What is Digg?119 Comments
- Moskie, on 10/11/2007, -6/+77***** like this pisses me off. Why do they have to apologize? I'm not a regular listener or anything, but I have a feeling I would have laughed at this bit. Is that so bad? So what if I think a homeless man banging Condi, or the First Lady, or the goddamn queen of England is funny, and so what if a radio show makes a joke about it.
Why can't people just leave well enough alone.... - floridiot2, on 10/11/2007, -12/+53Condoleeza Rice is a nappy headed hoe.
- NICU, on 10/11/2007, -4/+38I can see people being upset if this segment was re-broadcast over terrestrial radio, but trying to censor satellite radio is ridiculous. XM and Sirius both have parental controls so that's more than enough censorship.
- TACH08, on 10/11/2007, -2/+23Why is this even an issue? SatRadio does not fall under the FCC (and notice how the FCC did nothing to Imus or CBS for his comments).
The message sent is a seriously one.... even if the pubic pays for the content, it still can be censored... What's next, the 'comedy' channels on XM and SIRI... HBO and Showtime? PBS?
This is bad,.. I don't need a guy a like Drudge (who got this story up and running) dictating what I can see and hear... Like Drudge has a leg to stand on.... fcuking ponderous!!!
You Mom's Box was the closing line today... not a good sign... - commongiga, on 10/11/2007, -7/+23I've been a listener for about a year. O&A have said time and time again the best thing to do if you get in an Imus like situation is to apologize if you are forced to, and then just leave it alone. Let it fade away into sensationalized news oblivion. First of all, they didn't say anything, their homeless guest did. I guess you could argue they "silently endorsed" his opinion by not saying anything contrary to it.
Secondly, if you heard their apology it was almost word for word what the official XM apology was, and after Anthony read it you heard a lot of paper crinkling...implying that they were handed a statement and told "read it or be fired", and then went about their business. They alluded to the controversy, but never directly addressed it.
Opie and Anthony are doing the right thing, treating it as a non-issue because it was on XM.
This is a free speech issue. If you can't say what you want on satellite radio, we're not far in a society from not being able to say what we want period.
WE DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO NOT BE OFFENDED! - arthritisankle, on 10/11/2007, -10/+23I love O and A and only heard part of the show this morning, but I'm pretty sure that this is a gag. They were playing it really safe and apologizing for every joke, which is completely out of character. This is a gimmick.
- BonhamsGhost, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12Not a fan at all, but this is ridiculous. It wasn't on regular radio, it was on a PAY service. Dont' pay for it if it offends you. I bet they use this ***** to help block the merger.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -5/+16If they remove O&A, I remove my xm radio from my apartment and I will cancel.
- rmmatt01, on 10/11/2007, -3/+13While O&A often do raunchy and cringe humor like this, the vast majority of their show, believe it or not, is very thought-provoking and -dare I say, intelligent. Any one who has heard them speak on the Imus case, the VT shootings, or even during the days following 9/11 will testify to that. Sure they can be crude, but that's the style of their show as a whole and they shouldn't be solely judged on isolated sound-bytes like this.
- gopher043, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11Let's throw a couple of the Golden Girls into the mix and I am so there.
- TACH08, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10@NICU Being that XM replayed the 'bit/show', I don't think they had an issue with it. It wasn't until Drudge made an issue of it did it get legs.
Plus far worse has been heard on T-Radio...
Seriously, Gamers, Stern fan, etc.. beware! This will not stop here,.. time to draw the line in the sand... - dogstar0125, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Seriously, who doesn't have the hots for Queen Elizabeth? Wasn't George Bush making eyes at her the other day?
- viviwanu, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8The homeless sure knows how to flatter ***** women!
- thatsmyaibo, on 10/11/2007, -16/+23For those that listen to them, they were extremely pissed off at what happened to Imus. I'm sure it was in reaction to that.
And to ttntyler, I'm taking it you're one of those idiots that eat up all the ***** that spews from Howard Sterns mouth. I can't believe people still listen to that moron. - f7eleven, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so, too. ~Voltaire
please visit http://peopleagainstcensorship.org/ and help keep your favorite radio programs, artists and musicians uncensored. - zomgflamer, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11"Mr Blu... Mr. Blutarsky!!.. Zero Point Zero!"
- carve, on 10/11/2007, -9/+15Yeah- they shouldn't apologize. They can say whatever they want. If people don't like it, they won't listen. But people DO like it except for a vocal minority. They're called "shock jocks" because they are SUPPOSED to say things like this. I'd like to hear Tom Leykis's take on this.
- HackLawyer, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7You've completely distorted the issue! This wasn't about sex or rape or race. It was drudge finding a corresponding scenario to Imus and alleging hypocrisy on the part of supporters of political correctness to discredit it. Good job playing into his hands.
- WhateverMJ, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7This is a pathetic example of the media trying to ignite a situation that they can report on, and it's failing miserably (I'm happy to say).
This "report" first appeared on Drudge, I'm wondering where it came from, probably Mancow himself, since had so much intensity on Hannity and Colmes that night.
What they wanted to do was rile up a special interest group that would give them some good camera shots of people protesting and marching, so they can all shake their heads and roll their eyes at the horribleness of talk radio personalities.
What happened was Hannity & Colmes and Sheppard Smith made a morally courageous judgment on air to say "No, this happened on a private entertainment medium only available to the people who want to hear that type of comedy.", which is absolutely correct.
Not to mention all the deplorable spinjobs done by various "blogosphere" pseudo-journalists, going so far as to call the off-the-cuff spontaneous comments by a legitimate New York City homeless man a "rape skit", as if it were on the god damned schedule.
It seems as though the defense wall of the uncensored, unregulated XM content is holding, for NOW, but, even a foothold gained by these moralist, holier-than-thou, milquetoast kvetching nannies is UNACCEPTABLE.
www.peopleagainstcensorship.com
It's time there was an activist group FOR the right to enjoy offensive material and black comedy. - HackLawyer, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Please bury this! The Imus controversy gained steam partially because there was a slow news week. Continued media exposure can only serve to build momentum for the story. There was a very good reason that their show was as nonchalant as it was today. It serves O&A fans, Stern fans, gamers, fans of comedians and anyone else who appreciates media that avails itself of the First Amendment to not dignify the headline-grabbing hyper-reactionaries.
Remember, there's a potential that Imus would still be on the air today if the VT shooting had happened a week sooner. Instead, Imus played into his critics' hands by dignifying them. - Toddbrew1, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7I would'nt have apologized. They are Opie and Anthony and they are hired for being on the cutting edge of crudeness. It's what listeners want to hear. Shock jock radio on a subscription radio. I would cancel this ***** joke of a station. I would ***** Condoliza while eating the Queen and pooping on Laura Bush.
- treed, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6You're right and you're wrong.
The First Amendment is the guarantee that free speech will not be infringed by the government. I agree that when some company censors an employee, and the idiots start yelling "FIRST AMEDNMENT!!!11", it's pretty, well, idiotic.
However, there are folks who think that the right to free speech extends beyond government censorship. There exists the belief that we, as a society, should promote the ability to speak freely, whether or not the government is involved. How exactly that promotion is achieved is an occasional topic of debate.
So, in summary, first amendment issues can be free speech issues, but not all free speech issues are first amendment issues. (Also, the first amendment covers more than just free speech.) - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7How many times will I have to post this before people understand:
http://www.digg.com/world_news/Please_understand_what_Free_Speech_is_before_you_say_it_is_being_attacked
Your 1st amendment rights are not protected in a corporate environment. You cannot say whatever you want to while on the job and expect the government, or constitution for that matter, to back you up. You're on the company's dime, you'll do and say as the company says. Oh you can try to buck the system, but know that there is a consequence to every action you take. The consequence may be you losing your job or you being forced to apologize on the air. - trouble916, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Today's terrestrial show was awesome! A perfect example of the kind of boring, bland, acceptable content the nannies of this world want us to listen to.
The fact that no company is willing to back up their talent is despicable! - illb, on 10/11/2007, -18/+22tnttyler - Zero point zero was a lie. They actaully had a 1.8, up from a .06. Check the facts, not the Howie Math.
- frodsteamin2, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6please get gonorrhea and die
- BasharTegg, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5The 0.0 ratings for Las Vegas and one other market were in the latest monthly ratings (which don't get broadly released) rather than in the quarterlies, a fact that can be confirmed by listening to the call O and A made to Tim Sabien.
The name of the other market was stated incorrectly initially, which was what O and A were complaining about. - dvddesign, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4People don't listen to O&A for deep insightful commentary. That's what "This American Life" is for.
People listen to O&A/Howard/Imus for the shock value and color commentary.
Anyone can step back from their character role (these are characters after all) on a radio show and be serious for a few minutes.
Everyone should be aware of that... - frodsteamin2, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6in other not so odd news, you're not straight.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4How is this more offensive than Howard taking advantage of retards ad nauseum on terrestrial radio?
- PrometheuZ, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4He hit the nail on the head here too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClqfJp4WBBQ - stanleyford, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@Manhigh - "The government doesn't have the right to detain me without fair trial, neither do other private citizens/entities.
The same goes for speech IMHO."
No. Free speech is a liberty (which cannot be taken from you), not an entitlement (which must be provided to you). There's a difference: I can write a book about my crazy views on the world, and no one can stop me (because being able to speak is a liberty), but no one is obligated to publish that book either (because being able to speak is not an entitlement). What you are suggesting is that private entities have an obligation to publish speech, even if they disagree with it. Saying that one person is entitled to something (in this case, speech over satellite radio) at the expense of another person (in this case, the decision-makers who don't want that speech published) does not advance, but retards, the cause of freedom. - ScottoGato, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3In the words of Dave Chappelle, "do what you gotta do, son."
- stgeorge, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Actually, people only listen to O&A for Anthony's killer Dice impression.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -10/+13you are wrong... Howie Math Strikes Again. They never had a 0.0 and that is a FACT!
- ATHEISTinHELL, on 10/11/2007, -4/+7it's not rape. it's surprise sex
- mojo0510, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Ant says it all the time. You do have the right to say what you want in this country. You don't have the right to be not offended. Free speech comes at a price.
- dgh1973, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5I would bang them to, but I'm not homeless so I could afford to buy them dinner first.
- patsonrt1, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4@twinklyjesus
Shut your pie hole Missy. It is obvious companies are not standing by their talent. As soon as some group (and they are always non listeners) raises a ruckus the talent gets fired. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3People tend to paint Fox with a broad brush because of their top rating programs, but Shepard Smith is one of the best journalists on TV.
- cozinator, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Shepherd Smith hit the nail on the head:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jT_kX2Svow - gopher043, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4I think homeless people have more to worry about then who they want to *****. Like getting hit with a concrete block by a couple of 10 year olds.
- juicebag, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I hate when things like this, like the Imus thing, start as not mattering too much and then press covers it and it's a huge career-threatening issue.
- dn11, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3"i said something that made sense... i'm sorry about that slip up there, i don't know why i did that, it will never happen again"
- thatsmyaibo, on 10/11/2007, -6/+9I am not bragging about anything nor was it a comparison. But Howard was giving false information about O and A's ratings. I'm not here to announce my distaste for Howard Stern, I simply don't like the show enough to listen to it. But if people are going to give bad information because the heard it on his show, you bet I'm going to correct it. And you're attacking the wrong person. ttntyler is the one comparing and slamming. It just shows your 1-sidedness to you interests.
- ronaldinho, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I don't get it. We are talking about satellite radio! I'm not a radio listener, but I do know that first you have to pay for those things (so that eliminates quite a lot of listeners already). Second, there are no federal restrictions. So technically O&A can say whatever they want. Not to mention they already have parental control already! I think those barriers are good enough.
Is the content bad? Yeah, because I personally do NOT want to have sex with the First Lady, Rice, and the Queen, even if they pay me. Like everything else, there is the good and the bad. Free speech is no exception. On a sidenote, that homeless dude really have a royal taste when it comes to sex. - NextGenXbox, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4That bit was hilarious. That homeless guy is funny and the comments were only jokes.
I know O&A didn't want to apologize but were told by their superiors.... what with the whole Don Imus thing..... I don't blame them though, they want to keep their jobs. - rmmatt01, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I don't have a problem with people who don't like their humor and I don't want to sound like I'm only out to defend these guys, but you shouldn't single out radio for content that is on the same level as South Park or Chappelle (they've done thing a lot more vulgar). Why are radio shows treated so differently?
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3As much as you say you wouldn't have apologized. If you were actually in this situation, you would've likely apologized in order to keep your very high paying job.
I would have not wanted to either, but if I was being paid like that to run my mouth on the radio, I would've apologized too- who says the apology was sincere anyways... - Scyth3, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3@thatsmyaibo
Yeah, I'd be upset that I got publicly humiliated...but that 50 million dollar contract that followed his humiliation would be totally worth it. -
Show 51 - 100 of 118 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is