Don Imus gets fired for calling the Rutgers women’s basketball team “nappy headed hos” but XM radio shock jocks Opie and Anthony continue filling the airwaves with even worse garbage and getting away with it.
Click here to listen.
(Warning: Very vulgar language used.)
Would Opie and Anthony and “Homeless Charlie” think it was hilarious if some guy overpowered and raped them? Would they be laughing if someone were talking about doing that to their mothers or sisters or wives? Could these jack asses possibly stoop any lower?
Here’s a good roundup of some of Opie and Anthony’s other stupid stunts.
Just to clarify, my point isn’t that “they should be fired because Imus” was but instead why the selective outrage. What do you think is worse? Imus’ comments? Or the comments made by “Homeless Charlie”, and laughed at by Opie and Anthony?
Update: Oh, and the First Lady was ‘jokingly’ referenced as a potential by “Homeless Charlie”, too.
opie and anthony, howard stern, they are all overpaid and all pretty disgusting. i guess that’s why they went to satelite radio, so they don’t have to worry about decency on the air. i think it’s time someone monitored satelite radio. who made the rules where satelite gets a free pass on decency?
Comment by G-Monster @ 5/10/2007 - 8:21 pm
Satellite and cable get a pass because they are not broadcast over the open air for anyone to receive. You need decoding equipment and a subscription, which puts them in a different place legally as opposed to things anyone with a receiver can hear and see. Also the government ownership of the airwaves/frequency bands is not the same. Which is fine with me, I like some things that are edgier than should be openly broadcast, and I can get them this way. Not Opie and Howard Stern type obscenity, but darker, more “mature” fiction, not happy ending type stuff.
Comment by Severian @ 5/10/2007 - 8:36 pm
I know we don’t want to censur things but talking about raping our First Lady and Secretary of State should NOT be allowed, sat radio or not.
lets.
These guys a left wing gross outs.
Comment by Drewsmom @ 5/10/2007 - 10:04 pm
Actually, Anthony is a Republican. Big 2nd Amendment guy, too.
Comment by Dale Franks @ 5/11/2007 - 12:19 am
I saw that the Pharisee Sharpton was going to debate Imus’s producer on H&C tomorrow night. That should be interesting.
As for Opus and Asinine, feh, don’t care either way. Same goes for Howie…
Comment by Vegas Art Guy @ 5/11/2007 - 12:28 am
I hate to say, but I think the government should step in on satelite radio, and police it. It’s obvious they think they have a free pass to do and say whatever they want.
Comment by G-Monster @ 5/11/2007 - 12:58 am
I wish that people could choose not to have him in their subscription on satellite radio. That would be better than MORE government regulation… ick!
Comment by Vegas Art Guy @ 5/11/2007 - 1:08 am
Dale, I doubt the hell out of your statement that anthony is a Republican, show us his registration card.
How many conservative talk show guys discuss this, not Rush, Hannity, or anyone I know. Just cuz he’s for our 2nd amendment doesn’t make him a Republican.
I agree with the above poster who said Sat radio should be held in a little check from the feds. You can be funny as hell without talking about holding a woman down and raping here and asking folks to imagine it.
Also, I have listened to them on occasion and have heard them BOTH bash the President so as I said, whip out that registration card my friend.
Comment by Drewsmom @ 5/11/2007 - 5:59 am
Drewsmom, if you to listened to O&A you would know Anthony is a conservative guy, a little twisted, but still a conservative. I’m glad they’re not on free radio with uncensored material. They would go way overboard. But since we pay for their humor I see nothing wrong with what they do. It is easy enough to turn them off if they offend me. Which I do sometimes. I heard the Rice comments by Charlie, it didn’t seem like they would get O&A in trouble. But we are a nation of thin-skinned cry-babies.
Comment by Lakedog @ 5/11/2007 - 9:54 am
They are on a paid service leave them alone. Just like HBO and Showtime, you are allowed to say what you want. They are an XL channel that can be blocked at any time. I say everyone has to grow up, you are allowed to say whatever you want whenever you want. If you don’t want to listen change the channel. They have a job and an audience, if you aren’t part of it go somewhere else. Why is everyone so upset about what everyone else is doing?
Comment by Nick @ 5/11/2007 - 10:10 am
Drewsmom, you cannot be serious, “show us his registration card?” First off, Hillary Clinton could register with the GOP and get a card; just a card means nothing. Listen to an entire O&A show just one or two days a week and you will realize where their values lie by their views on issues other than just gun control. And since when does bashing the president prohibit you from being a republican? The ability to criticize our leadership with out the threat of losing one’s livelihood, property, or life is our most important right as Americans. And the ability to criticize leaders and hold open discourse without being labeled by others who only sporadically engage in said discourse is our right as civilized humans.
Vegas Art Guy, I don’t know about Howie and Sirius, but O&A are on what is called an ‘XL Channel’ which can be blocked by an attentive parent or sensitive listener. In my opinion, this is as far as the government should ever be allowed to go in censoring broadcasts on a private subscription satellite service. Anything more is un-constitutional.
Comment by an actual listener @ 5/11/2007 - 11:00 am
Why would you seek out something that is offensive (even get a warning) then surprisingly you are offended? Then after that you want no one else to hear something you sought out. It’s the most ridiculous argument i’ve ever heard. What you feel emotionally has consequences beyond just one situation. You aren’t a customer, you have no interest in this at all.
Comment by Eric Brown @ 5/11/2007 - 1:50 pm
Re: Drewsmom
Anthony is very much a republican. Look it doesn’t even matter, it’s not a liberal/republican thing. You cannot bash the president and still be republican. That’s silly.
Comment by Eric Brown @ 5/11/2007 - 1:54 pm
To the O&A listeners who are visiting and making note of the fact that “you pay to listen to them, so if you don’t want to hear it don’t pay” are missing the point. Bill Maher is on HBO, which is a an extra channel you have to pay for and that’s never stopped one conservative from complaining about his crap. Having to “pay” to listen to someone doesn’t mean that person is beyond criticism from people who don’t pay to listen to them. You don’t have to see a rotten egg to know that it stinks.
Comment by Sister Toldjah @ 5/11/2007 - 2:40 pm
Yeah, I don’t know where all this “constitutional rights” stuff came up. I don’t recall anyone saying they should be banned or censored. Why is it that they are allowed to talk about sexually assaulting Condi Rice, but we’re not allowed to criticize them?
Why, that sounds like CENSORSHIP!!!!!!!!!
You certainly are allowed to say whatever you want, whenever you want. However, if I were to ,say, give the eulogy at your mother’s funeral and talked about what a whore she was, would you be offended? Or is it my right to say whatever I want? See the point.
Comment by NC Cop @ 5/11/2007 - 3:09 pm
Excellent points NC Cop. Having a right to do something doesn’t make it right to do it. I have a right to fart in an elevator full of people, doesn’t mean it’s a good thing to do. It’s called comporting yourself like a lady or gentleman, not a gutter tramp.
More and more in life I realize that my Mother was right, most people are just not raised right, and it not only shows but creates problems for everyone.
Comment by Severian @ 5/11/2007 - 3:17 pm
the fact that some radio hosts are getting rich saying disgusting things says something about the people that employ them. whether it be the station or the listeners.
i would never be stupid enough to pay for satelite radio when there are many free radio stations out there that are just fine. you never hear ryan seacrest saying anything disgusting.
if you are the type of person that gets there jolies listening to opie and andy or howard stern, and are willing to pay for it, you’ve got problems.
also, i used to pay for hbo, and had no problem with that, due to the fact that they brought great content to my television screen. when they gave bill maher a show, i cancelled my subscription.
Comment by G-Monster @ 5/11/2007 - 3:54 pm
I subscribe to Sirius, and it is a true blessing. I don’t listen to shock jocks, to me a person is not clever, witty, or funny just because they say insensitive or shocking things. That’s a poor excuse for wit and real humor, Bob Hope and the Marx Brothers managed to be hysterically funny without resorting to obscenity, shock jocks don’t impress me.
However, commercial free radio with channels tuned to different types of music to suit my mood makes for far better driving on trips and my daily commute. I like it better than using my iPod, as I can get surprises, if I want classic jazz or blues for example, I can select the appropriate station and get a good selection of music that I’d probably not think to program on a playlist. Works for me anyway.
Comment by Severian @ 5/11/2007 - 3:58 pm
But I do agree with you G-Monster, the fact that these shlock jocks get rich says something disturbing about our modern culture.
Comment by Severian @ 5/11/2007 - 4:00 pm
Where does the line get drawn?
Do you draw it at swearing and nudity - obviously not if you have seen Stern’s show.
Do you draw it at fatasizing and describing over the Satellite radio about brutaly beating and raping a black woman (Condi Rice) and the First Lady of President of the United States?
Where is Al Sharpton and the other black community leaders denouncing this and boycotting this? Nappy headed ho gets a white man fired, but because this is satellite it is alright to talk about beating and raping a woman, whether she is black or white?
Where is NOW (National Organization of Women)?
What is next? Talking about Pedophilia and what they want to do with little boys or girls?
How about Beastality? What they want to do with your cat, dog, horse …whatever.
Where do you draw the line?
Just because it is Satellite radio, does it truly give them the right to talk and say anything they want?
Then perhaps what is needed is to contact their sponsors - without Sponsors they will soon disappear - just as it happened with Imus.
We as a society need to take control of what we want as public decency.
What do you think should or shouldn’t be allowed on a paid service? Do you think anything should go just because it’s a paid service?
Comment by sanity @ 5/11/2007 - 4:18 pm
Just because it is Satellite radio, does it truly give them the right to talk and say anything they want?
Then perhaps what is needed is to contact their sponsors - without Sponsors they will soon disappear - just as it happened with Imus.
We as a society need to take control of what we want as public decency.
What do you think should or shouldn’t be allowed on a paid service? Do you think anything should go just because it’s a paid service?
Basically, yes, I don’t want the government censoring things on subscription services. That opens the door to liberals censoring conservative opinions, kill Fox news perhaps? They’d like to. Be very very careful when you give government power, they may use it in ways you never imagined and never would approve of.
But I also fully understand your frustration with the enormously lopsided response to such things, how the liberals get away with assaults on common decency but raise a hue and cry over far less when done by conservatives. It stinks, it ain’t fair by any stretch of the imagination, but I don’t want the government to step in. However, making your opinions known to the financial sponsors of these types of shows is fair game to me, that’s an aspect of the free market. It’s then up to the advertisers and money people to decide whether the audience for such filth is sufficient to compensate for the bad publicity and loss of business from people who are offended.
Comment by Severian @ 5/11/2007 - 4:27 pm
Some things done on normal airwaves:
* WKQX in Chicago was fined $7,000 after offering a reward for killing a pedophile.
* WNEX in New York was fined $21,000 for a segment of the “Opie and Anthony” show in which a 17-year-old caller was asked to perform lewd acts.
* KNDD in Seattle was fined $14,000 for a discussion of whether penises can lift heavy objects.
* KEGL in Fort Worth was fined $14,000 for explicit discussion of bisexuality and masturbation.
So Severian, you have no problem if, just because it is on satellite radio, that they can have explicit and graphical discussions of brutal raping of women, pedophilia…
How about terrorism radio? We can have Jihad radio with graphical descriptions of what it was like when they saw through an american soldiers neck chopping of his head….
Perhaps that is already on the dial - but the question is, do we have any control over the content of those who use the United States as their base of operation, but use the satellite to say and do whatever they want?
Where is the line drawn?
I am not talking about acting like China - but if a business is operating out of the US and using Satellite, do they not have a responsibility to keep it from escalting to what could lead to advocating brutal rapes of women over the satellite?
As people listen to it, and things escalate form brutal rapes of women, to say killing a pedophile (see above) - what happens when someone actually does what they talk about on satellite radio? When they make crimes like this seem grandiose and so great to be able to see the expression on a woman’s face as you brutally beat her and rape her…
I don’t know Sev - I realize we don’t want censorship or our ideas and thoughts, but just because it is satellite radio, or a paid TV service, should that give them the right to really seem to advocate doing such things?
Comment by sanity @ 5/11/2007 - 4:44 pm
Re: Sister Toldjah
It’s not that I think you can’t or shouldn’t be offended, and I don’t know if you are a republican or liberal. I guess i’m conservative if I had to choose, hopefully i get points for that. My only point is that it’s safely on a platform away from you. You actively have to seek it out to be offended by this speech. In condemning it you have take responsibility that you agreed to hear it.
As to the selective outrage, Imus’comment was much lighter, but much more racially charged. It shows the priority of America pure and simple. An old white man using a word that turned into a slur about young black women was a fatal sin in the eyes of the media. This lacks the power of that perceived racial slur.
Comment by Eric Brown @ 5/11/2007 - 5:21 pm
Noted - but racial slurs are not enactments of a crime.
Free speech does not or should not extend to advocating criminal behaviour.
Now the argument can be made whether explicit description and such as they were doing advocates such behaviour.
Same as with rap artists that in their ‘music’ talk about killing cops and slapping around their hos..ect
You take responsibility by BUYING such garbage - so should not the same arguement apply then?
If Al Sharpton is so fired up about lyrics and such that you have to pay to buy pay to buy or pay to go see them in concert - does not the same apply to those you would have to pay to listen to on satellite?
Seems a double standard if not.
Comment by sanity @ 5/11/2007 - 6:04 pm
Where is the line drawn?
Where indeed? Once you decide to start allowing the government to draw these lines, don’t be surprised if you wind up not liking where they get drawn.
If you want my honest opinion, I find all of the above deplorable. But, again, the 1st Amendment specifically states that the government cannot censor speech, and the courts have held that they can’t unless it’s pretty narrowly defined, the “yelling fire in a crowded theater” argument. Some of what you mention would, IMO, fall under that guise, as in incitement of people to perform dangerous or lawless acts, and those should be properly dealt with via the courts. But they have to be pretty extreme cases, the overall value of the 1st is in not establishing a precedent to allow government to censor, and it does have downsides but I believe the benefits are worth it. I’m not completely sure that the FCC’s rationale for censoring broadcast radio and television is completely in accordance with the 1st.
The 2nd Amendment also allows some nut cases and unstable people to get weapons, but I’m not willing to sacrifice that freedom and right in order to attempt to reign in the bad apples, as I know the benefits of allowing the average citizen to arm themselves, both for fighting crime and self defense as well as for resistance to government oppression, outweigh the damage by a large degree.
All of our “rights” have dark sides when abused, but I think you have to be very very cautious about restricting them. The problem is we have a society that tolerates this, and how to solve that is more difficult. Trying to squelch the speech itself, at least by using the power of government, is putting a bandaid on an arterial wound, it doesn’t really address the problem, just the symptom. How you really solve the problem is a whole different can of worms.
Comment by Severian @ 5/11/2007 - 6:05 pm
Severian, while our tastes in talk radio entertainment differ, I appreciate your rationality on censorship and letting the marketplace dictate business, not the government.
The above example from NC Cop of ‘a eulogy at your mother’s funeral’ doesn’t fit this scenario. The point that some seem to be being missing is that when we talk about O&A and the like, we are talking about entertainers on a controlled medium. Entertainers who are obviously open to criticism, but not censorship. They are not elected officials responsible to a constituency and influencing policy, they are entertainers, entertainers who are very open and honest about the fact that what they say is comedy. Should they be allowed to say ANYTHING? No. But at present they do not incite, encourage or seriously contribute to any dangerous activity. Offensive, yes. But truly dangerous or lastingly harmful, no. And believe it or not, they are on the air because many people think they are funny.
FM radio has been cleaned up alot in the last few years and I think that, while mixed, it has done more good than harm. However, the notion that this style of entertainment should not exist at all is absurd. Where to draw the line? When talking about taste in entertainment you are touching on a uniquely personal gauge that is different for everyone. That is like some one saying, “I don’t prefer poultry, so restaurants may no longer serve chicken.” This idea that these forms of entertainment are destroying our culture is backwards. Our culture produces this form of entertainment. They are a product, not a cause. Besides, I am an avid listener who happens to lead a respectable, decent life and can take a joke and can recognize the difference between entertainment and reality.
Comment by an actual listener @ 5/11/2007 - 6:47 pm
You could start by cancelling your subscription to satelite radio as I cancelled my hbo. Maybe you could use your cd player? If everyone cancelled their subscription there would be no market for satelite.
I do like you sev, but you asked for a solution, and I think by not sponsoring satelite radio, you would be doing your part to let them know you are not going to pay for trash.
Comment by G-Monster @ 5/11/2007 - 7:17 pm
I don’t find the issue worth canceling satellite radio over, as I don’t listen to those channels. The downside is not sufficient to offset the benefits I get from it. If you feel differently, you are perfectly and reasonably allowed to not subscribe. I loathe Bill Maher, and don’t watch his drivel, but I do have HBO HD so I could watch things like Rome and Elizabeth I.
I find this all reprehensible, but you’re still swatting at symptoms. I suspect the degradation of ethics and morality are a deeper issue relating to the disintegration of the family, liberal ideology seeping into schools and parenting, etc. Those social issues run a lot deeper than what HBO or XM Radio do or do not allow on the air.
Comment by Severian @ 5/11/2007 - 7:46 pm
well government may not censor free speech - but xm and sirius are trying to get FCC approval for a merger at this time - and talk of brutally raping the Secretary of State and the First Lady probably will not endear the Govenment to like them much at this time…..
If the Govenment wanted they could easily squash this merger for any number of reasons but could be in retribution for comments like this also.
Comment by sanity @ 5/11/2007 - 9:09 pm
I have the greatest respect for Condi and while she doesn’t deserve to be talked about like this, I think she can take it. People need to lighten up and either laugh it off, or even better yet don’t listen.
There is obviously a witch hunt going on by people who are easily offended. Who says that anyone has a right to not be offended? O & A are not for most people, so listen to something else.
Comment by Erik Hellmans @ 5/11/2007 - 9:13 pm
A few general comments to some of the newbies who are treating me like I’m going on a witchhunt on O&A:
1) Please read what I said - again. I clearly stated that I wasn’t advocating O&A be fired, but I was offended by what was said/done/laughed at.
2) It has nothing to do with being “PC” (yes, believe it or not, being upset with someone over them joking about rape is not being “PC” anymore than it is PC for someone to be upset with another person for ‘joking’ about assisinating the President - like Randi Rhodes did).
3) To the person who said I have to “seek out” O&A in order to get offended, I don’t think so. I didn’t have to do anything other than visit Drudge and the link was there. Shock jocks like O&A say and do stuff like the Condi crap in order to get attention and sure enough, that’s what happened here. Bill Maher is on HBO, a pay cable channel, and we hear and rant about his BS all the time, so the argument about ‘if you don’t want to hear it, don’t pay to do so’ really doesn’t wash.
4) Another assumption/strawman that has been implied in this thread is that the people are offended by this ‘obviously’ don’t have a sense of humor. That’s a load. I used to watch some of the Howard Stern shows they’d play on the E! channel. Some of it offended me, while other bits I laughed til my stomach hurt. I used to watch Beavis and Butthead, which a lot of people I know thought was an offensive show. I have the first season on VHS. So, yes, I do have a sense of humor, and laugh at things others probably would not laugh at, but I don’t think joking about raping someone is funny - again, no more ‘funny’ than some crack a person makes about assassinating the President. And some of the comments I’ve read at other blogs make me believe there is a little selective condemnation going on here, because some of the same people defending O&A slam Bill Maher up one side and down the other. It’s odd how the ‘pay to see’ arguments don’t come up in those threads.
5) I think it’s a sad commentary on society when people automatically assume that when someone complains about something someone else said, that that person wants the ‘offender’ fired or banned, etc. Also, when did it become wrong to complain about things said on the airwaves? I complained about the overtly liberal nature of the TV show “Boston Legal” a few months ago, and I didn’t see anyone telling me that if I don’t like it don’t watch.
6) As I said in a comment at Hot Air, if you’re merely defending someone’s right to say somthing stupid, I’m with you. But if you’re holding up O&A as the standard bearers for humor, and think that being offended by their ‘jokes’ means other people don’t have a sense of humor, then you’ve lost me.
7) I have just as much right to complain about O&A as they do to make their little ‘jokes.’ If this country is free enough that they should be able to say what they want on XM radio, then I’m free enough to complain about something controversial they said/did that made national headlines.
Comment by Sister Toldjah @ 5/11/2007 - 10:12 pm
PS: I’m totally with Sev on the cultural issue comments. I haven’t even gotten into that part of the argument, because I seriously doubt anyone wants to hear/read that long-winded rant by yours truly
Comment by Sister Toldjah @ 5/11/2007 - 10:19 pm
You make a good point sanity, about the merger. This was incredibly ill timed and stupid, if you’re about to ask your dad for a favor, it’s a bad time to lip off to him first.
ST’s point is also very well said, the freedom to be upset about it and complain is part of the same coin that O&A and their supporters use to rationalize the filth they spew. Double edged sword and all that.
And here I may actually shock some people, but putting on my infowar hat from a past life, if people like O&A and Rosie and Cindy Sheehan and all didn’t exist, I’d pay to create them. These are dangerous times, and we are involved in a desperate ideological struggle both on the world stage and here at home with our own domestic enemies. We can’t afford for our base to be lulled into complacency, the more shocking, distasteful, hateful, and radical filth and treasonous drivel is spewed by the left, the easier it is to rouse people of good character and morals, people who understand the stakes, into action. We on the right are often harder to get engaged than the left. For whatever reason, we have jobs, are engaged in work, and other pursuits, jokes about leftists living in their mom’s basements and not working, whatever, the right takes more to radicalize them into motion than the left, and we desperately need to be rallied. The result of our failure to support our cause is to terrible to contemplate.
Comment by Severian @ 5/11/2007 - 10:26 pm
The ick factor on what they said is off the charts, but I still don’t like more government interference. I did find out and got confirmed today that you can block those shows, which is a good thing. If we want them off the air then we don’t listen to them. But wow ST, you sure picked a good subject to talk about!
Comment by Vegas Art Guy @ 5/11/2007 - 10:44 pm
Should we ban every strip club and adult movie theatre, because lewd acts are offensive to some? What about gambling, should we ask the government to shut down all casinos because we think gambling is immoral????
The important thing to remember is that XM is a private service that broadcasts over private space that requires a specific XM receiver and a subscribtion plan to purchase it. People don’t complain when your cable company offers Adult movies, why? because you can choose not to order them. The 1st ammendment guarentees the right to free speech, with a few exceptions…none of which are extremely disguisting or offensive speech. If we start ignoring constitutional rights whenever we are offended, whats to stop our society from plummeting into a society where if enough people don’t like it, it becomes illegal. And if that happens, watch out, not everything you like may be accepted by the masses….next thing you won’t be able to swear on cable, then you won’t be allowed nudity on any premium channel, then they’ll go to the movies…no movies with excessive violence, no movies depicting sex, no adult movies, not even in stores…..
Now, I’m not defending what they said. It was reprehensible…As a historically famous person once said, and if I was smarter I’d know who said it, “I agree with what you say, but I’ll defend to my death your right to say it”
Comment by SomeCommonSensePlease @ 5/11/2007 - 11:11 pm
Well, that quote is supposed to say, “I don’t agree with what you say, but I’ll defend to my death your right to say it”
Comment by SomeCommonSensePlease @ 5/11/2007 - 11:12 pm
Once again it seems like the issue is clouded. I don’t believe anyone said that they should be banned or censored. The point is that these guys were making fun about a rape. To me, the person involved is irrelevant, but to joke about a rape period is disgusting. If you’ve ever dealt with a rape victim, you might be a little more sympathetic to what I’m talking about.
And it is that same constitutional right that allows them to spew this garbage, that gives me the right to say it is despicable and cowardly. I don’t expect, or want, them fired. Our point is that it is a sad commentary on our country today, nothing more.
Comment by NC Cop @ 5/12/2007 - 12:28 am
Sister Toldjah (ST): “Would Opie and Anthony and “Homeless Charlie” think it was hilarious if some guy overpowered and raped them?
No one raped anyone!
ST: “Would they be laughing if someone were talking about doing that to their mothers or sisters or wives?”
Probably not, but they wouldn’t try to get that person fired from their job.
I understand the problem people have with with this audio, but the people who PAY TO LISTEN to them don’t have a problem. The story about the “Shock Jocks” who said something shocking isn’t a surprising story.
Comment by Adam @ 5/12/2007 - 1:17 am
I give up.
It’s amazing how if you criticize someone, some people automatically assume you want them jailed, fired, or killed.
Comment by NC Cop @ 5/12/2007 - 8:43 pm
NC,
I’m in the group that wants them fired. Not saying you or ST are. But if they got fired, others would think twice about crossing the line of decency on the airwaves.
Comment by G-Monster @ 5/12/2007 - 9:00 pm
I just read where CBS canned a couple of DJ’s because of a crank call they made to a Chinese restaurant.
I just think that decency can’t be regulated by the government, nor should it. Unfortunately as a species, human beings seem to be gravitating more and more to the “If it feels good, it must be right” attitude, regardless of who it may hurt or offend.
As I said before, joking about a rape is despicable and they should be ashamed of themselves. I don’t think it has anything to do with being on public airwaves or not. If the same people had heard Imus’s comments on satellite radio, they would have made just as big of an issue out of it.
Comment by NC Cop @ 5/12/2007 - 9:16 pm
That wasn’t the infamous “Chickity China, the Chinese Chicken” one was it?
Comment by Severian @ 5/12/2007 - 9:22 pm
Maybe the most insulting event here is that the original “article” here states that O&A’s guest mentioned “RAPING” someone, and then they all laughed about it. That’s just not true and completely inaccurate and misleading reporting of the facts! The exact words were “can’t you just see Charlie holding the b**** down and f***ing her!?”, followed by a few other comments referring to “holding her down…”, but all in the context of ASKING her if he could do this. I find nearly all of O&A’s “humor” to be offensive and moronic, but what everyone is crying about is NOT apparently what they actually said (maybe implied, but no RAPE was ever mentioned, only a possible dominance in the sex act, not rape!) and the ONLY people that could hear this were subscribers to their particular range of no-holds-barred type of explicit radio. It’s like being upset at seeing a very explicit sex scene in an X-rated movie - where it is not only expected, but one would assume desired to experience!
So what are we going to move on to next - attacking old Richard Pryor records, and Lenny Bruce LPs, and Red Foxx, George Carlin, and Chech and Chong, and Eddie Griffin, and Chris Rock, and other media that is consumed almost exclusively by those who PAY to experience these people’s own particularly blue and explicit adult word play? The outrage should be in our loss of freedom!!!
Comment by FantasyArtMan @ 5/16/2007 - 4:14 pm
Why isn’t anyone concerned about this blatant censorship?
O&A were on XM Radio, a subscription service which people must pay to be a part of. The only people listening to that show were people who WANTED to.
When I turn on Comedy Central and see Chris Rock or Dave Chapell make fun of white men using nasty steretypes I get offended and I change the channel. Why cant you do the same? Should we make a big stink about those comics? Its a double standard
Comment by Chris @ 5/16/2007 - 7:44 pm
Everyone makes some very good points. Each person has the right to their opinion. I was married, I have two children. I have somewhat “old fashioned” morals. I have never done drugs and only drink like once or twice a year. I try real hard to be a good Dad to my kids. I listen to Opie and Anthony and think “most” things they say are funny. Sometimes I am horryfied and can not believe they said what they did. A few times I have even switched the station due to this. Overall I love the show they put out and will listen til they arent on the air anymore. Everyone has the right to be offended by what they said. Honestly I think them edging “Homeless Charlie” on was in VERY bad taste. Is it disgusting and offending what they were doing?? Sure was (To most people) but guess what, they as Americans have the right to express themselves as Entertainers and entertain their audience. Just like you have the right to disagree and be appaulled by what was said. They make ALOT of money due to the fact they have sponsors and costumers that want to hear them entertain us in these ways.
I dont want the Government to step in and regulate the Pay Satelite services (Of course things that would put us as Americans in harms way should be regulated). We give the government an Inch and they will take a Mile. What we need to do to fix many many many of the issues of this great United States is the following.
Make people realize they are responsible for every single action they make( I am so Gosh Darn tired of people blaming everyone else for thier problems instead of maning up for what they do)
Stop asking what the Government or others can do for you and start asking what the Hell you can do for yourself or others.
If a girl gets pregnant under the age of 18 then it is the parents responsibility to help their daughter to take care of that child. The man that helped to create the child definitely should be “partially” (as in 50%)responsible in helpin to support and take care of the child. IT TAKES TWO people to create a child NOT JUST ONE.
Welfare and other services of that type should be an “Emergency Help” for those that need it. Not a crutch people use to be freakin lazy.
Criminals clogging up our jails… This is a HUGE problem in our society. Give the criminals a punishment that is befitting to thier crime. If they savagely killed another person they need to Die. I know alot wont agre with what I just said and that is okay. I feel that if people started seeing that when you commit a crime like murder or any other brutal crime that ends anothers life, and what the consequences are for actions like that it wont definately make them think twice or possibly chose not to do it.
Sorry so long winded and also sorry a bit off topic. Agree with me or hate me it doesnt matter. I just though I would post that I am a super nice, loving and normal guy that enjoys hearing things on the radio that is explicit. Just because I hear it and enjoy it doesnt mean I would do anything they did or suggested.
John
Comment by John @ 5/17/2007 - 10:23 pm
“I give up.
It’s amazing how if you criticize someone, some people automatically assume you want them jailed, fired, or killed.” -NC Cop
You see, the problem is that nearly everytime you hear someone complaining they DO want the offending party fired, or jailed, or whatever. It’s getting frustrating that the shows that I like always have to watch their back, just in case someone wants to throw them off the air. I love O&A because they just don’t give a damn about the people who would normally try to censor you in the name of “PC” or “Decency”. I fucking tired of people interfering with what I like.
And I can’t stand the false outrage that I always hear in conjunction with these sorts of storys.
And in answer to one of the first questions you posed, If O&A got raped or had someone who was close to them raped how would they react. Well, they would a.) laugh about it and goof on themselves, and b.) unleash the Pest Army upon the unfortunate rapist. That’s what O&A would do.
Comment by Ickcatarzo @ 5/18/2007 - 2:37 am
Has anyone ever heard of FREEdom of speech?? The first amendment covers the right for anybody to SAY that they are going to do ANYTHING to ANYONE. As long as they don’t actually do it, who cares?? Besides, this is a radio station that you HAVE to PAY to recieve AND further more, there are restrictions so that parents can BLOCK their children from listening to it. Lighten up and get a friggin sense of humour America. You take yourselves too seriously. I like to believe that the founding fathers made it the First Amendment for a reason!!
Comment by Kristal @ 5/19/2007 - 4:48 pm
Kristal,
Free speech is not an absolute right. There are a variety of situations that demand a bit of restraint. The old “You can’t yell fire in a theater” comes to mind as an example. We certainly wouldn’t want a radical Muslim cleric using the radio to make suggestions about appropriate locations and times for jihad.
However, I have to confess that I am a bit torn on this one. I have no use for Opie and Anthony, and the fact that they, and some of their listeners, would find the discussion of raping ANY woman funny makes me shudder. They consider themselves on the cutting edge, but I have to wonder what edge they reference. Is joking about rape just good clean fun or does it provide incitement for some of their more feeble-minded and less restrained listeners? Does it diminish the seriousness of the real crime of sexual assault? I worry about the coarseness of our culture, especially with people like Opie and Anthony trying to keep themselves in the spotlight by pushing the bubble.
On the other hand, there is nothing illegal about what occurred on their show, and as such, the proper method to voice disapproval should have been to contact the XM network and any sponsors who may be involved. I am content to let the market drive the content on satellite radio, so long as the content does not cross over into the advocacy of violence, which in this case it nearly did. If allowing people who like the content of Opie and Anthony’s show, or Howard Stern’s show, to have access to a paid venue to listen to them means that other forms of speech are freer, I think it is an appropriate price to pay. As Severian said, if we allow these sophomoric morons to be censored, what is to stop an angry listener from insisting he or she is offended by conservative commentary, and demanding censorship of Limbaugh, Hannity, or Franken, for that matter?
Comment by Crabby @ 5/19/2007 - 7:54 pm
Crabby is absolutely correct, you are not allowed to say “anything.” Speech that can cause harm, such as actively inciting people to murder or break the law, and the classic “yelling fire in a theater” are quite rationally subject to restrictions. We don’t often restrict speech for good reason, but dangerous and harmful speech is not protected.
All of which overlooks the primary factor here, the 1st Amendment only specifies that the government cannot restrict your speech, it does not apply to private enterprises such as businesses. People so often fail to realize this. Your employer has an absolute right to control what you say and when and where you can say it. Imagine a kid at the local hamburger joint claiming his free speech “rights” were imposed upon because the manager doesn’t want him to say “would you like fries with that you mother F’er.” That’s patently ridiculous, the manager can and would fire his butt in a heartbeat, and it would not violate his rights at all, as the business is not government.
Don’t they teach civics and such in schools anymore?
Comment by Severian @ 5/19/2007 - 10:50 pm
To add, this entire mess is being handled in the way it needs to be, in the free market. People have expressed their opinions on O&A to both XM and the sponsors as to whether or not they want them banned/removed, and XM and the sponsors are sorting it out. It appears that XM jumped and banned them before waiting long enough to figure out what their market really wanted, as the sponsors are getting an ear full from people who wanted them to stay, and pulling out of XM. It’s a messy affair, but it’s exactly how it should be handled, XM and the sponsors are determining which action will PO the fewest of their customers and acting accordingly.
Comment by Severian @ 5/19/2007 - 10:54 pm
Kristal would flunk government 101 as she wrote, “Has anyone ever heard of FREEdom of speech?? The first amendment covers the right for anybody to SAY that they are going to do ANYTHING to ANYONE.”
Ignorance is bliss…. And you were free to be so.
Comment by Baklava @ 5/20/2007 - 2:00 am