Post by: glockfan.45 on May 17, 2007, 09:41:09 AM
Quote
McLEAN, Va. (AP) XM Satellite Radio suspended shock jocks Opie and Anthony for 30 days Tuesday, one week after they aired crude sex comments about Condoleezza Rice, Laura Bush and Queen Elizabeth and one day after they made light of the incident in their broadcast.
"Comments made by Opie and Anthony on yesterday's broadcast put into question whether they appreciate the seriousness of the matter," Washington-based XM said in a statement. "The management of XM Radio decided to suspend Opie and Anthony to make clear that our on-air talent must take seriously the responsibility that creative freedom requires of them."
Opie and Anthony, who last week apologized for the sex comments, struck a more defensive tone on Monday's broadcast. They lamented the state of radio and what they perceived as excessive reactions to comments made by themselves and other radio disc jockeys.
"We're under the same scrutiny as (National Public Radio) it doesn't make sense," they said on Monday's show.
The pair also expressed sympathy for Don Imus, saying his career is now "gone, just because he was trying to entertain people."
FIND MORE STORIES IN: George W Bush | Hughes | Don Imus | XM Radio | CBS Radio | Opie and Anthony | Anthony Cumia
Last month, cable network MSNBC dropped its simulcast of Imus' show, then CBS Radio fired him for using racist and sexist terms to describe the Rutgers women's basketball team.
On May 9, Opie and Anthony, whose full names are Greg "Opie" Hughes and Anthony Cumia, aired a segment with a man they call Homeless Charlie. As the names of Rice, Bush and the queen came up, Charlie said in vulgar terms that he would like to have sex with each of them.
Opie and Anthony laughed as they imagined Rice's "horror" while describing a violent sexual encounter in which Rice is punched in the face.
Opie and Anthony were fired by CBS Radio in 2002 after broadcasting a call from two listeners who said they were having sex in New York's St. Patrick's Cathedral.
XM hired the pair in 2004. Because the show airs on satellite radio, its content is not subject to regulation by the Federal Communications Commission.
Opie and Anthony also host a syndicated, tamer terrestrial radio program for CBS. Opie and Anthony will be on the air for that program as scheduled Wednesday morning, CBS Radio said Tuesday.
A call to Opie and Anthony's agent, Robert Eatman, was not immediately returned Tuesday.
A spokesman for XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. declined to say whether Opie and Anthony would be paid during their suspension, calling it a contractual matter.
"Comments made by Opie and Anthony on yesterday's broadcast put into question whether they appreciate the seriousness of the matter," Washington-based XM said in a statement. "The management of XM Radio decided to suspend Opie and Anthony to make clear that our on-air talent must take seriously the responsibility that creative freedom requires of them."
Opie and Anthony, who last week apologized for the sex comments, struck a more defensive tone on Monday's broadcast. They lamented the state of radio and what they perceived as excessive reactions to comments made by themselves and other radio disc jockeys.
"We're under the same scrutiny as (National Public Radio) it doesn't make sense," they said on Monday's show.
The pair also expressed sympathy for Don Imus, saying his career is now "gone, just because he was trying to entertain people."
FIND MORE STORIES IN: George W Bush | Hughes | Don Imus | XM Radio | CBS Radio | Opie and Anthony | Anthony Cumia
Last month, cable network MSNBC dropped its simulcast of Imus' show, then CBS Radio fired him for using racist and sexist terms to describe the Rutgers women's basketball team.
On May 9, Opie and Anthony, whose full names are Greg "Opie" Hughes and Anthony Cumia, aired a segment with a man they call Homeless Charlie. As the names of Rice, Bush and the queen came up, Charlie said in vulgar terms that he would like to have sex with each of them.
Opie and Anthony laughed as they imagined Rice's "horror" while describing a violent sexual encounter in which Rice is punched in the face.
Opie and Anthony were fired by CBS Radio in 2002 after broadcasting a call from two listeners who said they were having sex in New York's St. Patrick's Cathedral.
XM hired the pair in 2004. Because the show airs on satellite radio, its content is not subject to regulation by the Federal Communications Commission.
Opie and Anthony also host a syndicated, tamer terrestrial radio program for CBS. Opie and Anthony will be on the air for that program as scheduled Wednesday morning, CBS Radio said Tuesday.
A call to Opie and Anthony's agent, Robert Eatman, was not immediately returned Tuesday.
A spokesman for XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. declined to say whether Opie and Anthony would be paid during their suspension, calling it a contractual matter.
Regardless of if your a fan of the show, or approve of the comments made this is scary stuff. Now even satellite radio is no longer safe. The disgusting thing about this is that XM didn't even wait for a special interest group to attack them over this. We need to stop running scared from the special interest groups, and take a stand against them. Its time to turn around and fight back, unless you support the P.C witch hunt taking place in he radio world. I doubt many here are fans of the Opie & Anthony program however remember first it was Imus, then J.V & Elvis, now O&A. Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh are next (I think Glenn Beck is ripe for the picking with his constant anti-islamic rants). If you are an XM subscriber I urge you to take a stand against XM's decision and cancel your subscription. XM promised uncensored radio, and went back on that promise with O&A's suspension, and likely termination.
If you are an XM customer cancel, and be sure to tell them why. Send XM a message that you do not support their joining the ranks of the P.C Police. Please take a moment to visit this site http://www.peopleagainstcensorship.org/ and find out how you can help defend free speech and turn the tables on people like Al Sharpton, Jesse jackson and the rest of those who seek to limit our rights. If you do call to cancel tell them you will be back when O&A are back, and XM decides to uphold its promise of delivering uncensored radio to it's customers. Do not take their 30 day credit they are offering. Canceling your subscription hurts them more, and drives the point home.
Post by: mtnbkr on May 17, 2007, 10:01:26 AM
Chris
Post by: HankB on May 17, 2007, 10:05:28 AM
Someone else's soapbox, someone else's rules. Get your own soap box if you don't want to be "censored."
(Now, if it was THE GOVERNMENT that forced XM to remove O&A, that would be a different story.)
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 17, 2007, 10:35:15 AM
Post by: glockfan.45 on May 17, 2007, 10:43:12 AM
Quote
Nothing the Constitution says about free speech says anything about someone else being obligated to provide you with a soap box to stand on and mouth off from.
Someone else's soapbox, someone else's rules. Get your own soap box if you don't want to be "censored."
(Now, if it was THE GOVERNMENT that forced XM to remove O&A, that would be a different story.)
Someone else's soapbox, someone else's rules. Get your own soap box if you don't want to be "censored."
(Now, if it was THE GOVERNMENT that forced XM to remove O&A, that would be a different story.)
Its not about the first amendment so much as its about, standing up to the assault on radio programing, by special interest groups. While XM is a privately owned company they promised me as a potential customer that they would provide uncensored content. Now they have broken their promise to me, and their customers by censoring their content.
Quote
I canceled my subscription in 2004 partly because they kept dropping or modifying the programming that attracted me to XM in the first place and partly because they hired O&A.
Chris
Chris
Like I said its not about if you like Opie and Anthony, but rather about sending the message that this new witch hunt will not be tolerated. I can't stand Bill O'Reilly, but if he were fired for the type of commentary he regulary makes on his program for fear of drawing the wrath of special interest groups I would defend him. Why you would cancel because they added O&A is beyong me. If you don't like it don't listen. XM has Air America with Al Franken, and Ed Schultz whom I can't stand. I did not cancel because of that, I just didnt listen.
Post by: K Frame on May 17, 2007, 10:47:22 AM
Were Opie & Anthony's free speech rights being quashed by the PC Police when they were fired for broadcasting the couple having sex in St. Patrick's Cathedral in NY City?
Sounds to me like, in all cases, they're being either fired or disciplined for being consumate, complete idiots.
If you can't stand the sun's effects, Icharus, don't fly so damned close to it.
Post by: glockfan.45 on May 17, 2007, 10:47:29 AM
Quote
Maybe I missed it, but I don't think there's any censorship in this situation. Imus and these other two nobodies broadcast reprehensible content, and deserve to lose their jobs. If you want a radio service that will broadcast anything and everything, then start your own and quit whining.
Who made you the judge of whats fit to broadcast? Yes fistful we all have the money to start our own radio stations
. I didnt come here to appeal to a fan base of the show. I came here thinking that people here had enough common sense to see how this new trend in attacking radio personalities for expressing their views is a dangerous thing.Quote
Just for clarity's sake...
Were Opie & Anthony's free speech rights being quashed by the PC Police when they were fired for broadcasting the couple having sex in St. Patrick's Cathedral in NY City?
Sounds to me like, in all cases, they're being either fired or disciplined for being consumate, complete idiots.
If you can't stand the sun's effects, Icharus, don't fly so damned close to it.
Were Opie & Anthony's free speech rights being quashed by the PC Police when they were fired for broadcasting the couple having sex in St. Patrick's Cathedral in NY City?
Sounds to me like, in all cases, they're being either fired or disciplined for being consumate, complete idiots.
If you can't stand the sun's effects, Icharus, don't fly so damned close to it.
No their station was bullied by the Catholic Leauge, and Bill Donahue into firing the two. This was inspite of popular demand that the two stay on the air. NBCs ratings dropped as a result afterwards. This is about not allowing the majority to be ruled by the minority.
Post by: K Frame on May 17, 2007, 10:51:43 AM
Quote
Maybe I missed it, but I don't think there's any censorship in this situation. Imus and these other two nobodies broadcast reprehensible content, and deserve to lose their jobs. If you want a radio service that will broadcast anything and everything, then start your own and quit whining.
Who made you the judge of whats fit to broadcast? Yes fistful we all have the money to start our own radio stations
. I didnt come here to appeal to a fan base of the show. I came here thinking that people here had enough common sense to see how this new trend in attacking radio personalities for expressing their views is a dangerous thing.Hum...
Seems to be that you're willing accepting that mantle by apparently contending that anything that spews forth from anyone's mouth at any time, in any manner, in any format, should somehow be Constitutionally protected and without repercussions of any kind.
B.
S.
You're confusing two things...
O&A aren't being punished for expressing their views.
They're being punished for HOW they expressed their views.
Two totally different things.
Post by: crt360 on May 17, 2007, 10:57:05 AM
Post by: K Frame on May 17, 2007, 10:57:31 AM
Catholics can't have opinions? Bill Donahue can't have an opinion? The owners of the radio station where O&A broadcast their show can't have an opinion?
Jesus wept.
What a tortured, convoluted, argument you've made. You can only have an opinion, or a 'free speech' position, if you're a very, very small minority of the total population. If someone else disagrees with you, they're bullying you in an attempt to shut you up.
IIRC, O&A had a about a million listeners daily in NYC and the NY Metro area when they were fired. Powerful juju. Then again, there are more church going Catholics than that in NYC and the NY Metro area.
Oh, and by the way. That station's ratings went down for one reason, and one reason only... With O&A fired, the ONLY show they had was Ron and Fez. Of course their ratings would go down. WNBC tried desparately to fill the gaps -- they even gave Eddie Van Halen his own show for awhile. Disaster. So they fired him. Maybe they were violating his free speech rights, too.
Post by: allmons on May 17, 2007, 11:06:54 AM
The government did not censor Opie and Anthony - the marketplace registered outrage. That is MY right to free speech.
Like Imus, just more wannabe's with no talent.
Post by: K Frame on May 17, 2007, 11:09:00 AM
BULLY! YOU BULLYING BULLY! YOU CRUSHER OF FREE SPEECH!
Post by: The Rabbi on May 17, 2007, 11:10:00 AM
Post by: Chris on May 17, 2007, 11:18:29 AM
Where's the violation? A private employer punished these employees for an action they took.
No Government action. No problems.
As for media types firing these people because of advertising/public pressure, well that's the nature of the beast.
Post by: K Frame on May 17, 2007, 11:22:35 AM
Okay, the First Amendment...(reaching across the bench for the copy of the Constitution kept there)...It says that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress f grievances."
Where's the violation? A private employer punished these employees for an action they took.
No Government action. No problems.
As for media types firing these people because of advertising/public pressure, well that's the nature of the beast.
Where's the violation? A private employer punished these employees for an action they took.
No Government action. No problems.
As for media types firing these people because of advertising/public pressure, well that's the nature of the beast.
Bully enabler!
Post by: glockfan.45 on May 17, 2007, 11:28:40 AM
Quote
So, in other words, if someone expresses A CONTRARY opinion, they're not exercising their free speech rights; they're BULLYING?
Catholics can't have opinions? Bill Donahue can't have an opinion? The owners of the radio station where O&A broadcast their show can't have an opinion
Catholics can't have opinions? Bill Donahue can't have an opinion? The owners of the radio station where O&A broadcast their show can't have an opinion
Nope I never said that, and it is not very prudent to try and make that argument with me. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion and views. Not you, not I, not the Catholic League, Bill Donahue, no idividual, or intrest group has the right to decide what goes on the air. The majority public was against their firing then, but NBC caved to pressure from a small group that was not speaking for the majority.
Quote
What a tortured, convoluted, argument you've made. You can only have an opinion, or a 'free speech' position, if you're a very, very small minority of the total population. If someone else disagrees with you, they're bullying you in an attempt to shut you up.
Once again everybody has the right to free speech. However demanding something be removed because it offends you is counter intuitive to freedom of speech. Demanding silence from those you disagree with is counter intuitive (i.e what the Catholic Leauge did). Using your right to free speech to attack anothers right to free speech is low plain andd simple.
Quote
Uncensored speech is one thing, but misogynisitc speech has to go. "Joking" about rape is as hurtful as the " N" word. There is no reason - ever - to joke about rape, child molestation or lynchings. Free speech is fine, but once you decide to step over the line, don't be surprised if you discover that you are trampling someone else's rights.
What gives you the right to decide what must go in radio? Their comments regarding the Queen, Laura Bush, and Condi Rice hurt nobody. If you dont like it turn the station.
Quote
The government did not censor Opie and Anthony - the marketplace registered outrage. That is MY right to free speech.
Actually XM has recieved mass cancellations from their suscribers over thier suspension. I would say the marketplace has registered outrage alright. XM didnt make this decision based on what suscribers wanted, they made it in fear of small groups of people that can't understand we live in a free country that provides you no right to not be offended.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 17, 2007, 11:31:34 AM
Quote
Quote
Who made you the judge of whats fit to broadcast?
What makes you the judge? Ownership, but neither of us have it. O and A and Imus felt the heat of popular disapproval and market forces. Why do you think Zumbo lost his job? Was he censored? No, he simply ceased pleasing his sponsors. Same thing here.
Post by: mtnbkr on May 17, 2007, 11:37:15 AM
Chris
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 17, 2007, 11:38:58 AM
Quote
Using your right to free speech to attack anothers right to free speech is low plain andd simple.
But that didn't happen. No one is attacking their right to speak. They can publish a book or hold a meeting to express themselves anytime they like. But they don't have a right to use XM's equipment, they use it at the pleasure of those that own and manage the system. Just like you and I babble here at the pleasure of Oleg Volk, the owner of this site. If you want O and A back on the air, then apply more pressure to XM than is coming from the other side. Like you said, you can't afford to start your own satellite radio system. And I can't afford my own radio station to broadcast my views. Oh well.
Post by: HankB on May 17, 2007, 11:44:34 AM
. . . Yes fistful we all have the money to start our own radio stations
Good for you, then you can give O&A a prime-time slot on YOUR network. Problem solved. . . . this new trend in attacking radio personalities for expressing their views is a dangerous thing.
Nothing "new" about media types hurting their careers by saying or doing the wrong thing at the wrong time; they can say what they want, but nobody has to listen OR provide a forum. Plus, consider . . . while radio personalities & other celebs have a right to free speech, the rest of us do, too. So if we don't want to listen to O&A or attend Jane Fonda movies or buy Dixie Chicks albums, we have a right to not do so. If we want to tell the broadcaster's sponsors that we won't patronize them if they continue to broadcast someone we find objectionable, we have a right to do THAT as well.
See, we have free speech, too . . . so long as it's not the government deciding by legislative fiat what is "allowable" free speech (outside of very narrowly defined limits) I don't see a problem.
Post by: glockfan.45 on May 17, 2007, 11:53:52 AM
Quote
The High Road XM Satellite Radio is private property and requests that members hosts adhere to all forum XM Satellite Radio policies. It is a contract agreed to by all who use The High Road XM Satellite Radio. Those who break the rules cannot invoke censorship or freedom of speech - a contract broken is a contract broken. If you do not like the rules of conduct or the acceptable topics, seek out a new venue or start your own board satellite radio outfit.
And the rules of XM were not violated by O&A. I entered as a customer with the understanding that some stations would broadcast vile and vulgar comments.
Quote
What makes you the judge? Ownership, but neither of us have it. O and A and Imus felt the heat of popular disapproval and market forces. Why do you think Zumbo lost his job? Was he censored? No, he simply ceased pleasing his sponsors. Same thing here.
Quote
But Zumbo was critical of guns and gun owners. The rules don't apply to his situation...
Chris
Chris
Zumbo was fired because he **** where he ate. O&A were fired due to pressure from a group that were not their target audience. If you dont like it turn it off, its that simple. Zumbos speech was a threat to others rights, what O&A did hurt nobody.
Post by: mtnbkr on May 17, 2007, 12:02:18 PM
Chris
Post by: glockfan.45 on May 17, 2007, 12:13:30 PM
Quote
What special interest group got them taken off the air this time? So far, it sounds like an internal XM affair.
Chris
Chris
No group claims to be resposible at this time. This was a preemptive move by XM in fear of possible outcries. That is the state of things today sadly, broadcasters have to fear their own shadows. Just wait, if we allow this sort of thing to continue more, and more will follow suit. Say goodbye to any political talk show, that doesnt embrace liberal ideology.
Quote
As the owners/managers of the service, they have the right to manage the content of their service. Seems to me that O&A **** where they ate as well.
Chris
Chris
Not in this case they don't. They have a responsibilty to provide their customers with uncensored radio as promised when I signed up. They did not **** where they ate. They did as they have done since 2004 when they first came on the air with XM. The only thing that has changed is we allowed special interest groups to claim a victory with Imus. The comment that got them suspended/fired was mild compared to comments I have heard on the show in the past.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 17, 2007, 12:34:29 PM
I'd rather live in Glockfan's world, where hosts can talk freely about raping women, shooting all the darkies, or just sexually molesting the children of their audience members. And since it doesn't really hurt anybody, the ones who pay the bills just have to like it.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 17, 2007, 12:39:03 PM
But if they meant to promise you uncensored radio, anything goes, everyone who comes on the air is allowed to say anything that enters their minds without recompense, "Hey, the CEO's wife is hot, right? Man her ________ looks fine." Well, in that case, it was a stupid thing to promise.
Post by: glockfan.45 on May 17, 2007, 12:46:41 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 17, 2007, 12:50:27 PM
Who wants pancakes?
Post by: mtnbkr on May 17, 2007, 02:36:43 PM
Chris
Post by: TF_FH on May 17, 2007, 02:42:48 PM
Quote
Imus and these other two nobodies broadcast reprehensible content, and deserve to lose their jobs.
There are quite a few people who find gunowners reprehensible, and if they were in a management position, would it be right for them to fire people under them because they found out they were gunowners? What if we applied it to religion? Fire people because because they don't believe in the same gods/goddesses, etc because you find it reprehensible that they would want to do that? -- Please don't imply it's different because its religion or guns, people are offended by everything, its just in a different form there.Also those two nobodies may have said something that offeneded people, but it was only when a re-run of their broadcast was done in the wake of the whole Imus incident, that they were fired. It's not like they went back on the air and did it again, they just happen to have a re-run of the broatcast go on and then the *expletive deleted*it hit the fan for them.
Quote
I'd rather live in Glockfan's world, where hosts can talk freely about raping women, shooting all the darkies, or just sexually molesting the children of their audience members. And since it doesn't really hurt anybody, the ones who pay the bills just have to like it.
They should be able to talk about whatever they want, and if people didn't want to hear the *expletive deleted*it, they wouldn't be listening to it. (Just like when Rosie O'Donnel shows up on TV, I CHANGE THE FREAKING STATION) However, there have been mass cancellations because of this incident, meaning the ones who pay the bills want to hear the programming offered on the O&A show. There's a reason its on the channel that constantly has a warning of explicit language on the breaks.And Mike, O&A actually didn't broadcast sex on the air during that contest, and they weren't fired for it. The phrase that the FCC decided was offensive was "the balloon knot" which was some kind of reference to anal sex. How it makes any sense? I have no freaking clue. But last I checked Infinity broadcasting refused to pay the fine as "the balloon knot" is hardly offensive and barely makes any sense when you compare what the definition was. They were just taken off the air and sat around until their contract was up, being off the air and getting paid for it.
What I'm trying to say is, letting all these little special interest groups get their way all the time to the point where companies are scared of them without even a threat uttered, is a very bad thing. Things just seem to be going downhill with all these little groups in control of everything. All of this crap in the name of "political correctness".
Post by: Balog on May 17, 2007, 02:55:05 PM
Post by: Moondoggie on May 17, 2007, 02:57:38 PM
They went too far, their leash got yanked. I'm sure their Mommas are proud.
You will never hear Limbaugh (I'm not a fan) or O'Reilly (I do agree with most of his positions) talking that sort of smack about public figures. I have to admit that I really don't know what Limbaugh says, as I haven't listened to 2 syllables from him since the early 90's.
Imus, Stern and their ilk have pushed the envelope beyond the point that most folks are willing to tolerate.
XM owns the equipment, and they're free to make a business decision to pull the plug on O & A anytime they want. (They can also consider the legal settlement ramifications as a part of that business decision.)
Subscribers can cancel their subscriptions anytime they want, too.
See, it really is a free country!
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 17, 2007, 03:01:40 PM
I think a business should be able to fire whoever they want for whatever reason they want. That's not censorship, that's freedom.
And angels sing. That is correct.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 17, 2007, 03:37:28 PM
Imus was talking about a bunch of young women about which he knew nothing, and he called them whores. Prostitutes. That is enough reason for outrage and his employers/sponsors felt the heat.
Tweedledum and Tweedledee were airing jokes about raping the Queen of England, a former First Lady and the Sec. of State. I don't care if you're Gloria Steinem or Jeff Cooper, that there ain't funny.
Oh, but no one really heard it until somebody got all upset and told everybody, blah, blah, blah. Big deal. It's about time XM and whoever it is that used to shovel Imus's crap paid the price for the slime they sell.
But you can change the channel, you say. Well, that's nice. XM can change their channel, by hiring some new talent that doesn't joke about raping people. And O+A's fans can go listen to Stern or whatever. If you want to listen to Opie and Anthony, or watch porn, or listen to Rush Limbaugh or Al Franken, or a show about guns, someone's got to put in the plumbing. When you're paying the bill, you can call the shots.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 17, 2007, 03:40:16 PM
You don't like the fact that your favorite XM channel doesn't have Opie and Dopie anymore. CHANGE THE CHANNEL!!
If you want to listen to Opie and Dopie, you can change the channel to wherever they are. Oh, you say no one will hire them, because everybody's uptight like me? Boo-%&*#-hoo.
Post by: K Frame on May 17, 2007, 03:47:20 PM
Wrong.
On several counts, actually.
Count 1:
O&A were fired WELL before the FCC arrived at any findings in their investigation.
The incident happened on August 15, 2002.
O&A were fired on August 23, 2002.
The FCC opened its investigation into the incident on, IIRC, August 21, 2002, and didn't conclude the investigation, or fine WNEW, for several months at least, or well after O&A had been dropped.
Count 2:
O&A broadcast the entire incident LIVE.
You can listen to it HERE: http://radio.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/opieanthony1.html
The reference to balloon knot and the security guy coming up occurs at approximately 1:35.
Interestingly enough, there's one of the clowns at the Cathedral whining about his "constitutional rights."
There's only about a dozen things wrong with that assessment.
I just finished listening to the clip.
Yep, it happened exactly as I remembered it -- O&A's official escort describing the couple having sex in the Cathedral.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 17, 2007, 03:53:01 PM
Quote
Please don't imply it's different because its religion or guns, people are offended by everything, its just in a different form there.
If your religion causes you to joke about raping people - real, living people, or slanderously, frivolously calling them whores for a large audience- you're fired. Making jokes like that is most certainly different from having guns or following the teachings of the Buddha or Scientology, etc. Please don't imply that my religion or my gun ownership is equivalent to that sort of bilge. And if my guns or my Bible-thumping does cause a problem for my employer, then I would certainly expect to be suspended or fired. Wouldn't you?
Post by: TF_FH on May 17, 2007, 05:43:01 PM
Transcript of the sex for sam incident - starts on page 7
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-225637A2.pdf
Quote from: Mike Irwin
Interestingly enough, there's one of the clowns at the Cathedral whining about his "constitutional rights."
There's only about a dozen things wrong with that assessment.
I really do have to agree on that point, even though he's arguing about the guard telling him to be quiet, the property is owned by the church, so if you say/do something they don't like, the church gets to give you the boot. If he had just shut up and left there probably wouldn't have even been an arrest as the shouting and ranting about priests was taking that too far.There's only about a dozen things wrong with that assessment.
Quote from: Mike Irwin
Yep, it happened exactly as I remembered it -- O&A's official escort describing the couple having sex in the Cathedral.
How is "We're in St Pat's and he's doing the balloon knot (inaudible) and a security guy is coming up to us right now" describing the couple describing sex? I'm still confused on how the balloon knot even fits as a synonym for that act.Quote from: Scapegoat
And if my guns or my Bible-thumping does cause a problem for my employer, then I would certainly expect to be suspended or fired. Wouldn't you?
Thing is, this situation did not cause a problem for the employer, as it is expected to be heard on that channel and there was no outrage about it unlike the Imus incident. (Which I really don't want to get into right now as thats a whole different can of worms)Quote from: Scapegoat
Tweedledum and Tweedledee were airing jokes about raping the Queen of England, a former First Lady and the Sec. of State. I don't care if you're Gloria Steinem or Jeff Cooper, that there ain't funny.
They brought a homeless guy into the studio, he said his jokes about raping people, and then XM got pissed and O&A apologized. I never said it had to be funny, but their target audience isn't exactly people who get offended by hearing these things.Quote from: Balog
I think a business should be able to fire whoever they want for whatever reason they want. That's not censorship, that's freedom.
I agree, but in this case, these are the kind of things that are expected from their show by the company. They are shock jocks, so who would guess that you show would have something shocking on it. It's like getting fired from a company for doing your job.
Post by: glockfan.45 on May 17, 2007, 06:04:38 PM
Quote
How is "We're in St Pat's and he's doing the balloon knot (inaudible) and a security guy is coming up to us right now" describing the couple describing sex? I'm still confused on how the balloon knot even fits as a synonym for that act.
Without getting too lewd in detail balloon knot is slang for anus, as the anus somewhat resembles the knot tied in the end of an inflated balloon.
Post by: RadioFreeSeaLab on May 17, 2007, 07:19:44 PM
Okay, the First Amendment...(reaching across the bench for the copy of the Constitution kept there)...It says that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress f grievances."
Where's the violation? A private employer punished these employees for an action they took.
No Government action. No problems.
As for media types firing these people because of advertising/public pressure, well that's the nature of the beast.
Ding ding ding! Someone who understands the First Amendment.
Where's the violation? A private employer punished these employees for an action they took.
No Government action. No problems.
As for media types firing these people because of advertising/public pressure, well that's the nature of the beast.
Post by: K Frame on May 18, 2007, 03:24:51 AM
You're joking, right?
Balloon knot was a well known, and repeatedly used, description for the anus on O&A's show. It had been for some time. I first heard the term used in April 2001 when staying in Northern New Jersey, months before O&A came to Washington, DC (they're back on in DC now, by the way).
The event in which the couple was participating was titled "Sex for Sam 3."
Couples were awarded points (that concept is also freely discussed during the show on the day in question and in the weeks leading up to the show) for completing sex acts at or inside various public locations. Page two of the transcript has Opie or Anthony (it just says host) awarding the points to the couple, plus bonus points.
Finally, on the last page of the transcript, O&A try to "spin" the situation, doing so in a way that makes it very clear that yes, the intent was for the couple to have sex in the cathedral, and that O&A are fully cognizant that they did have sex in the Cathedral as reported by Paul, their official spotter.
Oh, by the way...
There's a reference to "Ken" near the end of the transcript. That's Ken Stevens (or Stephens). He was the station manager at WNEW, and had been the station manager at WJFK in DC prior. There was a program manager named, IIRC, Jeremy or something like that. Both Ken and Jeremy approved O&A's Sex for Sam show, and both were fired around the same time as O&A.
I wonder if by firing Ken & Jeremy, who were only very very seldom on the air, their First Amendment rights were violated...
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 18, 2007, 05:19:38 AM
Thing is, this situation did not cause a problem for the employer...
Really? As glockfan asked, "Who are you to judge?" If it didn't cause them a problem, then why did they suspend one of their big cash cows, for THIRTY days? Sounds to me as if the employer saw a problem in the situation.
Quote
I agree, but in this case, these are the kind of things that are expected from their show by the company. They are shock jocks, so who would guess that you show would have something shocking on it. It's like getting fired from a company for doing your job.
No, it's like getting fired for doing your job in the wrong way. Someone pointed out that they had done worse things in the past. I hear that Imus had done worse things, too. But, apparently, people aren't quite as willing to hear that sort of thing lately. Or maybe they really both did cross some new line, and just went too far. Either way, it's hard to see how it is a bad thing for businesses to stop sponsoring such worthless trash programming. And maybe it's time that more of us outgrew this childish shock-jock trash. If you have XM, aren't there some kickin' music channels to listen to, anyway?
Post by: Phantom Warrior on May 18, 2007, 08:19:59 AM
If you want to talk about the First Amendment and free speech, find a radio station that will say "Shut up, screw you, First Amendment" to everyone who objects to their content. And then takes it to the court to fight it all they way out. But don't complain about First Amendment rights being violated if the company doesn't even have the guts to stand up for the offensive content they are broadcasting.
Once again, those O&A are offensive and good riddance. It's nice to know people still get offended over something.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 18, 2007, 09:52:49 AM
Post by: ilbob on May 18, 2007, 02:57:59 PM
Boring speech will get you kicked off the air too. Do you think that should be somehow protected as well?
BTW, ever hear of podcasting? You can start your very own broadcasting empire for almost nothing and spew out whatever you want. Of course if you want advertisers or listeners, you do have to give them what they want.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 18, 2007, 03:14:02 PM
Post by: SteveS on May 18, 2007, 04:16:28 PM
Post by: gaston_45 on May 19, 2007, 09:00:55 AM
That is what XM is advertising right now.
http://xmro.xmradio.com/xstream/index.jsp
If they are advertising it and taking people's money with the expectation that they will provide uncensored O&A then they need to provide uncensored O&A! That's part of the contract too.
Post by: K Frame on May 19, 2007, 11:13:59 AM
I wonder, though....
What is XM running in place of O&A while they're on *censorship* hiatus...
Are they running old shows like many OTA radio stations do when a popular DJ is out?
If so, then they're still providing uncensored O&A...
whatever.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on May 19, 2007, 11:44:32 AM
"Uncensored comedy including the outrageous, uninhibited talk duo, Opie & Anthony"
That is what XM is advertising right now.
http://xmro.xmradio.com/xstream/index.jsp
If they are advertising it and taking people's money with the expectation that they will provide uncensored O&A then they need to provide uncensored O&A! That's part of the contract too.
That is what XM is advertising right now.
http://xmro.xmradio.com/xstream/index.jsp
If they are advertising it and taking people's money with the expectation that they will provide uncensored O&A then they need to provide uncensored O&A! That's part of the contract too.
Then sue them. That's the libertarian solution to a breach of contract. Not complaining about them making decisions about who they choose to air on their station.
Post by: Jamisjockey on May 19, 2007, 12:02:23 PM
And Sirius has Bubba the Love Sponge!
Post by: lupinus on May 19, 2007, 12:54:42 PM
XM owns their service, they don't approve of how one of their acts preformed, they punished them. How is that not XM's right as the people who own the place?
They offer a place not censored by the goverment but that doesn't mean they have to allow anything and everything and can't pull anyone. If the comments had been, say, racial and they didn't approve of it going over their airwaves would anyone complain? How about if they broadcasted a suicide over their show and XM's network? Yeah, we aren't talking that we are talking a crude joke. But the principle is the same, private buisness and they can choose not to air what they please. Just because they advertise non-censored entertainment that doesn't mean they can't self regulate.
Post by: Perd Hapley on May 19, 2007, 06:32:41 PM
The problem is that some people seem to think the Imus and O&A dust-ups represent some "chilling effect" that forebodes some crack-down on free speech.
But, of course, it is a red herring, that gets far more coverage than the talk hosts who have recently been fired for their political point of view, not for jokes about rape. Not to mention the potential revival of the Fairness Doctrine, which would effectively censor right-wing points of view on the radio. Interestingly, I hear the ACLU might be on the right side of this one.