Today the ‘shock jock’ Howard Stern announced he was moving over to satellite radio as of 2006. He is taking his program plus planning on producing or sponsoring other programs on three Sirius satellite radio stations.
I’ve been occasionally listening in to some of his program since the recent battle with the FCC after having stopped listening to him regularly a few years back because quite honestly most of his humor or ‘bits’ as they call them are not that funny to me.
The best part of his show to me is the part when Quivers gives the news, which is probably the least popular to most of his fans. I like the sometime humorous comments (or comments in general) he makes about the news as Quivers reads it.
I also think some of his funniest moments are when he takes calls from some of his listeners (not the ‘regulars’ whose calls are basically part of a ‘bit’ and not spontaneous - most of the time).
I enjoy his banter about the behind the scene happenings at his radio program (although some of the arguments Arty and the rest of the crew have are also planned ‘bits’), the informative gossip he has on things happening in the entertainment business (he reveals things that publicist would prefer not get revealed sometime), and the ruminations he has on his family and his life (hmmm, I think I mentioned this stuff before on one of my blog entries).
The religious right has finally succeeded in chasing him from the public airwaves. Stern said they had not but really they have. I know Stern would probably prefer staying on free radio because of the size of the potential audience he could reach.
Satellite radio will not be as widely available as free radio no matter what Stern says or does. A radio service one has to pay for will not reach an audience as large as free radio reaches for quite some time.
I have no intention of purchasing a device so that I can then monthly pay for radio programming provided by any radio satellite network. Why would I do such a thing?
It is funny that the political party that championed his brand of humor, which was not very politically correct when Stern started, now wants him off air (many in the Party but not all). The Party I’m talking about in case you are wondering is the US Republican Party.
Stern’s humor was insulting and divisive in the view of many and many Republicans loved it as long as Stern supported Republican politicians, and kept the divide between the way most blacks vote and white males vote wide open.
The Republican Party had a shock jock that engaged in sexually charged, insulting, denigrating, and utterly childish humor that served the Party’s purpose. The social Darwinist, capitalist Republicans could live with Stern.
Of course this was before the Christian religious right became so prominent in the Republican Party. The irreverent humor of Stern has no place in a religious right controlled party or society.
Howard Stern engages in a lot of ethnic humor, potty humor, and what one can call irreverent humor. He plays on the stereotypes many have of minority communities. He says his ‘bits’ are to be taken as satire.
My view is that he knows better. His audience takes the humor as it is. When he makes fun of minority groups the audience takes it on ‘face value’. They aren’t thinking, ‘wow, what great satire’. There is no thinking about the satirical meaning of the humor on the Stern show by his audience for the most part.
Robin Quivers has hung on in there with all the denigrating humor (much of it aimed at African-Americans and, some would argue women). She could have found other more fulfilling pursuits like putting her nurse education to use but it wouldn’t have been as lucrative as a job in the entertainment business. She must have quickly realized this.
I guess she knows she contributes little to what is broadcast on the Stern program (I’m talking ‘bits’ here). Her role amounts to background noise most of the time, the conscious and subconscious of Stern some of the time (sort of playing the role of the little angel and/or devil whispering in the ear of a cartoon character) and news anchor for the Stern show.
I guess she did see that Stern is not a racist, sexist, homophobe or really that nasty of a person.
Stern is a person who loves radio and the entertainment business and decided to make a living in it. He needed a niche in the radio market to be successful and he discovered it and has exploited it to the fullest.
As I said I don’t really think Stern’s radio program is that funny (there might be 10 to 30 minutes out of his 4 hour program that I find funny).
I do believe he has a right to broadcast his type of program without being harassed by the FCC. In his case I believe the market place should determine if he survives. I believe a society that believes in freedom of speech has a place for his type of entertainment.
I believe strongly in free speech and free will. All voices must be heard if we are to truly know the human predicament.
I wish Stern good luck as producer and radio host on the Sirius satellite radio network. His presence will probably lead to a much needed growth spurt in the industry.
Rodney Dangerfield: A comedian that I liked past away the other day. He was quick with the funny one-liners and made a career out of muttering, I get no respect’ followed by a story to illustrate the point.
Dangerfield came late to the business of making people laugh. He was forty when he got into the business (or found success in the business).
He was not much of an actor. The movies he starred in basically had him doing his stand up comedian act.
He was good as a comedian and that is what matters to me. He brought a lot of laughter to many others and me and that is saying something. Dangerfield will be missed.