The Daily Stern
: SUPPORT: Even a paper in God-fearing Utah supports Stern:
The Federal Communications Commission is picking a fight it simply can’t win by hammering at radio shock jock Howard Stern….
Stern is a liberal pop icon. His argument that these fines and attempts at censorship are politically motivated are grounded.
What’s confusing is that this can’t be a result of the words Stern uses. We have seen tapes of the president describing a writer for the New York Times by using a crude anatomical reference.
With his history as a hearty partier, the president is probably no stranger to off-color humor, either.
That means the line could only have been drawn on the grounds of political advantage. Endorsing decency, even if it is a hypocritical stance, looks good and wins votes.
It would be nice if Stern would clean up his sometimes vulgar humor, but as one of the most popular figures on the airwaves, it is clear that by today’s definition of obscenity, he is not offensive to community standards at large.
: MORE: Dan Gillmor is also pissed:
The odious Clear Channel radio barony’s firing of Howard Stern only puts a period at the end of the sentence. The people who run that company are contemptible, because their action combines flagrant politics and cowardice — quite a combination. But save your real contempt for the FCC, its cowardly chairman, Michael Powell, and his craven colleagues. Egged on by a Congress that has shown frightening disdain for free speech, the FCC has gone on its only holy war against “indecency.” (If any of this bothers you, please contact the FCC and say so.) What’s indecent is rankly political and financial motives that spit on the First Amendment. Stern, as I’ve noted, is not my cup of tea. But I’ll support advertisers who support him in the future….
