The Daily Stern

The Daily Stern

: INCONSISTENT: Michael Powell doesn’t make much sense in this FMQB summary of an interview. Could be his fault; could be the interviewers; could be FMQB’s.

“Here’s the truth: the ownership debate is about nothing but content. Don’t be fooled. I mean, this is my greatest warning to the American public. It’s easy to go after every ill in society by claiming it’s the media’s fault. It’s the American pastime, right? Anything you don’t like, it’s the media’s fault,” said FCC Chairman Michael Powell in an interview with Kenneth McGee, a research fellow and Group VP for Gartner, Inc….

Powell claims that the ownership debate is not really about the ownership rules, saying, “The vast majority of people don’t even know what the rules say, to be perfectly candid. Name all six of them. Name what they actually do. Nobody can. They became a stalking horse for a debate about the role of media in our society. I can expect and understand consumer anger and anxiety about that. But the ownership rules are not the cause or the cure. It was really an invitation for people with particular viewpoints to push for a thumb on the scale, for content in a direction that people preferred.”

Powell accuses some of the people who hold those “particular viewpoints” of hypocrisy, saying, “It’s easy to say, ‘I’m comfortable with that when the government’s doing it for something I like. But I get really scared when it’s something I don’t.’ And what is juxtaposed against the media ownership debate? Indecency, which maybe is what you mean by content. Hollywood was happy to beat up on ownership liberalization because they want the government to intervene so we can promote more independent programming

6 responses to “The Daily Stern”

  1. anne.elk Avatar
    anne.elk

    “This is why I avoided the F word here”
    Uh, before Howard, you said repeatedly that you banned users for using the “F” word because your son surfed this site.

  2. tony Avatar

    since when was howard stern ever fined for saying the f word?
    its not the f word that all the hubbub is all about. it’s that oprah can talk about tossing a salad and howard can’t.

  3. Andy Freeman Avatar
    Andy Freeman

    > I’m against government regulation of content. Thus I’m for deregulation when it comes to media business and media content. It’s not government’s job to censor what we the citizens say. Simple rule to follow. Too bad Powell doesn’t follow it.
    And neither does Jarvis, despite the above.
    Jarvis is steamed about the FCC, because it regulates media-speech. The FEC, which regulates political speech by the rest of us, is fine with him.
    Of course, he tries to wrap himself in the First Amendment with all of the talk about “if Stern can’t talk about boobies on the radio they’ll come after political speech by the rest of you”, but that horse was ridden out of the barn by Jarvis and his ilk.
    When media cares about my free speech, I’ll care about media’s.

  4. gringoman Avatar

    SUCCESSFUL SCHLOCK: I’m probably unqualified to say anything on Stern and the Law. I really tried three or four times to listen to this guy, to see what he was all about. Could never hang in longer than about 10 minutes. Sounded to me like a Suburban Prince playing post office with the babes, something that obviously has a market for the male wanking community and the stereotype adolescent American (and anybody who thinks this is puritanical knows nothing about me and the female gender) He just sounded to me like a slick garbage man. To be perfectly frank: I’d have no problem with this show disappearing from the known universe, yet I understand how cruel this would be for its target audience, and what a Constitutional problem that might present.

  5. tony Avatar

    youre right gringo, you are unqualified to say anything after listening to him for 10 minutes.
    stern has been on the air over 20 years, for 5 hours a day. he’s the top rated morning radio personality in the usa, and he’s been number one for years.
    obviously theres more to him than what you described and if you gave him more than ten minutes maybe youd see it too.
    but instead its obvious you’d rather just make sweeping generalizations based on flipping past him on the dial.