Howard Stern is the mirror image of quite a few things that are wrong with society today. The first issue is two-fold. For one thing, he swears a lot. Let's face it. The 'ol "if someone jumped off the Golden Gate Bridge, would you?" doesn't really stick, no matter how much it rings true. Why, a smart alec, in true Howard Stern fashion, could reply, "But I live in Ohio!" Thus, Stern's French only encourages people to curse, which is especially damaging to the youth. On top of losing car keys, do they have to lose their innocence? What kind of message is Stern's radio show sending if that message is swear like a sailor and you'll reap nothing but the benefits: money, fame, and eternal glory? After all, Stern's going to live in infamy in the oh-so-expensive textbooks.
Secondly, because he is never actually punished for cursing on air, it gives the impression that it's okay to have a foul mouth. Well, the "it's what God gave me" excuse doesn't work here the way it does for hips and thighs, bringing me to the second fold of the aforementioned issue. The absence of a spanking clearly shows that not everything that's legal is right. The only reason Stern isn't getting a time-out from the FCC is because profanity is legal. (Apparently there's a difference between profanity and indecency like there's a difference between tomato and tomato.) Yes, Howard Stern may show that our constitutional rights are still intact. However, for me, he is a primary example of what's wrong with the freedom of speech: people, like him, who abuse it to no end.
Sidenote: I'm appalled that the same symbol of what I believe is the civil rights movement (a closed fist pumped in the air) is on Stern's website. It should be a lyric in an Alanis Morissette's song.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
If writing this entry makes me an idiot, then you're one too, for writing that comment--ANONYMOUSLY. There's an option to write your name, you know. Also, if you have a blog, you can leave your url so I can directly respond there since you're probably not coming back to check whether I replied or not.
And I'd just like to point out that I conceded in the post that he "shows that our constitutional rights are intact." Did you just miss that? Did you just read the title and assume I was writing nothing but bad things about him?
FYI Stern and I have something in common--we're both entitled to our opinions, so you DEAL WITH IT. If you can tolerate his opinions (you probably even agree with them, right?), why can't you tolerate mine?
Stern represents free speech, listening is a choice and I am glad you mention that in your article. I am not sure what your point is though, you don't like foul language?
Should he be jailed, or his show taken off of pay radio (you do know it is a pay service right?) People pay to listen to him because as much as you don't like him, they do. They don't force you to listen to him though so please don't push your opinion on them.
Post a Comment