am going to expose that little fu&*^er to everything the goverment says is "bad" That way if he turns out to be a coplete moron or a serial killer, my wife and I will have someone to sue.


----------



## agreer

oldave said:


> Sure they can. Did you sleep through Civics classes?
> 
> Doesn't mean they can't regulate it.


Prove it: I do not for one second believe that congress could regulate the satalite radio services: if they tell me that I can not listen to Howard Stern because he is delivered over the air (in signal leased/bought from the FCC for use by Sirius) then by that same logic, they could ban use of any offensive language on the internet because it travels over carrier lines that are on public land...and Playboy magazines are shipped via the US post office...cant have that...

Now then: who gets to deem offensive... for example, Howard Stern does not offend me, but Dr Phil does (he is the lowest form of life, claiming to help when he is really exploiting for profit)

It is a known fact that the FCC will not pre-screen content, there are no templates or guidelines, the only factor is weather or not "The (lazy ass) Parents TV Council"and the small but powerful wacko sect of the Christian faith* deem something "knotty" that day...do you really want the Christian Coalition editing HBO or Howard 100?

* I am talking about a small minority of Christians who try ti act as thought police...I am a Christian, come from a Christian background, but I understand that people are free to do and say what they will in this great country.


----------



## James Long

The closer satellite services tie themselves to being like broadcast services the closer they bring themselves under the scrutiny that broadcast services are under. When satellite delivery becomes ubiquitous it becomes a public issue.

For example, Comedy Central is advertising the "network television" premier of a movie this weekend. I don't think of Comedy Central as network television, I think of them as a cable network. Network television are the broadcast guys that syndicate their content to a network of television stations, not a cable channel that broadcasts identical content 24/7 on cable and satellite systems. But if Comedy Central wants to be considered network TV fine -- let them live up to the standards set by network TV -- keep that bleep box running!

Cable and satellite TV has become so common that it is no longer an 'extra' service that people choose to have, it has become a staple of life - like a telephone and electricity. Sure, plenty of people without a telephone (no even a cell phone) and there is still a noticeable percentage of homes without TV at all. But pay TV has reached the level where it is expected to be in a home.

Satellite radio is still growing. XM and SIRIUS have nothing to worry about in the short term (although the RF modulators that they sell for people's cars are a serious problem for terrestrial radio and ARE transmitting unfiltered content on public airwaves). Right now satellite radio is too small to care about in the big picture --- but the more that they try to pretend to be regulated radio the more likely they will become regulated radio.

IMHO


----------



## agreer

James Long said:


> The closer satellite services tie themselves to being like broadcast services the closer they bring themselves under the scrutiny that broadcast services are under. When satellite delivery becomes ubiquitous it becomes a public issue.
> 
> For example, Comedy Central is advertising the "network television" premier of a movie this weekend. I don't think of Comedy Central as network television, I think of them as a cable network. Network television are the broadcast guys that syndicate their content to a network of television stations, not a cable channel that broadcasts identical content 24/7 on cable and satellite systems. But if Comedy Central wants to be considered network TV fine -- let them live up to the standards set by network TV -- keep that bleep box running!
> 
> Cable and satellite TV has become so common that it is no longer an 'extra' service that people choose to have, it has become a staple of life - like a telephone and electricity. Sure, plenty of people without a telephone (no even a cell phone) and there is still a noticeable percentage of homes without TV at all. But pay TV has reached the level where it is expected to be in a home.
> 
> Satellite radio is still growing. XM and SIRIUS have nothing to worry about in the short term (although the RF modulators that they sell for people's cars are a serious problem for terrestrial radio and ARE transmitting unfiltered content on public airwaves). Right now satellite radio is too small to care about in the big picture --- but the more that they try to pretend to be regulated radio the more likely they will become regulated radio.
> 
> IMHO


BUT you have to pay for satalite radio; it is a contract between 2 private parties; entertainment for $$$ -- and you can call Sirius or XM and have all of the unsencord channels (of which there is only a small handfull on both services) shut off to you -- you cant even do that with cable tv! just try to get MTV or BET blocked by the cable company...not gonna happen!

ALSO: Will I melt if I hear the F-word? will my head explode? I am a mature adult who desided to purchase a service knowing full well what I would get...kids cant buy satalite radio, and if their damn parents do not block the "bad channels" then that is their own damn fault - they explicitly asked my twice if I wanted the unsencord channels like Howard, Uncut Rap, Raw dog and so on blocked when I was activating, they then sent an email explaining how to change my settings on the web at any time!

This is just Clearchannel bullying congress into breaking satalites balls, it has nothing to do with decency.

AM and later FM were designed and commisioned to be clean and everyone friendly sources of news and entertainment on the local or regional level, not this coast to coast carbon copy ****, community service and entertainment. satalite is whatever the owner of the bird damn well wants.

as to comedy central, the only reason they sensor is to keep the advertisers happy


----------



## James Long

agreer said:


> BUT you have to pay for satalite radio; it is a contract between 2 private parties; entertainment for $$$ -- and you can call Sirius or XM and have all of the unsencord channels (of which there is only a small handfull on both services) shut off to you -- you cant even do that with cable tv! just try to get MTV or BET blocked by the cable company...not gonna happen!


Actually, it does happen. IIRC the FCC requires cable companies to block channels upon request and I went to a college where all the music video channels were blocked by the cable company at the request of the university.

I'm paying for satellite TV. Seems like entertainment for $$$. I could be paying for cable TV (more entertainment for $$$). I also pay for phone and cell phone service ... my $$$ ... yet the government doesn't seem to be afraid of regulating those common services.


agreer said:


> AM and later FM were designed and commisioned to be clean and everyone friendly sources of news and entertainment on the local or regional level,


Perhaps you should turn back the clock, check out the facts, then re-write that line. "Commissioned to be clean"? Nope. Broadcast standards came much later in life when broadcasters decided to transmit things that did not meet community decency standards. People complained that they shouldn't be hearing that on the radio and THEN rules were written to define what could and couldn't be said. Content wasn't an issue when radio was born.

One thing lost along the way was serving the public interest. That is much easier to do now than in the past. The record keeping a few years ago was much stiffer than it is today. That was the only content issue when radio began ... we (the government / FCC) grant you these licenses to serve the public. It wasn't until much later that obscenity and indecency entered the picture.


----------



## Steve Mehs

So James, are you in favor of content and so called ‘obscenity’ restrictions on satellite radio or not? Should the FCC babysit me when I CHOOSE to pay for uncensored content, instead of listening to crappy commercialized watered down radio? Should the FCC next be allowed to regulate the content on my iPod?


----------



## James Long

It is up to XM (and Sirius). If they want to be the ubiquitous source of radio replacing "clean" terrestrial radio then expect that the government will step in.


----------



## Steve Mehs

Why? The government can't touch cable and satellite TV and it replaced OTA for the most part. Why should the FCC get their grubby First Amendment hating paws on satellite radio.


----------



## James Long

Why not? Everything regulated by the government was at one point "free".


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman

Steve Mehs said:


> Why? The government can't touch cable and satellite TV and it replaced OTA for the most part. Why should the FCC get their grubby First Amendment hating paws on satellite radio.


 The problem, I see first is the FCC can't get there grubby hand on it. Satellite radio protection act was passed in the 2002 year. Satellite radio is doing it's job. asking people, If they want something blocked.. If somebody is gripping tough.. They send there people yearly rights there subs. Satellite radio is not for Children.. If it was. They would violate federal laws..


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman

I believe we need to make a new thread to this forum, to what government dreams on doing. The Recording Industry Association of America and National Association of Broadcaster, want these legislation and don't care about our investment. The one thing broadcaster want to do is encourage legislation to satellite radio, with arbitron numbers.. 

Senator Diane Feinstein did say, Granite broadcasting was suffer over our dvr toys. I like my dvr toys could be regulated and not even able to record our famous fox tv show of America's most Wanted.. Broadcasters do not care about us, all they care about is for us to watch a stupid tv commercial AND corperate bucks from business. If the business doesn't do good, then satellite radio and video on demand shall be regulated until people see the product. 

It is a pleasure, knowing about this, and be upset with our government, the first admendment and free speech admendment. I do enjoy everybody info. Thank You, DBSTALK IS THE BEST FOR SAT-TV AND SAT-RAD. IT'S MY ONLY SITE WITH SKYREPORT.COM, TRANSMITTER NEWS, RUSIRIUS.COM, RADIOINK.COM AND OTHER COMMUNICATION NEWS SITES.


----------



## James Long

We have an entire forum for legislative issues. Reality prefered, but fan fiction accepted as long as it is marked as speculation/fiction/wishes.

The government doesn't post here (although some employees of the government do) so all the "dreams" that could be posted would be those of consumers.


----------



## La Push Commercial Codman

National Association of Broadcaster President and C.E.O. David K. Rehr Talks to FMQB about the push to make 260 million U.S. Radio Listeners aware of the hd radio rollout . And his goal of rebranding terrestrail radio as "real radio" or "local radio". 
Of the association future polictal activities, Rehr said, "over this next year, you'll see the brand and visibility of N.A.B. hill presences significantly increase above the levels that it has been is prior years..
Have a idea what N.A.B. is trying to do. I visited FMQB AND NAB.ORG site..

There is also 12-1/2 to 16 million video on demand subs. David Rehr of N.A.B. ORDER A NUMBER COUNT OF HOW MANY SUBS HAVE DVR'S, WHEN NEILSON DOES ITS SURVEY..


----------



## innersanctum

SamC said:


> PLEASE NOTICE ME!!! I say dirty words on the radio. Its my only trick.
> 
> PLEASE NOTICE ME!!!!! PLEASE.
> 
> Umm, Mr. Stern, your time is over.


*LMAO* 600,000 subscribers when he started....6.7 million since he's been there. You don't have to like him but you have to respect the fact that he brings in an audience.


----------



## Nick

innersanctum said:


> ...You don't have to like him but you have to respect the fact that he brings in an audience.


So does a cockfight, but I don't respect that either. Doesn't say much for the "audience" he attracts, either.


----------

