Vanhalen 0 Report post Posted July 2, 2004 US shock jock Howard Stern is suing America's largest radio group for $10m in damages after he was axed from the group's radio stations for a "vulgar, offensive and insulting" broadcast. Stern's company One Twelve and Infinity, the US radio group that syndicates his show, have filed a legal suit against radio giant Clear Channel accusing the network of violating several Stern show contracts. The row has also taken a political turn, with Infinity now taking his show into the cities where he was dropped, many of which are "swing states" critical to November's presidential election. Announcing the news on his morning drive time show, Stern said the additions would boost his long term mission to drive US president George Bush from the White House. "You'll notice that a lot of these markets are in swing states. Our audience is full of independent voters. Research shows we're having an effect on the election," Stern said. Clear Channel is in bed with Bush "Clear Channel is in bed with George W Bush - they're big contributors," he complained. "I'm going to kick [Clear Channel's] asses because I will quickly rise to No 1 in every one of those markets," Stern promised. Stern will start broadcasting on July 19 on Infinity-owned stations in San Diego, Pittsburgh, Orlando, Rochester and South Florida - the markets where he was dropped by Clear Channel - and Houston, Austin, Fresno and Tampa. While Stern said he was not sure if he could swing the vote in Florida - the scene of the infamous Bush-Gore recount four years ago - his influence, together with that of Michael Moore, is likely to have an effect in November's White House race. Washington newspaper The Hill said Stern had a discernible influence on swing voters. "Stern's listeners support Kerry over President Bush by a 10-point margin," the paper said. Ironically Stern's show recently regained the No 1 position among the key 18-35 and 25-54 age groups in New York, Los Angeles and Chicago, three of the biggest radio markets in the US, despite attempts by US regulators to force him to abandon his more outrageous material. Clear was 'drawing a line in the sand' Today's turn of events comes four months after Stern was dropped from six Clear Channel stations following a detailed on-air discussion about oral and anal sex with Rick Solomon, the man who filmed himself having sex with hotel heiress Paris Hilton. Clear later said it was axing the controversial DJ, claiming his show violated US indecency laws and saying it was "drawing a line in the sand" against indecency starting with Stern's show, which it described as "vulgar, offensive and insulting". Infinity, a subsidiary of media giant Viacom, and One Twelve are claiming that Clear Channel failed to notify them that the show was axed, as demanded in their contract for the Stern show. They are also seeking recompense for owed licence fees. The suit, filed in a Manhattan court, comes just weeks after Clear was landed with a record £950,000 fine, the largest ever levied for on-air indecency. Clear hit back at the suit, with chief legal officer Andy Levin saying Stern was the only one to have broken the law. "His contract explicitly requires his show comply with all FCC rules and regulations. On several occasions, it did not. Clear Channel Radio has both a legal right and an obligation to stop broadcasting it," he said in a statement. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest SP-1 Report post Posted July 2, 2004 Stern is funny at best. But I don't think he can have much of an effect on an election. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dangerous A 0 Report post Posted July 2, 2004 I think Stern will attempt to take credit for swaying the election if Kerry does indeed defeat Bush. Thing is Michael Moore is also going to be claiming credit for it as well. Then they'll war with each other. That's what I'd like to see. A Stern/Moore war over who swayed the 2004 election. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dangerous A 0 Report post Posted July 2, 2004 Actually now that I think about it, Moore is too smart to get into it with Stern. He knows that as popular as he is, he'll never be as big as Stern and knows he'd lose a pissing contest with the "King of All Media". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lil' Bitch 0 Report post Posted July 2, 2004 Howard is fighting the power! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndrewTS 0 Report post Posted July 3, 2004 Stern is a douchebag and I hope he loses. Clear Channel may be pure evil but I'm on their side in this affair. -"His contract explicitly requires his show comply with all FCC rules and regulations. On several occasions, it did not. Clear Channel Radio has both a legal right and an obligation to stop broadcasting it," he said in a statement.- So, I see it as CC doing something they had every legal right to do. Boo-hoo for Stern. -Infinity, a subsidiary of media giant Viacom, and One Twelve are claiming that Clear Channel failed to notify them that the show was axed, as demanded in their contract for the Stern show. They are also seeking recompense for owed licence fees.- Failed to notify them...when exactly? I'd heard of it at the time they'd done it for crying out loud. Or was a "warning" supposed to precede it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimmy no nose 0 Report post Posted July 3, 2004 I think failing to notify them means that they never sent anything official to them stating that they were cancelling the show. They aren't supposed to have to rely on the media to tell them that they cancelled the show, they have to go directly to them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndrewTS 0 Report post Posted July 3, 2004 So if that's the case then we have two parties breaching contract. If Stern was non-breaching he'd have a good shot at winning it. As it is he can probably get the licensing fees but that's probably it, I'd imagine. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bobobrazil1984 0 Report post Posted July 4, 2004 ^ except that STern was not actually being fined by the FCC when Clear Channel dropped him and broke the contract. He was fined after it. As I understand it, You can't just say "well clearly he was breaking the regulations." He hasn't broke the FCC regulations until the FCC actually says/fines him. Otherwise, I could bring up segments of The View or something where *I* think they broke FCC violations. Hell by that logic NBC (or whoever broadcasts OPrah's show) could renig on their contract with OPRAH because of a segment despite the fact that the FCC ignored it! Legally, Clear Channel broke the contract first, and Stern did not (until later), as I understand it (He might even try to argue that he didn't actually break FCC rules because the rule talks about "community standard", which can be interpreted in different ways, for instance, if he's the #1 show in the community, regularly, how can the show be constantly breaking community standard? This argument would spell out the biggest problem with the FCC... the vagueness of the rules). What CC *should* have done was WAIT until the FCC actually decided to lodge a cmoplaint/levy a fine against Stern, THEN drop him, not pay him, whatever. But they were so damn eager to get him off before the congressional hearings as a way of giving in. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chazz 0 Report post Posted July 4, 2004 Wasn't Stern singing Bush's Praises earlier this year? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MarvinisaLunatic 0 Report post Posted July 4, 2004 Clear Channel shouldnt be able to control the # of stations in the major markets that they do. Its quite the coincidence that since Bush was elected (bringing in new people in the FCC that he picked), that the FCC relaxed the ownership rules of TV/Radio stations allowing CC to own 6 or 7 stations in one market. Supposedly the FCC has three cornerstones that form its regulation of the broadcast industry: Competition, diversity and localism. The decision to allow CC to own 6+ stations in a market goes against all 3 of them. Not to mention the fact that since Bush was elected the FCC has gone nuts over fines for obscenity on TV/Radio. They were virtually non existant durring the Clinton Adminstration. Im not a real big fan of Howard Stern, but if he can have some sort of impact on the election to swing it in Kerry's favor then thats a good thing. I honestly think that its his ego talking and that while he might have a minor impact on the election it won't be as big as he's saying it will be. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1234-5678 0 Report post Posted July 4, 2004 In the past, he has supported George Pataki and Christy Whitman, and they were both elected. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scroby 0 Report post Posted July 4, 2004 This could be a very bad move on Stern's part, Clear Channel could just drop him altogether if he decides to attack them. Oh well I don't honestly care what happens to him and his crappy show. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest combat_rock Report post Posted July 4, 2004 Well, someone will always be willing to pick up the number one show, except possibly here in Denver, because we're one of those markets having are radios buttfucked by Clear Channel. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Salacious Crumb Report post Posted July 4, 2004 Not to mention the fact that since Bush was elected the FCC has gone nuts over fines for obscenity on TV/Radio. They were virtually non existant durring the Clinton Adminstration. Not true, Stern was fined millions of dollars by the FCC under Clinton's watch. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimmy no nose 0 Report post Posted July 4, 2004 This could be a very bad move on Stern's part, Clear Channel could just drop him altogether if he decides to attack them. Oh well I don't honestly care what happens to him and his crappy show. Clear Channel already did drop him altogether, that's what the whole thing is about. They only carried his show in 6 cities. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bobobrazil1984 0 Report post Posted July 4, 2004 This could be a very bad move on Stern's part, Clear Channel could just drop him altogether if he decides to attack them. Oh well I don't honestly care what happens to him and his crappy show. Um, they already have. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted July 4, 2004 In the past, he has supported George Pataki and Christy Whitman, and they were both elected. Don't forget Rudy G. Stern has no fucking clue on what he's talking about regarding being the target of a witch-hunt by Bush. I will not be listening to him when he comes on the air in Pittsburgh, which is a shame because I used to listen to him all the time... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scroby 0 Report post Posted July 5, 2004 Oh was he dropped in more cities? He's still on here in the Bay Area in California. I don't listen to his show but he's still on out here. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted July 5, 2004 Huh? Pittsburgh was one of the stations he was first dropped from when Clear Channel discontinued his services a few months ago... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scroby 0 Report post Posted July 5, 2004 When he first got dropped he was still on in the Bay Area, he's still on the air now out here, I didn't even know he got dropped from other cities later on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kkktookmybabyaway 0 Report post Posted July 5, 2004 He was dropped from six or so cities -- there's a thread here that goes into more detail... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites