Talk:Howard Stern: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:48, 2 May 2006

Latest revision as of 22:46, 18 August 2025

(548 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Skip to talk}}

==The Friday Show==

{{talk header}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes

|class=B|vital=yes|listas=Stern, Howard|1=

{{WikiProject Biography|a&e-work-group=yes|a&e-priority=mid}}

{{WikiProject Transcendental Meditation movement|importance=Low}}

{{WikiProject Judaism}}

{{WikiProject Radio|importance=top}}

{{WikiProject New York City|importance=Mid}}

}}

{{todo|3}}

{{archive box|

*[[/Archive 1|Archive 1]] - Feb - April 2006

*[[/Archive 2|Archive 2]] - May - July 2006

*[[/Archive 3|Archive 3]] - Jul 2006 - January 2008

}}

{{onlinesource|author=Jason Mahon|year=2011|monthday=May 1 |url= http://oaklandlocal.com/blogs/2011/04/garbage-miles-what-would-howard-stern-say-community-voices| title= Garbage Miles. What would Howard Stern Say? |org= ''Oakland Local'' | section= Community Voices}}

The Friday Show is occasional. Howard Stern has stated this on his show this morning. Therefore it is a vacation time. This, he also stated. We’re not including the vacation times he will be taking off (Like New Years and Christmas) so the Friday show shouldn’t be included either. [[User:Redd Dragon|Redd Dragon]] 02:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

== Psychotherapy ==

The Wikipedia Article policies are clear, statements need to be:

:What Howard Stern says is not necessarily the truth. The words coming out of one individuals mouth do not fact make. Only time will

Neutral point of view

:tell. User:unknown

No original research

Verifiability

::Your personal opinion has no place on Wikipedia. Until every Friday is "The Friday Show" your comment is irrelevant towards the article. [[User:Redd Dragon|Redd Dragon]] 02:43, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Stern's comments about being in Psychotherapy fails all three. The text "He started seeing a psychotherapist" and "he has since toned down his show, crediting years in psychotherapy for his evolution" should be removed. Other than Mr. Stern saying this there is no proof. [[Special:Contributions/96.236.44.65|96.236.44.65]] ([[User talk:96.236.44.65|talk]]) 04:03, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

:::Personal opinion, or fact? Again, check the contract. I repeat, "The words coming out of one individuals mouth do not fact make."

== Infobox parameter "political party" ==

::::How is it a fact when you are ignoring the FACT that he is doing a show tomorrow (WHICH IS FRIDAY)? Until the Friday show becomes an every Friday show he is on five days a week. [[User:Redd Dragon|Redd Dragon]] 03:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Should this be used in this article? Hes not a politican or a political commentator --[[User:FMSky|FMSky]] ([[User talk:FMSky|talk]]) 06:32, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

:::::So far, out of 4 Fridays so far, he has only taken 1 of them off. His contract may allow him to take every Friday off, but so far he hasn't taken much advantage of that. [[User:DHowell|DHowell]] 03:32, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

:I agree. His "candidacy" for NY Governor in 1994 was a transitory publicity stunt (despite his protestations) and he ended up withdrawing his "candidacy."

::::::Just as Bush spent his first few Fridays in office, so does Howard. Again, if he takes the occasional Friday off does he really broadcast Mon-Fri or Mon-Fri/Mon-Thurs.? Which answer is subjective and which is objective? ([[User:Countzer|Countzer]] 04:12, 10 February 2006 (UTC))

:He is, if anything, a Democrat, since in the last 30 years all he has done is uniformly support Democratic candidates (ie, Hillary Clinton, Obama) and espouse Democratic tenets (recently saying "I'm woke as hell"). And never a Libertarian candidate.

:In fact, in the very citation given for support of his affiliation (p.232 of "Howard Stern: King of All Media"), Stern himself says: "I don't know what the hell a Libertarian is."

:Going by recent article, he never votes Libertarian:

:“I was never a Democrat,” Stern said. “I voted for tons of Republicans. But I really don’t think I could ever, ever vomit up a vote for a Republican again. I don’t think so.”<ref>https://www.nydailynews.com/2021/01/06/howard-stern-asks-republicans-do-you-want-trump-to-be-your-new-fuhrer/</ref>

:I would think any "Party Affiliation" should be removed entirely, since his party registration (if any) seems to not be documented. He's not a politician, he's a comedian/entertainer. For comparison, [[Brit Hume]] — ABC journalist, FOX anchor/opinion writer — is unambiguously Republican yet has '''''no''''' Party Affiliation for his wiki entry.

:It's rather unsettling, when googling "Howard Stern political party", that you authoritatively are answered: "Libertarian Party"-- all because of this one dubious Wikipedia factoid. [[User:Petzl|Petzl]] ([[User talk:Petzl|talk]]) 08:13, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

:I vote this be removed [[User:Charger2|Charger2]] ([[User talk:Charger2|talk]]) 02:46, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}

:::::::It's been suggested by a few radio insiders that the reason Howard has been doing Friday shows is because Sirius asked him to do so until he was settled in and subscriptions had leveled off. Apparently, there was some concern that if it was known that Howard's contract specifies that he's only required to work 4 days a week, 9 months in a year (his contract allows for three months of vacation time per year), subscribers might be less willing to pay the full monthly fee to hear his show. It should be more than possible to mention what the terms of his contract state, while still maintaining a neutral POV. [[User:Hossenfeffer|Hossenfeffer]] 16:20, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

== excellent interviewer ==

:Howard Stern is the one responsible for the content on his channels. What he sais goes! These words was made by the only individual that has a say on what will and what wont happen on HIS channels, Howard Stern. He took one day off, thats all. ([[User:Renegader|Renegader]] 01:24, 11 February 2006)

This article could say more about the quality of Howard’s interviewing in recent decades. [[Special:Contributions/73.72.206.144|73.72.206.144]] ([[User talk:73.72.206.144|talk]]) 14:39, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

::Sirius's website says monday-thursday. http://www.sirius.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=Sirius/Page&c=FlexContent&cid=1130574541451 (We told ya so).. --[[User:Kvuo|Kvuo]] 15:06, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

:Really? I always thought his interview skills often seem contrived. “Tell me more, I’m interested” isn’t a very evocative way of engaging a subject. [[User:MasNuisance|MasNuisance]] ([[User talk:MasNuisance|talk]]) 16:11, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

:::You didn't tell anyone anything. He was on today, and today is friday. They list him as that because they allow him to take Friday off whenever he wants. [[User:Redd Dragon|Redd Dragon]] 23:12, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

== Remove “terrestrial radio” from various sections ==

==need to correct the "bigoted" attribution==

The entry says, near the top: "Some of his commentaries are perceived by many to include bigoted and misogynistic remarks about various religious and ethnic groups and women." It should more accurately read: "Some of his commentaries are perceived by many to include bigoted and misogynistic remarks about various religious and ethnic groups, women, and men." Howard has declared countless times that men are scumbags, men are pigs, men only want one thing, etc. It is important to note how non-discriminatory he is with the targets of his satire and caricature because many critiques of Howard Stern rely on ignoring the irony in his speeches and tirades. It also makes it much more telling to note who and what he, on principle, refuses to lampoon, such as certain political figures (e.g. Christie Todd Whitman and Rudy Giuliani), certain aspects of the private lives of even the most notoriously celebrated public figures, and the private lives of children who are not thrust into the public eye by their parents.

I know that’s how Stern refers to FCC regulated “radio” but that’s not how the majority of sources describe “radio”. If anything Sirius and XM should be described as “satellite radio” as that’s how most sources describe it. Remember, this article is for a wider audience than the show’s audience. Thoughts? [[User:MasNuisance|MasNuisance]] ([[User talk:MasNuisance|talk]]) 16:09, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

==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. -- [[User:Goatasaur|goatasaur]] 02:16 Mar 27, 2003 (UTC)

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis

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? :)

| age=2160

-- Howard Stern contributor

| archiveprefix=Talk:Howard Stern/Archives/

| minkeepthreads=4

| minarchthreads=2

| format=Y/F

}}

== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 December 2024 ==

:"Loosely autobiographical"? -- [[User:Salsa Shark|Salsa Shark]] 02:33 Mar 27, 2003 (UTC)

{{edit extended-protected|Howard Stern|answered=yes}}

::I like that better. -- [[User:Goatasaur|goatasaur]]

A section regarding Howard Stern controversies, his blackface, past cases of anti-black racism & anti-palestinian comments & heavy zionist support to the point of harrasing roger walters. please fix this or this page is just zionist propoganda. howard stern on 911 declared “we need to bomb the hell out of them” blaming hamas for the attacks when mossad assets have been found more responsible [[Special:Contributions/2600:100F:B12D:8C0A:B8F6:CAFE:B1F4:6A76|2600:100F:B12D:8C0A:B8F6:CAFE:B1F4:6A76]] ([[User talk:2600:100F:B12D:8C0A:B8F6:CAFE:B1F4:6A76|talk]]) 21:20, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

:[[File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done''': it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a [[WP:EDITXY|"change X to Y" format]] and provide a [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable source]] if appropriate.<!-- Template:EEp --> [[User:Cannolis|Cannolis]] ([[User talk:Cannolis|talk]]) 06:50, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

:"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?

::The name ''Private Parts'' was intended as a double entendre - in that it referred to both his genitals and the areas of his life not mentioned on the air.

==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. [[User:Kingturtle|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. [[User:Jordan Langelier|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]]. [[User:Ellsworth|Ellsworth]] 12:44, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

:Lenny Bruce was funny. Howard's not.

==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 <i>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.</i>

:He went to WNBC after his Washington gig. [[User:Jordan Langelier|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]]

== 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. -- [[User:Nknight|nknight]] 01:42, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

:ARGH, this whole article is saturated with POV. I'll take a crack at trying to erase the more egregious bits. [[User:Ellsworth|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 ==

*[[Seven dirty words]]

*[[Michael Moore]]

*[[Al Franken]]

*[[Arianna Huffington]]

*[[Moron]] - POV, probably should not be in the article

*[[Racism]]

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. [[User:Benc|&bull;&nbsp;Benc]][[User_talk:Benc|&nbsp;&bull;]] 01:38, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

==Picture==

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

: Who is this 'we,' Kemosabe? [[User:Jordan Langelier|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. --[[User:Feitclub|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. --[[User:Boothy443|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? --[[User:Feitclub|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. [[User:RickK|Rick]][[User talk:RickK|K]] 09:09, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

:That stunt was the main reason why he had to get his worthless ass out of DC. He and the management of DC101 were getting death threats.

==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. [[User:Hydriotaphia|Hydriotaphia]] 00:43, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)

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

<blockquote>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)</blockquote>

[[User:Hydriotaphia|Hydriotaphia]] 02:14, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

==Left wing?==

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

Stern was a very vocal supporter of [[John Kerry]] and the [[United States Democratic Party|Democrats]] during the [[2004]] elections. He also heavily promoted [[Michael Moore]], [[Arianna Huffington]], and [[Al Franken]]. He attack [[George W. Bush|President Bush]] from virtually every [[liberalism|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. -- [[User:Old Right|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. --[[User:Feitclub|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. ---[[User:Jonasaurus|jonasaurus]] 17:54, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

::I'm not sure your last statement is true. Libertarians oppose hate speech laws, hate crimes laws, affirmative action, excessive gun-related regulations, and much of what the feminist movement stands for (anti-pornography, special privileges for women, et al). -- [[User:Gerkinstock|Gerkinstock]] 18:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

::Libertarianism is not on the "right side of the political spectrum", by any means, and any Libertarian would quickly disabuse you of this misconception.

it should also be noted that Stern only ran as a libertarian because they were the only party that would endorse his campaign. although at the time he admited to supporting many of their platforms. many of the members of the new york libertarian part described his nomination as “hostile takeover" because so many of his fans packed the hall where they were holding the nominations.--BillSpike 06:23, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

:Yes, Howard has recently attacked the Religious Right for opposing affirmative action, which libertarianism is stauchly against. So he is partially, though not fully, libertarian in his views. -- [[User:Gerkinstock|Gerkinstock]] 18:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

==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. --[[User:Jonasaurus|jonasaurus]] 17:54, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

== 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. -- [[User:Old Right|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.''</blockquote> 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. --[[User:Boothy443|Boothy443]] | [[User talk: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.

[[User:Hydriotaphia|Hydriotaphia]] 19:30, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)

== Book on back pain ==

What Is the book called?

The author would be Dr. John Sarno.

tinyurl .com /8h2qp has a list of Dr. Sarno's books.

== Repeated vandalism source ==

http://www.wackbag.com/showthread.php?t=32765

Judging from their wiki entry, 'Opie & Anthony' are the XM version of Howard Stern. It looks like XM had to drop the $2 fee per month for their show after low ratings though.

What about restricting edits to registered users, at least fo some pages. It would stop much vandalism [[User:Gtoomey|Gtoomey]] 06:45, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

They're from wackbag.. I'm an O&A pest as well, however, I do not screw with wikipedia articles. If you read those threads on wackbag, I am trying to tell them not to screw with wikipedia. I personally think wikipedia transcends morning show radio wars.. I already told the wackbaggers many times that it takes 4 clicks to revert their bullshit, and dont waste your time.. some of them will continue, but they will grow tired eventually. they just dont realize how wikipedia works.. --[[User:Kvuo|Kvuo]] 04:13, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Actually, satellite radio doesn't have "ratings" as stated above so this doesn't matter. XM chose to change their pricing structure to include O&A and online streaming. anon dec12 05

Actually they could measure their ratings when they were on the premium. They had 35,000 listeners on the premium service so they decided to make them all part of the XM service, because of their low subcription rate. Although, today, Opie and Anthony are one of the top ten shows in XM.

==Columbine massacre reference==

For the record, Howard didn't initially make reference to there being attactive girls at Columbine High School - a caller did. I remember the show and still have it on tape. It was only after that that he added sex as a rationale for committing crime (in saying that the massacre had no apparent rationale - sex, power, monetary gain, etc.) --[[User:66.189.64.41|66.189.64.41]] 07:50, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

==Infinity rights==

I removed the phrase about infinty holding the rights to the show. Considering that none of us are parties, at least to my knowledge, to the contract that Stern and or his production company has with infinty/WXRK, i think we are jumping the gin with infinity holding the rights. This is also in consideration to the in-demand deal, which will span sterns time at both infinity and sirius, and the rebrodacts of those programs. Plus at the most infinity can only hold the right to rebrodcast programs aired while at infinty, and not creative control, or something of the like. --[[User:Boothy443|Boothy443]] | [[User talk:Boothy443| trácht ar]] 08:43, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

::CBS (Infinity) doesn’t have the rights to rebroadcast ANY show. It is owned by both Howard Stern and CBS. Both need to agree to allow a rebroadcast to happen. [[User:Redd Dragon|Redd Dragon]] 23:10, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

==New Book==

I remember him saying about a year ago, he had a new book planned. Is anything happening with that? --[[User:Irishrichy|Richy]] 17:24, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

he's mentioned WANTING to write a new book about his life from Miss America-to-Present but he's always said he's currently too busy - anon

== David Simon ==

I dont think Allisons new husband is the same dude who produces the wire. can someone confirm this? I think they have the same names but are different people.

:It's not. --[[User:Boothy443|Boothy443]] | [[User talk:Boothy443| trácht ar]] 04:25, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually, the David Simon that Alison is now married to owns a large chain of shopping malls in North America (Simon Malls.)

== The Last Show ==

Ugh - they chopped up Howard's speech quite a bit. His speech was too long and too many "last of a dying breed"s. I also noticed at the very end that he said "F Jackie". Did anyone else catch that? What was that about? [[User:Jeff schiller|Jeff schiller]] 15:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

-----

I think it was just a joke on him for leaving early on thurs.. I listened on WBCN in Boston -- where were you? I was wondering about that choppiness.

I organized the satellite section under its own new header, and added a subheader about the last show. this should get some more attention. Funny enough, today is the annoversary of the boston tea party. some other revolutionary guys with something to say about the government acted out 232 years ago today.

-Kether83 12/16/2005 17:47 UTC and wondering where everyone gets those nifty timestamps from

: In Wikipedia, sign all your entries with 4 tildes (~) which will insert your username with a link and the timestamp. Anyway, I was in Chicago and caught most of Thursday's show with Jackie and all of today's broadcast. Interestingly, I caught all of the cast members final speeches on the Yahoo internet broadcast, where I also noticed that Fred also signed off with "F Jackie". So why did Jackie leave early Thursday? Or do you mean because he left the show in 2001? I took Thursday's interview as a "no hard feelings" from the cast towards Jackie, that's why I was surprised by Fred and Howard's parting shot. [[User:Jeff schiller|Jeff schiller]] 22:22, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

----

Nevermind.

[[User:Kether83|Kether83]] 19:44, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

== Stern is Not a Shock Jock ==

There are many shock-jocks on radio but Howard Stern is not one of them. Jock in the radio industry assumes disk–jockey and he is definitely not one of those. Probably the only correct label is “radio-comedian” or “comedian of all media”. :-)

As for the person above who made the comparison between Howard Stern and Rush Limbaugh let me say that you are comparing apples to oranges; Stern is a comedian; Limbaugh is a idealistic promoter of the political right.

--[[User:Neilrieck|Neilrieck]] 01:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

:No, comedians are funny.

Words sometimes evolve in their usage, even idiosyncratically or illogically. The term has now come to be used with any on-air radio personality who uses controversial or risque material. Stern has been called a "shock jock," so the article can reflect that. [[User:Nightscream|Nightscream]] 07:26, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

==Language Issues==

No, not vulgarity. There is a reference to "shoving kielbasa down chick's throats during the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]]. If someone thought "chick" was the best way to phrase that, something's wrong, and leads me to think their might be other slang (however popularized) usage in the article. Maybe given the irreverant nature of the article's subject, it could be tolerable under other circumstances, but until I see Rush Limbaugh's wife #4 (or 5 or 6 or 7) referred to as his "boo", let's talk like humans.

:That was vandalism, and it has been removed, albeit not as quickly as usual for this article. As far as I know Howard did not shove kielbasa down anyone's throat on September 11, 2001. [[User:DHowell|DHowell]] 06:33, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

::I remember the whole show (and listened to it). It was vandalism. It did not happen. [[User:Redd Dragon|Redd Dragon]] 23:08, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

== obsessive compulsive disorder ==

Does he have it? On the OCD article, it says he does, but there's no mention of it in the article. [[User:Gflores|Gflores]] ^{[[User Talk:Gflores|Talk]]} 05:45, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

:If you look at the talk page for [[Obsessive-compulsive disorder]] most of the celebrity list is pure spectulation, but someone keeps re-adding it anyway. Stern has joked "I must have OCD" (for instance, on the soundcheck), but that doesn't mean he has been diagnosed as OCD. [[User:Chiok|Chiok]] 22:52, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

::Actually, he does have OCD, and has spoken of it many times on his show in a non-satirical manner (and in one of his books, I believe). He claimed to have been cured of it in the early 1990's but he has lapsed from time to time. He is a "germaphobe" and compulsively washes his hands. [[User:Gerkinstock|Gerkinstock]] 01:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, he mentioned it in the book ''Miss America''. [[User:Nightscream|Nightscream]] 07:22, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

==Question: Who was Stern's first celebrity guest?==

Does anybody know? [[User:Gerkinstock|Gerkinstock]] 01:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

==Stern's daughters==

Wasn't Emily born in 1983 and Deborah in 1986? Also, Emily recently appeared in a play where she did a nude scene. [[User:Gerkinstock|Gerkinstock]] 01:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I believe Emily is the oldest, Deborah is the middle child and Ashley is the youngest, I seem to recall that when Howard was on WNBC when Allison would call-in you could hear Emily (then a baby) in the background. [[User:Misterrick|Misterrick]] 21:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

This article is about Howard Stern not his daughters. If his daughters are publicly known enough they can have their own wiki. They are not. Therefore they should be left out of Wikipedia. Including their age in the article is fine (which already is included), but having small non-important irrelevant information such as his daughters plays isn’t really what this article should be. [[User:Redd Dragon|Redd Dragon]] 09:57, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

== Link to Howard 100 Audio ==

[[User:Redd Dragon]] has made a claim that it is illegal to rebroadcast Sirius Satellite Radio material, However I contend that U.S. Copyright law allows for fair use. Obviously This audio clip falls under fair use because it is a non-commercial site. Of course you can say the same thing about any clips for Howard Stern's shows on K-Rock, WNBC, DC101, WCCC and WWWW etc... all of which Howard presented on New Years eve and he was able to broadcast those clips under fair use especially since he doesn't own any of them which I never understood why in his contract he never had a clause that said if he left the station any audio clips and bits become property of him or his production company. I would like to point out that this is not my link but I am defending it because I believe that it should be left here. [[User:Misterrick|Misterrick]] 23:47, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

:The question here isn't whether or not that Tripod site is following [[fair use]] in offering the Howard MP3, because it's not (which I'll get to in a minute); the question is whether or not Wikipedia policy says it's okay to post a link to a page that's engaging in something illegal. I'm sure that question has come up plenty of times before, so there must be some settled policy somewhere (or at least a guideline). Hopefully someone more Wikiexperienced than I am will dig that up. As for the MP3, fair use would generally be considered a couple of minutes of the show; offering the entire show (which is, after all, no longer free to listen to over the air) would almost certainly not qualify as fair use. However, it must be noted that "fair use" is a very nebulous concept in U.S. law, and has never really been firmed up in established case law. Nobody on either side wants to ever take such a case to the Supreme Court because there's an excellent chance they could rule entirely in one direction or the other, and both sides have way too much to lose. --[[User:Aaron|Aaron]] 00:10, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

::Ok you make some very good points, So what should be done for now until a qualified and experienced Wikipedian can make a proper determination? Should the links be deleted? [[User:Misterrick|Misterrick]] 00:20, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

:::The ''optimal'' thing would be for everyone to just agree to leave the link as-is until someone more experienced can come along and guide us better, just so there's no chance of a [[revert war]] starting up. But I suggest you take the high road and do nothing even if someone else comes along and deletes it in the meantime before this is settled; again, it's just about preventing a fight breaking out over it, not over who "wins". In any case, I have no idea how many people are paying attention to this talk page, so you might want to hop into [irc://chat.freenode.net/wikipedia #Wikipedia] and ask a couple of the admins in there to come over here, check it out and offer their suggestions. If nothing else, that'll help speed up the consensus on this matter. --[[User:Aaron|Aaron]] 00:45, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

::::Well I think it's a moot point now because I just clicked on the link and it looks like either the site owner shut it down or the site was removed by Tripod for a Term of Service violation. It's was probably the latter. So I am going to delete the links. [[User:Misterrick|Misterrick]] 00:52, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

:::::Yeah, sounds like they made our decision for us! --[[User:Aaron|Aaron]] 00:54, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

==What? No Imus?==

I find it very hard to believe that any article about Stern could exist without even a mention of his 20 plus year war with [[Don_Imus|Imus]]. Imus and Stern have mentioned the other on numerous shows like [[Larry King Live]] and their [[A%26E_Network|A&E]] biographies both mentioned the other not to mention Stern's section on Imus in his Private Part's book and movie. What casual Stern fan does not know that Stern hates Imus with a passion? I also believe that his conflicts with [[Opie and Anthony]] should be mentioned as well. Both Imus and O&A's wikipedia articles reference Stern. Stern mentioned Imus on every one of his first 5 days at [[Sirius_Satellite_Radio|Sirius]]. Stern threatened to sue Imus over a bit where Imus made fun of him and Beth O which upset Beth and her family and he even tried to call in and confront Imus on air but Imus wouldn't take the call which I witnessed watching Imus's TV show.

:Why am I not surprised that Stern can dish it out, but he can't take it?

Stern goofed on Imus's [[Vanity_Fair_%28magazine%29|Vanity Fair]] article his cancer ranch and even mentioned Imus at length during his first day press conference where [[MSNBC|MSNBC's]] [[Keith Olberman]] was called on to confirm that everyone at MSNBC wants Imus gone. Imus found out about Stern attacks and went back at him with a Cardinal Eagan bit causing one of Stern's fans to call him and mention it on air. Stern even said "Imus should just crawl off in a hole and die!". As often as Imus was mentioned Stern didn't mention Opie and Anthony once during week one even though O&A sent Pests to disrupt his last show celebration and streamed his first Sirius show on their [[XM_Satellite_Radio|XM]] broadcast to goof on him. That may simply be because a Stern fan would have to subscribe to XM in order to monitor O&A's show and report back to Howard which would defeat Howard's goal of making Sirius number one whereas they can still watch Imus on TV and listen on the radio for free. I've listened to both programs for over 10 years and Imus and Stern absolutely loathe each other.

[[User:Maddhatt|Maddhatt]] 04:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Additionally, Wikipedi is not a link dump, and excessive links to audio are not proper. I am removing them.

:Actually, Stern has mentioned Opie and Anthony a number of times on his Sirius show, and a case can certainly be made for O&A being the only other jocks aside from Imus that he really seems to hate. Before his recent legal troubles began, he mentioned them at least once a show for three shows in a row. It would definitely be within the bounds of neutral POV to mention both Imus and O&A, perhaps under a "Radio Rivals" category. Even if such a category contained little more than a short blurb about how they hate each other, with links to the relevant pages. [[User:Hossenfeffer|Hossenfeffer]] 16:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

The article is a biography about Howard Stern and the show. Putting a radio enemy list in seems irrelevant and childish. What information is gained by listing which radio show hosts are not friendly with the show? [[User:Redd Dragon|Redd Dragon]] 23:06, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

The fact Stern has been involved in such high profile on and off the air battle with both Imus and Opie and Anthony certainly makes it a relevant part of his career. It is not like this is a one show thing. Perhaps an enemies list is not needed but a controversies section would be helpful. If he found space for Imus in his movie at the very least there should be space for it here.--[[User:Watersnake|Watersnake]] 07:59, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

:::Imus I can understand. Stern talks about him all the time. But the other guys? I don't know who these guys are. How can he be enemies with them. This just seems like a section of people who don't like Stern. Why aren't Rush L. and my mom on this thing then. This whole section needs to go, with the exception of Imus.[[User:Vegasjon|Vegasjon]] 21:40, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

== 2006: Year of the Sirius Dog ==

[[Image:2006 Chinese New Year Dog.jpg]]

I thought it would be nice to put this image on the Howard Stern wiki entry for the duration of the Chinese Lunar New Year celebration. And I thought it was absolutely fitting that 2006, the year that Howard Stern moved to Sirius, is also the year of the dog. Now, to explain the tangerine: It's traditional during the Chinese New Year to give tangerines, which are supposed to mean good luck (even though Howard does not need luck -- we should have given him tangerines 25 years ago!) -- at least that's what my mom told me. In fact, it was after I asked her what the tangerines mean that I created the image in Photoshop. The Chinese caligraphy on the right is the symbol for "dog." I was in such a festive mood!

The font used for the year, 2006, is a Star Trek font, which I used just because [[George Takei]] was the Howard Stern Show announcer on Sirius. "Oh my!" The Star Trek font can be found on the saucer section (or primary hull) of the U.S.S. Enterprise 1701-A -- the one seen in Star Treks I through VI.

[[User:HeWhoE|HeWhoE]] 19:59, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

:I am not sure I understand what the relationship of the Chinese New Year has to do with Howard Stern. George Takei is Japanese, but he was on for one week and they hardly use his voice. He isn’t important enough to make a link between a Chinese holiday and the Howard Stern show. I really don’t get what this has to do with anything. [[User:Redd Dragon|Redd Dragon]] 17:50, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

:: If you look at Chinese New Year celebrations this year, you'll find that they're celebrating the Dog. It's the year of the Dog. Okay? Take a moment to let that sink in... Now, recall what animal the Sirius Satellite Radio company has in its official logo. Yes! A dog! We know George Takei is Japanese, but that's beside the point. George Takei was the first voice to be heard on Howard 100 (that's channel 100 on the Sirius radio programming). He introduced the show, and Howard says he will have George on the show regularly (just not all the time, because he wants to "keep it special"). The day was January 9, 2006. That's where the 2006 comes from! [[User:HeWhoE|HeWhoE]] 04:15, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

::: If you take a look at the wiki article name, you will notice it reads [[Howard Stern]] and not [[Sirius Satellite Radio]]. The Sirius Show article is there to document his show in a time period. Just like 1990’s and 2000’s versions. It is not an article about Sirius. George Takei was not the first voice on the channel. There were many shows on the channel before. I suggest reading [[Howard 100]]. The image doesn’t serve a purpose to the article. Again, the article is not about Sirius or his move to Sirius. The article is meant to document a certain time period in the radio show. Which doesn’t mean January 9th 2006, it means until the radio show is no longer on Sirius. [[User:Redd Dragon|Redd Dragon]] 00:03, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Ok becides oll of the symbolic notions, what if any relvance does this image have to an Encylopedia article on stern, FYI this is not a fan site, for fan images. --[[User:Boothy443|Boothy443]] | [[User talk:Boothy443| trácht ar]] 04:59, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

:I agree, this image is irrelevant.

:<small>&mdash;''The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by'' [[User:Countzer|Countzer]] ([[User talk:Countzer|talk]]&nbsp;&bull;&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/Countzer|contribs]]) {{{2|}}}.</small><!--Inserted with Template:Unsigned--> <small>&ndash;19:08, 14 February 2006 (UTC)</small>

::If people want it off the wiki entry, I will stop putting it back in. After all, I did say it would be up only for the duration of the Chinese New Year celebrations. Chinese New Years celebrations ended five days ago. Besides, I'm craving some man ass. Redd Dragon, Boothy443, Countzer and dbenbenn, let's get together again sometime. This time, dbenbenn, I'll let you use your fist on me and clench it too. [[User:HeWhoE|HeWhoE]] 19:17, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

== Userbox ==

{{user howard stern}}

Created this today. [[User:68.7.47.6|68.7.47.6]] 18:50, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

==NPOV Problems==

This page reads like an old Rolling Stone article. There is alot of POV material inserted into the fact surrounding Mr. Howard Stern's career, and this needs to be edited. Changes shall come as proper research, grammer and unbiased commentary are added. ([[User:Countzer|Countzer]] 05:29, 10 February 2006 (UTC))

I don’t see much POV problems. If there was it may have been edited out. Problems I do see are long paragraphs with many grammatical errors. Some of the paragraphs could be cut out.

Also, there are way too many links to other Wikipedia articles. We don’t need a history lesson on every single word mentioned in the article. For example “Spanish people” is linked. Is that necessary? Not only are unnecessary articles linked they are linked repeatedly. Every other word is blue. [[User:Redd Dragon|Redd Dragon]] 21:02, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

There is also the question of whether or not Wikipedia should read like a magazine article. Quotes about Howard's view on himself

are unnecessary. Can we find something similar elsewhere, my suspicion is that the answer is no. ([[User:Countzer|Count Zero]] 22:32, 10 February 2006 (UTC))

Someone removed the POV check from this page without speaking about it on the discussion page. Obvious vandal with repeated

vandalism to other radio show pages. I have re-inserted the POV check until the issue is resolved or I have time to

remove bias from this entry.([[User:Countzer|Count Zero]])

Again the POV check was removed from this page without discussing it here. Argue against the case for POV or submit to the

idea that this page will carry the POV banner until it is edited. ([[User:68.163.23.224|68.163.23.224]] 04:00, 21 February 2006 (UTC))

Just because you keep saying it's POV, that doesn't mean it's POV.

Just because you keep saying it is not, doesn't mean it isn't. Check up on this talk page, and you will see that this issue

has been brought up before and never resolved. Also, sign your posts please. ([[User:Countzer|Count Zero]] 00:57, 22 February 2006 (UTC))

:Issues Still have not been resolved, nor discussed. POV check has just been removed. ([[User:Countzer|Count Zero]] 10:14, 23 March 2006 (UTC))

What, exactly, is the paragraph(s) you have a problem with, Count Zero? I can help out if you're more specific. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 17:04, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

==[[The Howard Stern Show Revelations Game]] > [[Howard Stern]] Merge==

This is a duplicate of the article on [[Howard Stern]] under The Sirius Show. It should be moved to that section of the article or be deleted.

==Split [[Howard Stern]] and [[Howard Stern Show]]?==

It has been suggested by [[User:Enochlau|Enochlau]] on my [[User talk:DHowell#Scott Salem|talk page]] that [[Howard Stern]] and [[Howard Stern Show]] be split into two articles. Given the size of this article, it seems reasonable, but a daunting task considering how inextricably interwoven the biography and the show description is. There is also the fact that the term "Howard Stern Show" could refer to four different things: his former FM radio show, his current Sirius satellite show, his former E! TV show, and his WWOR-TV show from the 1990s. I thought I'd bring it up though in case anyone else had any thoughts on the matter. [[User:DHowell|DHowell]] 06:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

*Its seems like a good idea to me since the show and the man are not the same thing. Rush Limbaugh and The Rush Limbaugh Show are two separate articles. It should be the same with Stern and his show. -- [[User:HowardDean|HowardDean]] 07:05, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

*Damm, you beat me to it, i was thinking the same thing, espically now considering the size of the article. --[[User:Boothy443|Boothy443]] | [[User talk:Boothy443| trácht ar]] 07:11, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

*I agree to a point. If we were to split the radio show up with his biography most of the article would just be moved to another place. It would leave the same problem just without a few paragraphs.

For example, if we were to split up the biography and the radio show (and tv show, etc.) it would look like this:

[[Howard Stern]]:

Contents [hide]

*1 Biography

*2 See also

*3 External links

[[Howard Stern Show]]:

*1 Intro

*2 Terrestrial Radio Show

*2.1 1990s

*2.2 2000s

*3 The Move to Satellite Radio

*3.1 Goodbye to terrestrial radio

*4 The Sirius Show

*4.1 The Revelation Game

*5 Cast and crew of the Howard Stern show

*6 Regulars on the Howard Stern show

*7 Former cast and crew

*8 Former Regulars

*9 Frequent Show Games and Bits

*10 Common Show Sayings and Soundbites

*11 See also

*12 External links

Including the show articles as part of his biography really defeats the point of the [[Howard Stern Show]] article.

Not sure how it could be done, but should be done somehow. [[User:Redd Dragon|Redd Dragon]] 20:17, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

:Well it's a start, but still have to think about it. The bio should focus less on the show, and more on him, naturaly. But it should factor in the show somewhat, like is issues with the FCC, i.e the Larry King Call and such (was it King). I would also inculde things about the family, run for gov, things along that line. As for the show article, i personaly, consider the show to start from DC 101 on, as when robin came in thats when the show really statrts to come together into the format of today, the pre dc 101 i would look as a backgoundto the show but would think it would be better in the bio as part of a background on his radio carrer? --[[User:Boothy443|Boothy443]] | [[User talk:Boothy443| trácht ar]] 05:38, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

==Pat O'Brien Sex Tape==

If you cared about actually providing information instead of vandalizing articles you would realize Howard played these tapes on his terrestrial radio show when they came out. He played them on his first day because he couldn’t play the uncensored versions before and now he could. Fighting over who played them uncensored first is irrelevant and stupid. [[User:Redd Dragon|Redd Dragon]] 14:53, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

== Censorship Quote ==

please replace the paragraph with howard's remarks when he admitted to having O&A censored. [[User:Streamless|Streamless]] 19:34, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely. It is noteworthy and relevant. It shall remain as it is his word, and proven fact. Hipocracy and all, it will remain simply for that fact. It is fact. Documented, noted, and true. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 20:20, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

== Jackie ==

just a suggestion, but i think that there should be more about jackie in this article. the first mention of him is in the paragraph when it's announced that jackie is leaving the show. perhaps, how howard and jackie met (perhaps even the joke that convinced howard to hire jackie), and some of jackie's better contributions? [[User:Streamless|Streamless]] 15:36, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

:Don't forget to mention the Jokemaster, Jokemaster Junior, and Jokemaster Mini. [[User:MGlosenger|MGlosenger]] 02:25, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

== Wack Packers ==

Any chance we can get some more information on them? [[User:Lokiloki|Lokiloki]] 21:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

:See [[The Wack Pack]], --[[User:Boothy443|Boothy443]] | [[User talk:Boothy443| trácht ar]] 04:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks... [[User:Lokiloki|Lokiloki]] 07:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

==Dice Clay==

Can someone provide some detail on the feud between Andrew Dice Clay and Stern? I heard the recent broadcast, and it would be great to get some background on this... [[User:Lokiloki|Lokiloki]] 07:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

ummmm.....if you "heard the recent broadcast," why do you need background?

== Howard/"Dice" Clay Feud ==

For nearly a decade, Howard had a running fued with "Dice" due to an on-air interview, which both agreed fell short of their expectations. After the interview, "Dice" was quoted in Stepping Out Magazine stating that the interview was a disaster because Stern was off his game. Howard retaliated accusing "Dice" of not being interesting. Soon after, Dice called into the Stern show to have it out with Stern and himself admitted that Stern got the better of him in their screaming match.

On his recent appearance on Stern's Sirius show, Dice explained that he had been anticipating the interview that fateful day, as he usually called in, and was excited to do a live interview. He said he became disappointed when Stern almost immediatley went to the phones instead of conducting the interview himself. Stern countered that he felt that for whatever reason the interview was not going well and that he went to the phones as a means to salvage "Dice's" appearance.

In addition, Stern half-jokingly stated that prior to the interview he had already been somewhat fed up with "Dice" after a disastrous house hunting excursion the two had participated in, in which Stern set "Dice" up with his real estate agent. Apparently, Dice and one of his friends acted like imbeciles, embarrasing Stern, by childishly running through some of the houses, hiding in shower stalls, and jumping on beds. Clay explained that since he rarely finds anyone funny, he needs to amuse himself by making others uncomfortable with boorish behavior.

The recent Sirius reunion seemed to have gone well and all the cast members agreed that the past seemed to have been resolved and that the relationship between the two could move forward.

== Sirius Show Header ==

There was a paragrpah under the Sirius Show header stating that recently his battle with Opie and Anthony had come to a head when Stern admitted on Hannity's show that he placed a gag order on the two. While the statement was accurate, I saw no reason for it to be included under said heading, as it had absolutely no bearing to the Sirius broadcasts, and removed it...adding a little section about his desire to curb excessive swearing.

== Why is this relevant? ==

'''Recently a long standing feud with the Opie and Anthony Show has come to a head. On a recent appearance on the Sean Hannity Show in an interview, Sean asked Howard if he had them silenced or gagged from mentioning Howard on their program. Howard quickly affirmed that the rumors were true, and further stated that while he was a champion of free speech, he was a champion solely of 'his' free speech, stating "It doesn't matter, as long as I win, and you know what? I win." and "I believe in censorship when it benefits me."'''

Firstly, can someone please explain why the above statement is relevant in regards to The Sirius Show, under which heading this inane paragraph is entered?

Secondly, what does "come to a head" mean exactly? Doesn't the phrase imply a turning point? A watershed? How has the Hannity interview brought the fued "to a head?" What significant event has occured as a result of this interview to justify the above entry and its accuracy?

Perhaps this statement would best be served on the Opie and Anthony page, since they have a fued with Stern. I can honestly say, as a devoted listener of Stern, that he is not fueding with O&A, as he finds them to be insignificant. <small>&mdash;''The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by'' [[User:64.48.59.29]] ([[User talk:64.48.59.29|talk]]&nbsp;&bull;&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/64.48.59.29|contribs]]) {{{2|}}}.</small><!--Inserted with Template:Unsigned-->

First, sign your articles, it makes Baby Jesus cry when you don't. Also "Whis" isn't a word, so I took the liberty of making it "Why." You're welcome.

Now, the expression "Comes to a head" means it's reached the culmination of all the problems that have built up over the years that lead to this particular point. It's worth note, especially since Howard does have a clear and present problem with Opie and Anthony. After listening to him rant on how The "O&A Army" has only "Two members" (which is noted under his Radio Enemies section, I might add) as well as the fact that he likes to parade that he's the champion of free speech ('His' Free Speech) which was a significant event that he went on record admitting he had even ONE of his radio enemies 'forcefully' gagged. In essence, "Talk aboot me, I'll tell the bosses to fire you." That's not exactly the kind of free speech I enjoy.

As a devoted listener, you're delusional if you haven't heard any of his ramblings aboot O&A. Finding them "insignificant" is an ironical sentence in a sense since XM is doing better in all significant business areas then Sirius, which is partly due to the large success of O&A 'on' the XM platform.

In a final clarification correction, the reason it's under the "Sirius Show" section is because it occured 'during' the Sirius Show's time period. It has no other real place.

Hope that helps. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 21:15, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Technically...it HASN'T reached a "culmination." The culmination was reached WHEN he had the gag-order placed on them. All he did on Hannity was confirm his action.

Also, I haven't heard him "rant" once about the Army. He's joked about them, but with much less frequency than you suggest. On top of that, I've heard him mention O&A no more than ten times over the last 5 years.

Also, I don't believe I ever said that I've never heard him talking about O&A, so I don't understand why'd you'd say I'm delusional in that regard. As far as O&A's impact on XM, that's highly disputable. Do you have any facts to back your claims up?

The bottom line is this...you are a fan of O&A and the only reason you keep including Stern's Hannity appearance is that you mean to stain Stern's image. I don't really care, but it CERTAINLY has NOTHING to do with The Sirius Show. If you feel that his "feud" with O&A is soooooo significant to Howard's bio, then perhaps you should start a new heading, "Feud with Opie and Anthony," or something like that and write your version of that particular "war". That's where your comment would best be served. <small>&mdash;''The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by'' [[User:Floydiannyc]] ([[User talk:Floydiannyc|talk]]&nbsp;&bull;&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/Floydiannyc|contribs]]) {{{2|}}}.</small><!--Inserted with Template:Unsigned-->

Baby Jesus weeps again. '''*SIGN YOUR ARTICLES WHEN YOU FINISH THEM.*'''

That aside, the feud reached it's culmination at that point, when it was finally out in the open. And you wither A) Weren't listening that particular day when he did, or B) blocked it out for some reason. But I have explicitly heard him refer and rant aboot the army.

And no, this is what I assume based on XM's doing well, business and technology wise, and Sirius being still behind. Ratings numbers are not disclosed by either company, however, so neither Howard or Opie and Anthony, should they claim they have numbers, actually do. This is due to competition reasons between the two companies.

The bottom line is this... sign your comments. Wait, no, that was what I said the first time. Anyways, you might have a point, but what can I do if I did? You would most certainly delete that anyways. I'm not giving any "versions" of the war, there are no "versions" of the truth, only just that. The truth. I cited an article and gave a summary of it and what happened on that particular day. The relevance is to Stern himself, being hypocritical, and being called on it.

So, let's get to work. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 22:29, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm done arguing with you. You have an agenda and nothing I say will make you see why adding your blurb about the Hannity interview is insignificant. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia and hence, your opinion that Stern is a "hypocrite," while maybe valid, has no place on this site. Go start a message board or a web site....your AGENDA has no place in what is supposed to be a fact related article.

P.S.....what are you gonna do about me not signing? <small>&mdash;''The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by'' [[User:Floydiannyc]] ([[User talk:Floydiannyc|talk]]&nbsp;&bull;&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/Floydiannyc|contribs]]) {{{2|}}}.</small><!--Inserted with Template:Unsigned-->

Why, sign them for you, Pookie! <3

Side notes, hypocracy is not an opinion, it is a fact when backed up. He claimed to be a champion of free speech, yet places a gag order on a rival show. Hypocracy. The article tidbit I added has a CITED SOURCE (look for it, it's there), and that's why no moderators have had a problem with it so far. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 23:46, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

:::The guys you're talking about may not like Howard Stern. A lot of people don't. That doesn't earn them a place in the article. Imus is bashed relentlessly on the Stern Show. These other characters aren't really mentioned. Sorry.[[User:Vegasjon|Vegasjon]] 22:45, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Not mentioned enough to have an article written about his and their feud? This isn't a new thing. Howard doesn't constantly talk aboot any of his "Enemies" because no good radio host would, it's essentially a free plug. So saying "Howard doesn't talk aboot them much" doesn't cover it, because the article explicitly states otherwise. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 23:22, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

:"Doesn't cover it"? Stern has SPECIFICALLY SAID he is not enemies with O&A and he has even wished them luck on CBS radio. Give it up already. [[User:MGlosenger|MGlosenger]] 00:29, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

::Can one cite source? [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 02:19, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

This is ridiculous, obviously [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] has a personal agenda against Stern. [[User:Hollosyt|Hollosyt]]

::::I don't think it's obvious Payneos has a personal agenda. We should always assume good faith. At least this is being talked about in the discussion page as it's being reveted back and forth. I'm still not convinced that this section belongs on the Howard page. There are people Stern fueds with openly. I don't think the people in question are among those.[[User:Vegasjon|Vegasjon]] 06:17, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

: While I agree it can be taken in "good faith" when there is proof to the contrary it is hard to go on good faith alone. "Well wishing" can also be a backhanded "Yeah, good luck, hope you choke on a chicken bone" depending on the context. What he might have said and how he said it may be two different things, so why go on speculation when there's solid proof to the contrary? [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 06:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

::I was referring to your edits being in good faith.[[User:Vegasjon|Vegasjon]] 02:14, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

:::Talk aboot shooting myself in the foot. However, "good faith" and citation are rarely enough for people these days. I'll put the paragraph back up now since there seems to be no more contesting to the article. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 02:51, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

::::No more contesting? How exactly are we supposed to prove a negative? Perhaps we should rifle through every single broadcast he's ever done and ensure that he has never said 'O&A are enemies'?

::::He certainly hasn't said anything vaguely resembling it recently, and if you want to say 'Well, he's just being sarcastic,' then you can say that about anything. Hardly compelling evidence.

::::Stern may be an enemy of O&A, but O&A are clearly not enemies of Stern. [[User:MGlosenger|MGlosenger]] 03:19, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

:Which once again, is contrary to the cited article. I think we need to call in moderation to deal with this, because clearly even a cited, legitimate source with good faith as backing isn't enough to save it from repeated vandalism. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 05:41, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

::That article was written about an incident that happened years ago. Perhaps Howard Stern would have called O&A 'enemies' back then, but certainly not now. [[User:MGlosenger|MGlosenger]] 09:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

:::Written aboot an incident that happened years ago, but the term applies to both past and present. Howard just cannot silence them in any form now because they are carried by different companies. Which is fine. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 15:25, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

== Redirected from Blumpkin? ==

There is no article for Blumpkin, the page (incorrectly) links to Howard Stern. Can someone corect this?

== Enemies? ==

How can Opie & Anthony be 'enemies' of the Howard Stern Show when Stern himself has specifically said on his show that they are not enemies? He has wished them well on every occasion when anyone else has mentioned them. How does this make them enemies? [[User:206.190.139.254|206.190.139.254]] 18:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

:Can one cite source? [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 02:19, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I have also heard Howard say he is not Enemies with O&A. I was unable to find a direct quote, however if you read the week of 4/27 and 4/24 summaries on http://www.marksfriggin.com one will notice he never bad mouths the two, but wishes them well on CBS radio.

[[User:Hollosyt|Hollosyt]] 11:10 PM EST, 28 April 2006

Direct links to the appropriate MarksFriggin log:

http://marksfriggin.com/news06/4-24.htm#mon

There are other references to O&A in there too.. Good luck finding any part where Stern calls O&A 'enemies'.

04:38, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Unfournately Blogs and "Show Summaries" can't be used as cited sources, as was shown in the "Wackbag Incidents" on the Opie and Anthony Page. One needs direct news articles or other such reputable sources as a proper citation. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 06:00, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

:Yes unfortunatley, especially since Stern gets more negative press than any comedian. [[User:Hollosyt|Hollosyt]] 29 April 2006

Stern has never claimed they stole his idea of moving to Sattelite. Please cite where he did.

[[User:Hollosyt|Hollosyt]] 29 April 2006

Stealing the idea of moving to satelite can be worked around by dropping it, but it is noted [http://www.fmqb.com/Article.asp?id=206195] here that Stern does accuse them (and everyone) of ripping him off. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 15:14, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

How about getting around this deletion and addition problem by agreeing on a more well rounded section for O&A?

I propose something like this.

Opie and Anthony: Often accused by Stern of being 'Howard Stern' clones. Stern did have them gagged while working at CBS (link to Hannity article if you would like). However the unique part of this fued is it's apparant one sidedness. The O&A Army often attend Stern functions like his last day on CBS radio and David Letterman appearances and hold up signs mocking him as 'Hoo Hoo'. However Stern is ambivolent towards the O&A Army, laughing about how they seem to be fans of his since they all ask for pictures with him.

This could be improved but what do you think? [[User:Hollosyt|Hollosyt]] 30 April 2006

:It still doesn't work because there's no fact behind that. I don't recall reading anywhere that the pests wanted to take pictures with him, and if they did I doubt he would for the fact that they were holding up huge signs that stated "I invented everything." and "Everybody rips me off" - Hoo Hoo. It's not one sided if the only side to a story is the truth. But I do like some of the wording in it. We'll work around it somehow. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 15:28, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

::It is fact, he stated it on a March 14th show. See the show summary here - http://www.marksfriggin.com/news06/3-13.htm and I know you said you don't count a show summary as proof of him saying something, but it's unrealistic to provide a quote from a print source for every single assertion.

:::It's not that I don't count it, it's that Wiki-Moderators do not. And I'm upholding their decision on several occasions. While you can provide that, that means I could use some O&A Fansite that provides a show summary to discredit what you just stated, or most of the Howard Stern article. But it's obvious an O&A Fansite would have an O&A slant, much like a Howard Stern Blog would have a Howard Stern slant. Therefore, it has to be thrown out. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 22:37, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Cut the BS. Here is what is happening. Payneos has an agenda, the agenda is to portray Howard Stern as a hypocrite and bully to Opie and Anthony. It is not to accuratley portray the relationship between Howard Stern and Opie & Anthony. By using wikipedia loopholes he refuses to accept the combined common knowledge among actual Howard Stern listeners (of which he is obviously not among) that Howard Stern does not consider them Enemies at all, though he may have at one time. He also omits the fact that the 'fued' is currently one-sided as evidenced by the April 20th Howard Stern show. And shows during the week of March 17th. Apparently unless the press writes an article quoting Howard Stern in said shows, the shows did not happen regardless of the fact that myself and others can quote the passages verbatim.

A reasonable solution is to allow the community to write a fair and accurate description based on our shared knowledge, instead this section has degraded to vandalism. <small>&mdash;''The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by'' [[User:68.77.110.38]] ([[User talk:68.77.110.38|talk]]&nbsp;&bull;&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/68.77.110.38|contribs]]) {{{2|}}}.</small><!--Inserted with Template:Unsigned-->

I propose the current section be edited to only include the fact that Howard has not expressed ill-will towards them in their move to CBS radio, has wished them luck in this move. I think the fact that Howard admits to gagging them at Viacom is worth noting however. All the rest should be removed. [[User:Hollosyt|Hollosyt]] 10:14, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

:Actually "A reasonable solution is to allow the community to write a fair and accurate description based on our shared knowledge, instead this section has degraded to vandalism" is completely inappropriate for Wikipedia, inasmuch as it would violate [[WP:NOR]], [[WP:V]], and [[WP:RS]], amongst others no doubt. "The community" is not a citable or reputable source. The fact that '''you''' heard something on the radio is irrelevant. If someone is researching an issue and uses Wikipedia as an encyclopedic source (which is the intent), can they call you to verify what you heard? You (and I, and everyone else here) are not reputable sources. I suggest reading the above links to understand what Wikipedia is and what it is [[WP:NOT|not]]. [[User:Tufflaw|Tufflaw]] 20:56, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll state it again. If you can provide evidence to the contrary that this "feud" is one-sided, please do. But also, remember, just because they may not be "feuding" doesn't mean they're not "enemies." I.E. The Soviets and the Nazis, they originally didn't fight each other, doesn't mean they *like* each other. They were enemies. And O&A/Howard Stern are enemies as well.

On a side note, if you really would like to get technical, when Howard announced his big move to Sirius, Opie and Anthony stated flatly "Congrats to him, he went for the big payday and it paid off. Hope it works out." And that was that. Can I prove it? No. But notice how in subsequent articles, it does not appear. Therefore, I still propose the article stands on the basis of a legitimate citation. I have no problem with the "Well Wishing" but such statements would also appear in the Opie & Anthony article as well, which means it has to be taken with Good Faith, which I have no problem with. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 21:22, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

:I am not promoting not citing sources. In fact I would like Payneos to provide evidance that there is a fued at all, his one reference referred to a previous instance. [[User:68.77.110.38|68.77.110.38]] 21:34, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I would also like to add that just because Stern said he had O&A censored does not make them enemies. Here is the context of the censoring. When O&A and Howard were working for the same company. Howard asked Mel Karmizan to put a gag order on O&A because he felt disrespected and felt the actions of O&A went against the common good of profits for the company. Mel agreed, Howard did not have the power to do it on his own. This also does not prove they are enemies. For instance , if Payneos and I both worked for the same company and Payneos was telling clients that they should not work with me I would have a legitimate case for censoring Payneos, if my boss agreed she might censor him. This does not make us enemies. [[User:Hollosyt|Hollosyt]] 21:44, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

However, we were *competing* for some special reason in your given example, much like Opie & Anthony and Howard Stern competed back in the day, at least in Howard's opinion. THerefore, as stated in the article, he "silenced" the "competition" in order to stay on top. Amongst other quotes that directly lead to them at least being competition, if not direct enemies because of the anomisity between the two shows.

"I am not promoting not citing sources. In fact I would like Payneos to provide evidance that there is a fued at all, his one reference referred to a previous instance."

I concur, to an extent. But because there is no feud, does not mean they're not enemies. I realize that we can work out the wording that there is a feud *now* but that doesn't mean there isn't one going on. Most articles *printed* (not online, so I can't cite) comparing the two shows include the fact that the two shows just don't like each other. To the point of... pretty much hate. And that's not a *bad* thing, that's just how it is. Howard has every right to be pissed at O&A, especially their relentless mockery of his daughter and her "Jingle Ball" Incident. It's wrong to try to portray him to be above the fray, he is only human, you know.

It is also of interesting note that normally Howard Stern would confront problems on air, rather then go to a boss, it doesn't seem to fit the Howard Stern M.O. Why is Opie and Anthony the exception? That's an irrelevant statement, but food for thought. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 22:21, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

:Not really, Howard doesn't even care about them enough to start a war with them. Either that or he's scared of them. But, I don't think that's the case. O&A have to use Howard to prop themselves up, mentioning O&A would just bring them up to his level and Howard is the top dog. Why would he prop someone up who shows no respect to him? [[User:68.77.110.38|68.77.110.38]] 01:23, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

::See, but that's all opinionated. I think Howard is a master of his craft, and I respect him. That doesn't mean I like him, but I wouldn't take cheap shots at him on a website he'll never read, because that's silly. Neither Howard or O&A really war all out often with each other, but it may happen, and that would be a very interesting day.

That aside, I'm seeing a noticable decrease to the resistance to the article. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 01:43, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

:It's your agenda to crow bar and O&A reference into Stern's biography on wikipedia. At the end of the day Opie and Anthony have to define themsleves relative to Stern, not the other way around. [[User:68.77.110.38|68.77.110.38]] 02:15, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

::And you say that like it's insulting. Even O&A do not question that Stern is the benchmark. Nobody can deny that. But it's the fact they aspire to become the benchmark themselves. And with Howard on the downswing, and O&A still with many years left (barring another firing) they may do it. THat's just an opinion.

::On that note, however, you wield the word "Agenda" too much, but I can throw it back at you, saying you have an agenda to keep Howard's article 100% Pristine and free from any valid, backed up criticisms. Informal mediation should be arriving soon to help determine what to do. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 03:21, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Either way the section should be conidered for removal any way is it is noting less then POV from both sides, as the above disussion only goes to show, and will be tag accordingly. And aht would be really nice is that the OA or HS fans that have an agenda or bias sitck to editing their page for who they like and not the others as they cant seemto not interject the own personal/fan bias onto the the other. Also if the revert war keeps up, i'll see to have the page locked, and will have it relocked untill it stops. --[[User:Boothy443|Boothy443]] | [[User talk:Boothy443| trácht ar]] 03:28, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from Boothy, but that doesn't mean much because it's not a point of view if it is a fact. My goal is to insert a fact into the article, backed up by a cited source. Threatening to lock it doesn't do any good, nor does raving aboot how it's PoV, what DOES do good is helping to rewrite the article so it expresses fact and *not* a point of view, so it can be inserted in the article without the countless reverts that are going on. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 03:53, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

:If Stern hadn't specifically talked about the very 'O&A are enemies' issue when they moved to CBS, I'd say maybe the O&A entry would be valid. But, guess what, he said several times that he had no hatred for O&A and in fact wished them well. I just don't see how this makes O&A enemies of Stern..? [[User:MGlosenger|MGlosenger]] 03:55, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

::Again, you'd need to *cite* that claim to contradict the claims he made while on the Sean Hannity Show in the article I provided. However, it needs to me from a legitimate news source, not "The Community." As Tufflaw puts it... "'The community' is not a citable or reputable source. The fact that '''you''' heard something on the radio is irrelevant. If someone is researching an issue and uses Wikipedia as an encyclopedic source (which is the intent), can they call you to verify what you heard? You (and I, and everyone else here) are not reputable sources. I suggest reading the above links to understand what Wikipedia is and what it is [[WP:NOT|not]]." [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 04:07, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

:::That is a rather bizarre way to handle things, don't you think? So if the National Enquirer writes a story, it's a citable source because it's in print, but if the radio personality HIMSELF actually SAYS IT on the air, then it's meaningless? Is Stern supposed to hold a press conference and say, "Opie & Anthony are NOT enemies of my show"? [[User:MGlosenger|MGlosenger]] 04:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

That's how Wikipedia handles it's business. If you think it needs to be changed, you should lead an effort to change it. Normally, I would agree with you solely on the "Good Faith" Wikipedia Rule, but Citation > Good Faith, and therefore, I have to press the issue. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 04:22, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

:Let's assume that you're right, and that Stern's assertions are not valid unless they're reprinted somewhere. How do any past efforts Stern may have made to have O&A gagged make them current enemies of his show? 04:26, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

::And that's another problem I've had to contend with. It was debated above, but you might have missed it, so I'll restate my point. Just because they're not *openly* fighting does not mean they're not enemies. Which is a lot of negatives to prove a point, but is still how I see it. Both shows wished each other well when they did their new business ventures (Opie and Anthony when Stern "Signed his big paycheck" for going to Sirius, and Howard Stern when Opie and Anthony went back to CBS broadcasting.) However, both shows clearly still do not like each other, and probably never will, thus, I still am convinced they are enemies to the bitter end. Put another way... just because Howard won't "waste his time" on Opie and Anthony does not make them any less an enemy. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 04:44, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Well considering that the revert war continues, i have put the article up for protection. --[[User:Boothy443|Boothy443]] | [[User talk:Boothy443| trácht ar]] 05:00, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Which is a good idea. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 05:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

:::If the radio personality himself saying they're not enemies isn't good enough, then you having a 'real good feeling' certainly isn't.

:::I do think the fact that Stern had O&A gagged is interesting, especially in light of Stern always saying that censorship is bad. That does not, however, make O&A 'enemies' of the show. It would be better to have a 'notable incidents' section, and to put the O&A gagging under that section, and not claim anything about things 'coming to a head' or that O&A are 'lifelong enemies of the show'. The Mancow 'poo in a box', 'Anna Nicole Smith in a limo', and 'Rachel Hunter ditching the show' incidents can go under this 'notable incidents' heading.

:::I suppose that if anyone is an enemy of the show it's Leslie Moonves.. but so many people proclaim their hatred for the Howard Stern show, I wonder if this section is particularly meaningful. It would be better to have a section detailing Stern's CBS lawsuit. Don Imus isn't really an enemy so much as Stern just doesn't like the guy. When I think of an 'enemy', I think of someone who is violently opposed to all you stand for, and Imus and Moonves aren't it. [[User:MGlosenger|MGlosenger]] 14:20, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not using my 'real good feeling' as an actual evidenced way of stating what should go here and what shouldn't. I think to eliminate the "Enemies" section may be fine, actually. The two shows are different, so whereas one might treat things one way (As in, Howard takes things in strides, O&A confront immedately. This is what the two shows do *now*, what they did in the past may or may not be different.) THat said, I'm for a notable incidents section. [[User:Payneos|Payneos]] 14:54, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

:I'm all for that, let's just remove the Enemies section, since it is so subjective. As for the O&A gagging incident, I think it's fine to note it, but it shouldn't be noted and spun as making Howard a hypocrite since there was an arguably good reason to have O&A gagged. [[User:Hollosyt|Hollosyt]] 16:48, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

== "...taking bits from other media personalities..." ==

It seems that the following passage (from the "2000s" section of the "Radio Show" category) should be supported with specific examples and/or citations.

"On the opposite side, Stern has also been accused of taking bits from other media personalities. Several personalities have accused Stern of not giving credit to, or acknowledging, others for their ideas in which Stern has incorporated in to using in his show."

-> Which media personalities have made these accusations and what do they consist of?

==Marksfriggin.com as source?==

I propose we accept marksfriggin.com as a self-published source. According to the WP guidlines on sources self-published sources: "In some cases, these may be acceptable as sources, so long as their work has been previously published by credible, third-party publications"

Mark has been providing show summaries every day since 1998. He has also been cited by news stories like: http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/other_stories/multi_3/documents/05200113.asp

I remember finding a news article that actually cited mark but now I can't find the link of course.

[[User:Hollosyt|Hollosyt]] 15:10, 2 May 2006 (UTC)