Howard Stern: King of the future

Will Howard Stern's rebirth on satellite radio eventually represent a pivotal shift in societal limits on censorship? The pervasiveness of material that historically has been deemed objectionable has proved almost impossible to avoid in an increasingly digitized world. Already, some studies claim that exposure to readily accessible online pornography has fundamentally altered youths' attitudes toward sexual behavior.

Willing or otherwise, society may be destined to confront a far wider spectrum of "acceptable" content in the early 21st century, whatever the definition. Mass media have always confronted watershed issues involving decency, of course, with defining moments in the last century ranging from the 1930 Hays Code on moral standards in film to the Supreme Court's decision over comedian George Carlin's "Filty Words" broadcast in 1978.

The evolution of radio may just be the beginning; television could be next, as that industry moves increasingly to personal programming. As cable TV service becomes ubiquitous, its once-risque shows have become virtually indistinguishable from publicly broadcast counterparts. The resulting gap between reality and today's television is analogous to the days when Hollywood was creating a genre of "Brady Bunch" shows while the Vietnam War and civil rights protests were changing the public's collective consciousness.

So perhaps Stern, representing the media-saturated MySpace generation of the millennium, will play a larger role in shaping new standards for a world where almost nothing is off limits--for better or for worse.

Blog community response:

"Our government continues to violate the broadcast industry's First Amendment rights by regulating everything from political discourse to programming content--driving an increasing number of viewers to competing platforms and chilling political coverage in the broadcast media. What's wrong with this picture?"
--Spieckerman Speaks

"The fact that this kind of irreverent and always hilarious programming could even make it out there is legend making in itself; but Howard also, despite wanting to say 'bleep you' as much as anything, didn??t do it just to advance free speech. No, his primary motivation was creative license, and that is equally legend making. Freedom to create without boundaries or medieval censorship is Howard's raison d??etre, and he has more than survived all the less talented people who tried to limit or suppress what he was trying to accomplish."
--Victor Lana

"In the U.S., our Constitution was framed around the idea that any speech, no matter how tasteless or offensive, is protected. So, while he is a crude, inhuman schmuck, Howard Stern's defection to Sirrius is the first battle lost in a huge war for all of our minds...history will remember. Ironic that it has to remember such a talentless hack."
--The State of the Union

"Sometimes art flourishes under limitations. Seeing someone push the envelope can be a lot of the fun. The limitation isn't necessarily censorship or a network's standards and practices department" It can also be the number of tracks available to a recording artist, the quality or availability of an instrument, etc."
--klausboop