Tweet
Could Stern's anti-Bush rants shock the vote?
By Matthew Gilbert, Globe Staff, 3/18/2004
American liberals have been waiting for a perch on talk radio, a medium dominated by conservative and right-wing voices since the 1980s. And on March 31, the new Air America Radio network will give them a nascent one, as it premieres in the New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago markets. Just as "The Daily Show" brings an openly lefty spin to TV news, Air America will fly in the face of the right wing with hosts including Al Franken, Janeane Garofalo, and Marty Kaplan.
ADVERTISEMENT
But wait a minute: Is "shock jock" Howard Stern -- stripper aficionado, champion of misfits everywhere, all-purpose radio provocateur -- already giving liberals a voice on the airwaves? And is that voice powerful enough to affect the upcoming presidential election?
Since the FCC crackdown on media "indecency" in the wake of Janet Jackson's Nipplegate incident, Stern has transformed his morning variety show into a rabidly anti-Bush talk forum. Every weekday, he has been devoting hours of his broadcast (locally on WBCN-FM, 104.1) to impassioned criticism of President Bush and support of Senator John Kerry. Railing tirelessly against the president, Stern has been attacking Bush's yoking together of church and state, the legitimacy of his National Guard service, his use of Sept. 11 imagery in his campaign ads, his stances regarding First Amendment rights, his handling of Iraq, and his stands on gay marriage and stem-cell research.
"Join me and friends of this show who are outraged," Stern said on the air last Friday. "Vote out every Republican you can find." He has also been urging his listeners to send money to Kerry's campaign, calling him "a good man" and praising his record in Vietnam as well as his later criticism of the Vietnam War.
"With all the talk of liberal talk radio," says Michael Harrison, the editor and publisher of Talkers magazine, "we're seeing emerging from the ranks of `shock jocks' one of the most potent and articulate liberal talkers we've seen in years."
Harrison calls Stern's's recent crusade "historic." "Anytime you have somebody suddenly igniting political interest with an audience who has the kind of loyalty factor Stern has, it could turn an election." A large percentage of Stern's listeners -- some 8 1/2 million a week -- were leaning in favor of Bush, Harrison says. "If Stern could turn several million Bush supporters away from Bush, that has even more impact than Rush Limbaugh, who's preaching to the choir. So this is pivotal to what is shaping up to be a close election."
"On a national level, I don't know how much influence Stern could have," says Chuck Todd, editor of The Hotline, a Washington-based daily briefing on politics. "But we assume too little at our own peril when it comes to Stern and talk radio in general. . . . Does Bush really need to worry about him? If New York were a swing state, we definitely would take this more seriously. Is Stern's popularity as devoted outside of New York? We only know it is ratings-wise."
Stern is frequently dismissed, by liberals and conservatives alike, as a sexist, a racist, and a narcissist. But he is one of the most influential entertainers in America, particularly among the much-sought-after 18-to-25-year-old male demographic. His show is a critical stop for actors plugging youth-market movies, and his skits serve as the blueprint for many reality TV concepts. Last month, in an effort to borrow some of Stern's mojo, Jay Leno hired Stern sidekick "Stuttering John" Melendez to be an announcer and correspondent on "The Tonight Show."
Harrison says that Stern's audience is broader than most people realize. "They're not just 18-year-old, beer-drinking yahoos. They're 20- and 30- and 40-something professionals. They're mainstream American citizens who are well-educated and affluent and socially active and politically interested, though not politically active. But they're being motivated. Wouldn't that be amazing if millions of people vote who otherwise wouldn't, because of this issue?"
"Some people will dismiss Stern not because they don't believe he has a following, but because they believe his listeners don't vote," Todd says. "I would argue that a swing voter is just that; they swing between not voting and voting, not between the two parties. So if he brings some nonvoters to the polls, then that's a big impact."
Over the years, Stern has occasionally taken political positions. In the 1994 New York gubernatorial election, he briefly ran as the Libertarian Party candidate, before withdrawing and endorsing Republican George Pataki. "One could argue that he had an effect on that New York governor's race, that he was an impact player," Todd
says. And until recently, Stern was supportive of Bush and the decision to go to war in Iraq. But Stern has never come out so relentlessly for or against a politician, and he is best known as someone who would just as soon joke about flatulence and prostitution as take on the government. His anti-Bush push began in earnest after the FCC crackdown on "indecency" inspired Clear Channel -- which he calls "Fear Channel" -- to remove his show from six cities the week of Feb. 23. While those markets form a relatively small portion of his audience, the punitive action threw Stern for a loop. And his outrage has boiled to a head with news that Congress is currently considering a radical increase in the amount of FCC indecency fines (from a maximum of $27,500 to $500,000).
"It's over," Stern said on the air Tuesday. "When the Senate passes that bill, it's over. The show is over. . . . We can't do a radio program that's cutting edge . . . if the government keeps second-guessing everything we do."
Stern is also maintaining that Clear Channel dropped him last month not because of indecency but because of some of his Bush criticism earlier in the year. "There's a real good argument to be made that I stopped backing Bush and that's when I got kicked off Clear Channel," he said on the air earlier this month.
"When he takes that FCC persecution mantle and wraps it around his political views," says Mark Walsh, CEO of Air America, "and when he implies that it wasn't until he started to criticize this president that he really started getting nailed for `immorality' and `obscenity,' he throws gasoline on the fire.
"If he says, `I'm being stifled because I have the temerity to challenge this president,' and `Remember a year and a half ago when entertainers were chastised for questioning the war and now I'm getting nailed for the same thing,' if he starts pounding that drum, I would contend that a significant portion of his listenership will take that as gospel truth."
"He is self-aggrandizing if he thinks he's being singled out here," says Jeffrey Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy, a Washington-based advocacy organization. "Congress is engaging in this kind of witch hunt generally. I don't think they're singling out Stern for his alleged critical comments against the Bush administration."
Whether or not he is being censored for putting down Bush, the First Amendment issues at stake in his case remain incendiary. How much is America willing to let politicians determine what is "decent" and "indecent"?
"It has been this bubbling issue that unites liberals and conservatives, this free speech stuff," says Todd. "And it could pop under the right circumstances. It probably needs a linchpin, the way gay marriage got its linchpin thanks to the mayor of San Francisco suddenly issuing marriage licenses. It will need a seminal moment. Is Stern getting thrown off the air that moment for this FCC issue? I don't know."
"I'm no fan of Howard Stern or Rush Limbaugh and what I think is the tabloid-esque domination of radio and a great deal of television," says Chester. "But Congress is stampeding to censor a whole range of speech." Chester says it is unclear whether Kerry will indeed be Stern's "savior," and that "what Stern really should be doing is trying to get Kerry to be public and accountable on this."
One thing does seem clear, however. If Stern loses this battle, his cause will take on added vigor. "Take Stern off the air because of the government?" says Harrison. "Take a guy that's a beloved icon and turn him into a beloved martyr."
Matthew Gilbert can be reached at gilbert@globe.com.
© Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.
By Matthew Gilbert, Globe Staff, 3/18/2004
American liberals have been waiting for a perch on talk radio, a medium dominated by conservative and right-wing voices since the 1980s. And on March 31, the new Air America Radio network will give them a nascent one, as it premieres in the New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago markets. Just as "The Daily Show" brings an openly lefty spin to TV news, Air America will fly in the face of the right wing with hosts including Al Franken, Janeane Garofalo, and Marty Kaplan.
ADVERTISEMENT
But wait a minute: Is "shock jock" Howard Stern -- stripper aficionado, champion of misfits everywhere, all-purpose radio provocateur -- already giving liberals a voice on the airwaves? And is that voice powerful enough to affect the upcoming presidential election?
Since the FCC crackdown on media "indecency" in the wake of Janet Jackson's Nipplegate incident, Stern has transformed his morning variety show into a rabidly anti-Bush talk forum. Every weekday, he has been devoting hours of his broadcast (locally on WBCN-FM, 104.1) to impassioned criticism of President Bush and support of Senator John Kerry. Railing tirelessly against the president, Stern has been attacking Bush's yoking together of church and state, the legitimacy of his National Guard service, his use of Sept. 11 imagery in his campaign ads, his stances regarding First Amendment rights, his handling of Iraq, and his stands on gay marriage and stem-cell research.
"Join me and friends of this show who are outraged," Stern said on the air last Friday. "Vote out every Republican you can find." He has also been urging his listeners to send money to Kerry's campaign, calling him "a good man" and praising his record in Vietnam as well as his later criticism of the Vietnam War.
"With all the talk of liberal talk radio," says Michael Harrison, the editor and publisher of Talkers magazine, "we're seeing emerging from the ranks of `shock jocks' one of the most potent and articulate liberal talkers we've seen in years."
Harrison calls Stern's's recent crusade "historic." "Anytime you have somebody suddenly igniting political interest with an audience who has the kind of loyalty factor Stern has, it could turn an election." A large percentage of Stern's listeners -- some 8 1/2 million a week -- were leaning in favor of Bush, Harrison says. "If Stern could turn several million Bush supporters away from Bush, that has even more impact than Rush Limbaugh, who's preaching to the choir. So this is pivotal to what is shaping up to be a close election."
"On a national level, I don't know how much influence Stern could have," says Chuck Todd, editor of The Hotline, a Washington-based daily briefing on politics. "But we assume too little at our own peril when it comes to Stern and talk radio in general. . . . Does Bush really need to worry about him? If New York were a swing state, we definitely would take this more seriously. Is Stern's popularity as devoted outside of New York? We only know it is ratings-wise."
Stern is frequently dismissed, by liberals and conservatives alike, as a sexist, a racist, and a narcissist. But he is one of the most influential entertainers in America, particularly among the much-sought-after 18-to-25-year-old male demographic. His show is a critical stop for actors plugging youth-market movies, and his skits serve as the blueprint for many reality TV concepts. Last month, in an effort to borrow some of Stern's mojo, Jay Leno hired Stern sidekick "Stuttering John" Melendez to be an announcer and correspondent on "The Tonight Show."
Harrison says that Stern's audience is broader than most people realize. "They're not just 18-year-old, beer-drinking yahoos. They're 20- and 30- and 40-something professionals. They're mainstream American citizens who are well-educated and affluent and socially active and politically interested, though not politically active. But they're being motivated. Wouldn't that be amazing if millions of people vote who otherwise wouldn't, because of this issue?"
"Some people will dismiss Stern not because they don't believe he has a following, but because they believe his listeners don't vote," Todd says. "I would argue that a swing voter is just that; they swing between not voting and voting, not between the two parties. So if he brings some nonvoters to the polls, then that's a big impact."
Over the years, Stern has occasionally taken political positions. In the 1994 New York gubernatorial election, he briefly ran as the Libertarian Party candidate, before withdrawing and endorsing Republican George Pataki. "One could argue that he had an effect on that New York governor's race, that he was an impact player," Todd
says. And until recently, Stern was supportive of Bush and the decision to go to war in Iraq. But Stern has never come out so relentlessly for or against a politician, and he is best known as someone who would just as soon joke about flatulence and prostitution as take on the government. His anti-Bush push began in earnest after the FCC crackdown on "indecency" inspired Clear Channel -- which he calls "Fear Channel" -- to remove his show from six cities the week of Feb. 23. While those markets form a relatively small portion of his audience, the punitive action threw Stern for a loop. And his outrage has boiled to a head with news that Congress is currently considering a radical increase in the amount of FCC indecency fines (from a maximum of $27,500 to $500,000).
"It's over," Stern said on the air Tuesday. "When the Senate passes that bill, it's over. The show is over. . . . We can't do a radio program that's cutting edge . . . if the government keeps second-guessing everything we do."
Stern is also maintaining that Clear Channel dropped him last month not because of indecency but because of some of his Bush criticism earlier in the year. "There's a real good argument to be made that I stopped backing Bush and that's when I got kicked off Clear Channel," he said on the air earlier this month.
"When he takes that FCC persecution mantle and wraps it around his political views," says Mark Walsh, CEO of Air America, "and when he implies that it wasn't until he started to criticize this president that he really started getting nailed for `immorality' and `obscenity,' he throws gasoline on the fire.
"If he says, `I'm being stifled because I have the temerity to challenge this president,' and `Remember a year and a half ago when entertainers were chastised for questioning the war and now I'm getting nailed for the same thing,' if he starts pounding that drum, I would contend that a significant portion of his listenership will take that as gospel truth."
"He is self-aggrandizing if he thinks he's being singled out here," says Jeffrey Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy, a Washington-based advocacy organization. "Congress is engaging in this kind of witch hunt generally. I don't think they're singling out Stern for his alleged critical comments against the Bush administration."
Whether or not he is being censored for putting down Bush, the First Amendment issues at stake in his case remain incendiary. How much is America willing to let politicians determine what is "decent" and "indecent"?
"It has been this bubbling issue that unites liberals and conservatives, this free speech stuff," says Todd. "And it could pop under the right circumstances. It probably needs a linchpin, the way gay marriage got its linchpin thanks to the mayor of San Francisco suddenly issuing marriage licenses. It will need a seminal moment. Is Stern getting thrown off the air that moment for this FCC issue? I don't know."
"I'm no fan of Howard Stern or Rush Limbaugh and what I think is the tabloid-esque domination of radio and a great deal of television," says Chester. "But Congress is stampeding to censor a whole range of speech." Chester says it is unclear whether Kerry will indeed be Stern's "savior," and that "what Stern really should be doing is trying to get Kerry to be public and accountable on this."
One thing does seem clear, however. If Stern loses this battle, his cause will take on added vigor. "Take Stern off the air because of the government?" says Harrison. "Take a guy that's a beloved icon and turn him into a beloved martyr."
Matthew Gilbert can be reached at gilbert@globe.com.
© Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.
Comment