Talk:Howard Stern/Archive 1

message: : Howard Stern's brand of humor is satirical. For example a statmement like "Don't blacks like chicken?", is meant to reveal and poke fun at the ridiculous nature of racist remarks. It certainly does not mean that Howard Stern feels that African-Americans are inferior in any way to any other group.
: Referring to his language as crude and obscene is a way of categorizing his humor as it fits nowhere else. However, what lies beneath his ironic, sarcastic humor is a real understanding of social problems such as racism, crime, politics and hedonism. Although Stern does not "spell out" his intent on every show, his point is obvious when one spends the time to listen carefully. 
: It has been said that Stern's audience one of the highest per-capita income of any radio program. He is a lighting rod for first ammendment rights and educated individuals (aside from typical politicians) support his right to speak freely over public air waves.
While these points have merit and bear exploring (and I certainly agree with the last paragraph), as written now it's a POV analysis rather than a presentation of facts, and is unsuitable for an encyclopedic article.
I'm not currently in a position to rewrite it, but might be in a few weeks. I'd rather have someone that actually listens to his show on a regular basis do it, though. -- nknight 01:42, 3 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: ARGH, this whole article is saturated with POV. I'll take a crack at trying to erase the more egregious bits. Ellsworth 16:31, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV paragraphs 

message: *Seven dirty words
*Michael Moore
*Al Franken
*Arianna Huffington
*Moron - POV, probably should not be in the article
*Racism
I removed the following from the "See also" section. Most of them should be added back into the article, but not in see also. A casual reader would not see the connection between Stern and the following, as they are not mentioned in the article except as links! Add them back into the main text, devoting at least a full sentence to each. • Benc • 01:38, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed from see also section 

message: Since John has left the show, I see no need to link to his official site on this page at all. It no longer is of any relevance. His Wikipedia article, sure, but not his off-site page. --Feitclub 04:27, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)
I'm not a regular listener of his show, but how come John appeared on the show in october/november 2004 on that las vegas special when they played the "hollyweird squares" game - is he back on or what's going on? I saw it on E! in the last week of december 2004... Alex (Jan 16 2005)
*No, John is not back on the show. The time line for the E! show and the radio show usually dont line off, for the most part new eppisodes are shown within a couple of week. If i recall right i think Howard was last in vegas over the last spring or early summer. --Boothy443 06:37, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stuttering John 

message: Why are so many users in love with dead links?  Closing them doesn't prevent anyone from writing a new page.  They just take up wiki memory for no reason.  155 / 13 Apr 05
:Go ahead and remove them. --jonasaurus 17:54, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Dead Links?

message: I'm puting the line about Stern possible costing John Kerry votes back in because it's not POV at all, it's simply factual information about a legitimate speculation. -- Old Right 06:28, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Measuring the Howard Stern Effect 

message: http://www.wackbag.com/showthread.php?t=32765
Judging from their wiki entry, 'Opie & Anthony' are the XM version of Howard Stern. It looks like XM had to drop the $2 fee per month for their show after low ratings though.
What about restricting edits to registered users, at least fo some pages. It would stop much vandalism Gtoomey 06:45, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated vandalism source 

message: For the record, Howard didn't initially make reference to there being attactive girls at Columbine High School - a caller did. I remember the show and still have it on tape. It was only after that that he added sex as a rationale for committing crime (in saying that the massacre had no apparent rationale - sex, power, monetary gain, etc.) --66.189.64.41 07:50, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Columbine massacre reference

message: I removed the phrase about infinty holding the rights to the show. Considering that none of us are parties, at least to my knowledge, to the contract that Stern and or his production company has with infinty/WXRK, i think we are jumping the gin with infinity holding the rights. This is also in consideration to the in-demand deal, which will span sterns time at both infinity and sirius, and the rebrodacts of those programs. Plus at the most infinity can only hold the right to rebrodcast programs aired while at infinty, and not creative control, or something of the like. --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 08:43, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: CBS (Infinity) doesn’t have the rights to rebroadcast ANY show. It is owned by both Howard Stern and CBS. Both need to agree to allow a rebroadcast to happen. Redd Dragon 23:10, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Infinity rights

message: I remember him saying about a year ago, he had a new book planned. Is anything happening with that? --Richy 17:24, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: New Book

message: I dont think Allisons new husband is the same dude who produces the wire.  can someone confirm this?  I think they have the same names but are different people.
:It's not. --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 04:25, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  David Simon 

message: Ugh - they chopped up Howard's speech quite a bit.  His speech was too long and too many "last of a dying breed"s.  I also noticed at the very end that he said "F Jackie".  Did anyone else catch that?  What was that about? Jeff schiller 15:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In Wikipedia, sign all your entries with 4 tildes (~) which will insert your username with a link and the timestamp.  Anyway, I was in Chicago and caught most of Thursday's show with Jackie and all of today's broadcast.  Interestingly, I caught all of the cast members final speeches on the Yahoo internet broadcast, where I also noticed that Fred also signed off with "F Jackie".  So why did Jackie leave early Thursday?  Or do you mean because he left the show in 2001?  I took Thursday's interview as a "no hard feelings" from the cast towards Jackie, that's why I was surprised by Fred and Howard's parting shot.  Jeff schiller 22:22, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Last Show 

message: There are many shock-jocks on radio but Howard Stern is not one of them. Jock in the radio industry assumes disk–jockey and he is definitely not one of those. Probably the only correct label is “radio-comedian” or “comedian of all media”. :-)
As for the person above who made the comparison between Howard Stern and Rush Limbaugh let me say that you are comparing apples to oranges; Stern is a comedian; Limbaugh is a idealistic promoter of the political right.
--Neilrieck 01:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No, comedians are funny.
Words sometimes evolve in their usage, even idiosyncratically or illogically.  The term has now come to be used with any on-air radio personality who uses controversial or risque material.  Stern has been called a "shock jock," so the article can reflect that.  Nightscream 07:26, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stern is Not a Shock Jock 

message: No, not vulgarity. There is a reference to "shoving kielbasa down chick's throats during the September 11, 2001 attacks. If someone thought "chick" was the best way to phrase that, something's wrong, and leads me to think their might be other slang (however popularized) usage in the article. Maybe given the irreverant nature of the article's subject, it could be tolerable under other circumstances, but until I see Rush Limbaugh's wife #4 (or 5 or 6 or 7) referred to as his "boo", let's talk like humans.
:That was vandalism, and it has been removed, albeit not as quickly as usual for this article. As far as I know Howard did not shove kielbasa down anyone's throat on September 11, 2001. DHowell 06:33, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember the whole show (and listened to it). It was vandalism. It did not happen. Redd Dragon 23:08, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Language Issues

message: Does he have it? On the OCD article, it says he does, but there's no mention of it in the article. Gflores Talk 05:45, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you look at the talk page for Obsessive-compulsive disorder most of the celebrity list is pure spectulation, but someone keeps re-adding it anyway.  Stern has joked "I must have OCD" (for instance, on the soundcheck), but that doesn't mean he has been diagnosed as OCD. Chiok 22:52, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, he does have OCD, and has spoken of it many times on his show in a non-satirical manner (and in one of his books, I believe).  He claimed to have been cured of it in the early 1990's but he has lapsed from time to time.  He is a "germaphobe" and compulsively washes his hands. Gerkinstock 01:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  obsessive compulsive disorder 

message: Does anybody know? Gerkinstock 01:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Question: Who was Stern's first celebrity guest?

message: Wasn't Emily born in 1983 and Deborah in 1986?  Also, Emily recently appeared in a play where she did a nude scene. Gerkinstock 01:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Stern's daughters

message: User:Redd Dragon has made a claim that it is illegal to rebroadcast Sirius Satellite Radio material, However I contend that U.S. Copyright law allows for fair use. Obviously This audio clip falls under fair use because it is a non-commercial site. Of course you can say the same thing about any clips for Howard Stern's shows on K-Rock, WNBC, DC101, WCCC and WWWW etc... all of which Howard presented on New Years eve and he was able to broadcast those clips under fair use especially since he doesn't own any of them which I never understood why in his contract he never had a clause that said if he left the station any audio clips and bits become property of him or his production company. I would like to point out that this is not my link but I am defending it because I believe that it should be left here. Misterrick 23:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The question here isn't whether or not that Tripod site is following fair use in offering the Howard MP3, because it's not (which I'll get to in a minute); the question is whether or not Wikipedia policy says it's okay to post a link to a page that's engaging in something illegal. I'm sure that question has come up plenty of times before, so there must be some settled policy somewhere (or at least a guideline). Hopefully someone more Wikiexperienced than I am will dig that up. As for the MP3, fair use would generally be considered a couple of minutes of the show; offering the entire show (which is, after all, no longer free to listen to over the air) would almost certainly not qualify as fair use. However, it must be noted that "fair use" is a very nebulous concept in U.S. law, and has never really been firmed up in established case law. Nobody on either side wants to ever take such a case to the Supreme Court because there's an excellent chance they could rule entirely in one direction or the other, and both sides have way too much to lose. --Aaron 00:10, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok you make some very good points, So what should be done for now until a qualified and experienced Wikipedian can make a proper determination? Should the links be deleted? Misterrick 00:20, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The optimal thing would be for everyone to just agree to leave the link as-is until someone more experienced can come along and guide us better, just so there's no chance of a revert war starting up. But I suggest you take the high road and do nothing even if someone else comes along and deletes it in the meantime before this is settled; again, it's just about preventing a fight breaking out over it, not over who "wins". In any case, I have no idea how many people are paying attention to this talk page, so you might want to hop into #Wikipedia and ask a couple of the admins in there to come over here, check it out and offer their suggestions. If nothing else, that'll help speed up the consensus on this matter. --Aaron 00:45, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I think it's a moot point now because I just clicked on the link and it looks like either the site owner shut it down or the site was removed by Tripod for a Term of Service violation. It's was probably the latter. So I am going to delete the links. Misterrick 00:52, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, sounds like they made our decision for us! --Aaron 00:54, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to Howard 100 Audio 

message: I find it very hard to believe that any article about Stern could exist without even a mention of his 20 plus year war with Imus. Imus and Stern have mentioned the other on numerous shows like Larry King Live and their A&E biographies both mentioned the other not to mention Stern's section on Imus in his Private Part's book and movie. What casual Stern fan does not know that Stern hates Imus with a passion? I also believe that his conflicts with Opie and Anthony should be mentioned as well. Both Imus and O&A's wikipedia articles reference Stern. Stern mentioned Imus on every one of his first 5 days at Sirius. Stern threatened to sue Imus over a bit where Imus made fun of him and Beth O which upset Beth and her family and he even tried to call in and confront Imus on air but Imus wouldn't take the call which I witnessed watching Imus's TV show.
:Why am I not surprised that Stern can dish it out, but he can't take it?
Stern goofed on Imus's Vanity Fair article his cancer ranch and even mentioned Imus at length during his first day press conference where MSNBC's Keith Olberman was called on to confirm that everyone at MSNBC wants Imus gone. Imus found out about Stern attacks and went back at him with a Cardinal Eagan bit causing one of Stern's fans to call him and mention it on air. Stern even said "Imus should just crawl off in a hole and die!". As often as Imus was mentioned Stern didn't mention Opie and Anthony once during week one even though O&A sent Pests to disrupt his last show celebration and streamed his first Sirius show on their XM broadcast to goof on him. That may simply be because a Stern fan would have to subscribe to XM in order to monitor O&A's show and report back to Howard which would defeat Howard's goal of making Sirius number one whereas they can still watch Imus on TV and listen on the radio for free. I've listened to both programs for over 10 years and Imus and Stern absolutely loathe each other.
Maddhatt 04:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, Stern has mentioned Opie and Anthony a number of times on his Sirius show, and a case can certainly be made for O&A being the only other jocks aside from Imus that he really seems to hate.  Before his recent legal troubles began, he mentioned them at least once a show for three shows in a row.  It would definitely be within the bounds of neutral POV to mention both Imus and O&A, perhaps under a "Radio Rivals" category.  Even if such a category contained little more than a short blurb about how they hate each other, with links to the relevant pages.  Hossenfeffer 16:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Imus I can understand.  Stern talks about him all the time.  But the other guys?  I don't know who these guys are.  How can he be enemies with them.  This just seems like a section of people who don't like Stern.  Why aren't Rush L. and my mom on this thing then. This whole section needs to go, with the exception of Imus.Vegasjon 21:40, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What? No Imus?

message: Created this today. 68.7.47.6 18:50, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Userbox 

message: This page reads like an old Rolling Stone article.  There is alot of POV material inserted into the fact surrounding Mr. Howard Stern's career, and this needs to be edited.  Changes shall come as proper research, grammer and unbiased commentary are added. (Countzer 05:29, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Issues Still have not been resolved, nor discussed.  POV check has just been removed. (Count Zero 10:14, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV Problems

message: It has been suggested by Enochlau on my talk page that Howard Stern and Howard Stern Show be split into two articles. Given the size of this article, it seems reasonable, but a daunting task considering how inextricably interwoven the biography and the show description is. There is also the fact that the term "Howard Stern Show" could refer to four different things: his former FM radio show, his current Sirius satellite show, his former E! TV show, and his WWOR-TV show from the 1990s. I thought I'd bring it up though in case anyone else had any thoughts on the matter. DHowell 06:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well it's a start, but still have to think about it. The bio should focus less on the show, and more on him, naturaly. But it should factor in the show somewhat, like is issues with the FCC, i.e the Larry King Call and such (was it King). I would also inculde things about the family, run for gov, things along that line. As for the show article, i personaly, consider the show to start from DC 101 on, as when robin came in thats when the show really statrts to come together into the format of today, the pre dc 101 i would look as a backgoundto the show but would think it would be better in the bio as part of a background on his radio carrer? --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 05:38, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Split [[Howard Stern]] and [[Howard Stern Show]]?

message: If you cared about actually providing information instead of vandalizing articles you would realize Howard played these tapes on his terrestrial radio show when they came out. He played them on his first day because he couldn’t play the uncensored versions before and now he could. Fighting over who played them uncensored first is irrelevant and stupid. Redd Dragon 14:53, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pat O'Brien Sex Tape

message: please replace the paragraph with howard's remarks when he admitted to having O&A censored.  Streamless 19:34, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Censorship Quote 

message: just a suggestion, but i think that there should be more about jackie in this article.  the first mention of him is in the paragraph when it's announced that jackie is leaving the show.  perhaps, how howard and jackie met (perhaps even the joke that convinced howard to hire jackie), and some of jackie's better contributions? Streamless 15:36, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget to mention the Jokemaster, Jokemaster Junior, and Jokemaster Mini. MGlosenger 02:25, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jackie 

message: Any chance we can get some more information on them? Lokiloki 21:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See The Wack Pack, --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 04:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wack Packers 

message: Can someone provide some detail on the feud between Andrew Dice Clay and Stern?  I heard the recent broadcast, and it would be great to get some background on this... Lokiloki 07:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dice Clay