BlogWood: MT Archives

Howard's fighting for all of us

From Buzzflash, more on Howard’s fight against Clear Channel, Bush, and the FCC.

"Clearly the saddest and most infuriating irony of the whole mess is that Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell is demagoguing this ‘issue’ . . . about indecency in the media, thus distracting attention from his attempt to impose a radical relaxation of media ownership rules on the country," Shales reminded – a move, coincidentally, that benefits fat cats like Clear Channel. [TV Week]

And so, we’ve officially arrived at the bizarre place where yesterday’s news is colliding with today’s manufactured realities. And though Neil Young [NewsMax.com], like Howard Stern, [Fox News] was once touted as a "pro-Bush celebrity" the closer he examined the Clear Channel/Bush/Big Brother triangle, the more clearly he saw the danger at hand. "[A] lot of the people's civil rights have been compromised, and we don't know what's going on. If I keep speaking my mind, will I be deported?" Young asked the Guardian last May, before addressing Clear Channel’s monopoly on radio stations, concert halls and cheerleading for President Bush.

"I'm not very happy with the state of things. Music is being banned, and we have people in control of the radio stations who are the same people in control of the concert halls. They're also tied into the [US] administration and are sponsoring pro-war rallies. It's not good. . . In the next couple of months, they'll probably make it unpatriotic to be Democrat. It's pretty crazy." [The Guardian]

Rush Limbaugh, the gem in Clear Channel's showcase, need not worry about similar persecution, however. Following Sen. John McCain's astonishing 19-point victory in New Hampshire during the 2000 presidential primaries, for example, Limbaugh did the right thing by Bush and repeatedly raised questions about McCain’s integrity and credentials. When Sept. 11 widows questioned Bush’s odd behavior on Sept. 11 (and his repeated attempts to stonewall the independent commission investigating the attacks), Limbaugh leapt to the President’s defense -- shamelessly and falsely smearing the women as political toadies. [BuzzFlash.com]. (Why, one wonders, didn’t Clear Channel’s president consider Limbaugh’s blatant lies "offensive and insulting"?)

And though Limbaugh initially defended Stern’s First Amendment rights, he twisted his defense to make it seem as if John Kerry is the boogieman lurking in America’s censorship closet -- rather than blaming the myriad of Republicans involved. In case you’re wondering, the House Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act was introduced in the House by Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), while House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Sen. Joe Barton (R-TX) pushed for the provision that would also hold fine individual disc jockeys up to $500,000 for each violation. [HillNews.com] And the Senate version is sponsored by Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC).

Most blatantly, however, in his haste to blame the Democrats, Rush overlooked the fact that the FCC -- which is fining Stern for ancient offenses which were less racy than Oprah topics [New York Post] -- is headed by Colin Powell’s son.

"Do you think Karl Rove might have made a phone call to little General Powell, little Michael and said, 'Let's get this over with. Let's give him the fine and get this done with before Stern gets us all voted out of office,'" the National Enquirer’s Mike Walker asked Stern.

"First of all, I know that for a fact," Stern answered. "I can't even tell you how, just like you can't reveal your sources. I have two sources inside the FCC. They know exactly what is going on. They had a meeting two weeks ago, freaking out. I seem to be making enough noise that people are realizing we could hurt George W. Bush in the elections. So they are trying to figure out at what point do they fine me. So, you are absolutely right."

"This new fine that just came out is three years old," Stern continued. "It has nothing to do with the new rules that came out. They are coming up with new rules every day. . . So they went back three years ago, found a complaint, trumped one up against me and hit me with a fine. . . as soon as the Senate passes this bill, they are going to hit me up with some new fines." [FMQB.com]

Walker also suggested that Powell’s FCC crackdown on Stern created a "left-wing Rush Limbaugh," and Stern agreed, adding that "they unleashed a monster." (The difference, of course, is that the FCC wants to make sure that "a left wing Rush Limbaugh" will never have a national platform).

"I’m relying on people in the [media] to have a better understanding of this issue than the general public," Stern said on March 16, the same day a New York Post editor phoned into his show and revealed that even at the Rupert Murdoch-owned Post, reporters and editors are frightened of the government.

"People are afraid to speak," Jeremy Lipschultz, a professor of communication at the University of Nebraska at Omaha told the Guardian. "When you don't know exactly when you've crossed that line, the tendency is to stay way behind it.'' [The Guardian]
......

"Believe me, people are already collecting tapes of Stern’s radio show and kids will be listening to him under the covers at night, just like I read Henry Miller," Ronald Reagan’s daughter Patti Davis explained. "What will really be sad is when kids have to hide beneath the covers to read the First Amendment." [MSNBC]

And that, of course, is the ultimate point. Because though Regular Joes and clueless journalists may fail to see it just yet, Howard Stern’s First Amendment rights are their rights, too.

And while concentration camp survivor Pastor Martin Niemöller’s observations have been misquoted and abused too often, his warnings nevertheless ring true today. [History.UCSB.edu] First they came for the shock jocks. God only knows who’ll be next.

Note - the [brackets] in the article represent links in the original. Read the original Buzzflash article to get all the links.