Talk:Howard Stern

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by とある白い猫 (talk | contribs) at 23:39, 23 September 2005 (rvv). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Private Parts

Um, Private Parts was not a "pretend" autobiography. Howard Stern wrote the book, and the events depicted in the book and movie did happen. -- goatasaur 02:16 Mar 27, 2003 (UTC)

Yes, kind of... Except he lies like hell about the size of his private parts, and, if I went to the trouble to dig it all up, a lot of other things. So it is a pretend autobiography, more like an autohagiography. Actually, he takes autobiography to a new level, so what should we call it? :) -- Howard Stern contributor

"Loosely autobiographical"? -- Salsa Shark 02:33 Mar 27, 2003 (UTC)
I like that better. -- goatasaur
"Fanciful" works for me as well. Moving along, I don't remember the movie making that much (forgive the pun) of Stern's equipment. Did that only come up much in the book?

Lenny Bruce comparison

Lenny Bruce was highly political in his content. Howard Stern was/is not. It is in inaccurate to make such a comparision. I recommend removing the Lenny Bruce comparison. Kingturtle 00:23 Apr 18, 2003 (UTC)

If you've only seen his movies or his TV shows, that view would be understandable, but on his radio show he can be VERY political and incisive. Jordan Langelier
Agreed, but he's one of those rare Americans, like Hugo Black, whose politics defy conventional labels. That is why I dropped the "left-wing" modifier in the header para. I can't really see putting him in the same class with, say, Al Franken. Ellsworth 12:44, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

NYC station not obscure

The page says:

He originally started as a disc jockey for an obscure New York City station playing rock music.

How obscure can a radio station in New York be? Is the station WNBC? If it is, it's not obscure.


From biography.com After graduating magna cum laude, Stern took radio jobs first in the suburbs of Manhattan, then in Connecticut, Detroit, Washington, and finally New York City.
He went to WNBC after his Washington gig. Jordan Langelier

TV show

I see no mention in this article of Howard Stern's TV show. However short-lived it was, I think it deserves mentioning, although I don't know the details of it. —Pacific1982

Fanmail

I just wanna say, Air Florida joke apart, Howard Stern's da man!! He rules, hes got wacky ideas just like me.

POV paragraphs

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)[reply]

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)


What Stern hater wrote this article? It stinks of POV from miles away.

Use of the N-word

Howard didn't use the n-word in the Rick Saloman show, a caller did! JMR

During the Rick Soloman interview, a caller used the word nigger, not Howard, nor did he incite the comment.

Removed from see also section

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)

Picture

We need that sexy stern's foto in here somewhere. Lockeownzj00 19:20, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Who is this 'we,' Kemosabe? Jordan Langelier

Stuttering John

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)

Organization

I think this article needs a general overhaul. The 90's/2000's thing doesn't make a lot of sense because he's been on the air since the 80's. Does it make sense to create a separate article for his show, like Tom Green and Conan O'Brien? Then we could create a brief recap of the show here, while going into a more in-depth, chronological analysis of The Howard Stern Show. And what of his television work? --Feitclub 21:13, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

Air Florida Flight 90

I was listening to DC101 when Stern did this crap. It was the last time I listened to him. He was very new to the DC station when he did it. I found the guys he replaced had moved over to another station and started listening to them over there. RickK 09:09, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

Source cited for assertion regarding presidential election of 2004

The source cited for the proposition that Stern influenced the latest presidential election is clearly a biased one. (It is a conservative weblog.) I'll therefore erase the link to the source, along with the sentence it supports, since within the "source" the sentence would be unsupported. Moreover, the sentence makes a conclusory reference to "many celebrities," which is unsupported even by the "source" cited. Hydriotaphia 00:43, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)

A comment I made elsewhere, but appropriate to add here as well:

Old Right, the evidence that even Franklog provides is not, in my opinion, considerable. It doesn't even show that there is a correlation—let alone causation—between where Stern is heard and how many votes Bush got in the two elections. To show even a correlation, you would have to show that where Stern isn't heard, Bush's votes stayed the same or decreased. If you can show that, then we can begin to consider whether the statement should be included in the article. However, since you have linked to a weblog that doesn't do anything of the sort, then I don't think it's appropriate to include the statement or the reference. Further, even if the evidence you linked to did show a correlation, the reference to "one of the many celebrities" would still be POV and unsupported (how do you know that "many" celebrities alienated people?). I'm sincerely sorry if what I say seems harsh, but what you linked to is simply insufficient support for the statement. It is of course "possible" that there is a correlation. But since you have not provided any affirmative evidence for that correlation, the alleged correlation is unsupported and hence does not belong in an encyclopedia. Respectfully, Hydriotaphia 19:53, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)

Hydriotaphia 02:14, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

Left wing?

Can Stern's politics really be accurately described as "left-wing"? I have my doubts. Hydriotaphia 06:12, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

Stern was a very vocal supporter of John Kerry and the Democrats during the 2004 elections. He also heavily promoted Michael Moore, Arianna Huffington, and Al Franken. He attack President Bush from virtually every liberal argument there is - taxes, environment, gay marriage, more government-funded embryonic stem cell experiments, the war in Iraq, abortion, etc. In 2000 he was a staunch supporter of Al Gore and of Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996. He's pretty blatanly Left-wing, with a capital L. -- Old Right 07:04, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It's not nearly that blatant. Howard Stern was completely behind the "War on Terror" as well as the Invasion of Iraq. He has supported Republicans in the past, including Christie Todd Whitman, Al D'Amato, Rudy Guiliani, and current NY governor George Pataki. He is also a staunch supporter of the death penalty which he campaigned on when he ran for governor (as a Libertarian). I would also argue that he supports smaller government (starting with the FCC, I imagine). But he definitely leans to the Left on most issues. --Feitclub 04:46, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

Howard Stern is apparently a libertarian. He was going to run as a Libertarian in some political race, but decided not too because he would have to reveal too much of his private/financial information to do so. --emb021

That's correct. Stern did announce his candidacy for governor of new york on the libertarian ticket, though he withdrew because he did not want to reveal his finances. As libertarianism is on the right side of the political spectrum, that is presumably where Stern lies. However, it should be noted that libertarians and liberals do agree on most social issues, albeit for different reasons. --jonasaurus 17:54, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dead Links?

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)[reply]

Measuring the Howard Stern Effect

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)

  • And thats why it will be removed, it's speculation not based in any kind of fact what so ever other then the corolation between voting numbers and whp people voted for in a select "few" states in which Stern is syndicated to. Their is no evidence that any action of these voters was in part to Sterns views or opinions. Basedd on the same info i could insert say Limbaughs name, a person who is supporter of Bush and is also herd in all the listed states, and come to the same conlusions, or i could beaisl instert anyons name instead of Sterns that is herd or seen in all of the states listed and come so the same if not similar conclusions. Also the "blogger" has this listed at the bottom:<blockquote>UPDATE 11/5/04: I guess humorlessness should never surprise me, but I don't see how people like David don't get that, while the numbers above are accurate, the premise that Howard Stern could cause anything to happen related to this election (let alone be the sole cause of Bush gaining electoral ground) was more than a little tongue in cheek. In other words, Stern's a blowhard who has no effect on anything other than possibly the self-esteem of various strippers and midgets across America. which baslicaly discredits your reason for the link and supporting phrase to be on the page as well as discredditing the conclsuion of the article. Whn you find some real evidence, let us know. Untill then speculation like this has no room in this article. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 07:02, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Let me repeat something I said about a month ago to Old Right. He has not responded to this comment yet, so I'll give him yet another chance to do so.

Old Right, the evidence that even Franklog provides is not, in my opinion, considerable. It doesn't even show that there is a correlation—let alone causation—between where Stern is heard and how many votes Bush got in the two elections. To show even a correlation, you would have to show that where Stern isn't heard, Bush's votes stayed the same or decreased. If you can show that, then we can begin to consider whether the statement should be included in the article. However, since you have linked to a weblog that doesn't do anything of the sort, then I don't think it's appropriate to include the statement or the reference. Further, even if the evidence you linked to did show a correlation, the reference to "one of the many celebrities" would still be POV and unsupported (how do you know that "many" celebrities alienated people?). I'm sincerely sorry if what I say seems harsh, but what you linked to is simply insufficient support for the statement. It is of course "possible" that there is a correlation. But since you have not provided any affirmative evidence for that correlation, the alleged correlation is unsupported and hence does not belong in an encyclopedia.

Hydriotaphia 19:30, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)

Book on back pain

What Is the book called?