Talk:Howard Stern

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Howard Stern:

Areas to work on (and hopefully improve for GA status):

  • Make sure writing is clear and concise.
  • Add suitable, free to use images throughout the article. (See discussion topic below).
Priority 3
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Not intended to shock, just honest opinions: his have sex with a porn star contest??[edit]

While Howard Stern is frank about issues he discusses, one might question his claim that his goal is not to try to shock people.

Take for example the stunt where he arranged for several male listeners to compete for an opportunity to have sex with a pornstar who frequents his show. Hard to imagine that as a means for expressing honest opinion, much easier to understand that as a shock stunt.

Nothing against what he does -- sometimes its funny, but he should be honest about his intent, or else he's just like Fox News pretending to be fair and balanced when they're nothing of the sort. He does a lot of opinion. But he does a lot just to shock people. Why not just cop to it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:13, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Its rather than it's[edit]

Hello, I notice several instances of "it's" where "its" should be used. It's = it is and does not connote possession. A very common error. Can somebody correct these? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

It's as a possessive is very old English; modern preference is its possessive and it's as a contraction of it is as standard usage. Still, folks who read old authors pick up archaic usages and repeat them. Naaman Brown (talk) 15:04, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Career in other media[edit]

No mention of his PPV specials/tapes. Negligee and Underpants Party, U.S. Open Sores, Butt Bongo Fiesta and New Year's Rotten Eve.Satanico (talk) 06:32, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

They will be mentioned here as the article begins to develop, but there is a separate article for the PPV specials. Hopefully we can get this to a Good Article!( (talk) 03:22, 9 January 2010 (UTC))

Looking for the name of his sidekick at DC101[edit]

I think it was like Moondog or something like that. Not Robin Givens, but a different name, male. Had the impression that guy did not go with him to NYC and syndication.

The only sidekicks he had in DC were Robin Quivers and Fred Norris who was nicknamed "Earth Dog". MrBlondNYC (talk) 02:00, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Oh. Well how come they stopped calling him Earthdog? And how come you never heard him after Howard left DC? (talk) 18:27, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Fred has been on the show every single day to this day. You can click on his name, you know? "Earth Dog" was the radio nickname he gave himself. But because of his quirky personality they started calling him "Fred the Martian" and "Frightening Fred". MrBlondNYC (talk) 01:01, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
I think you guys mean Earth Dog Brent, who was with Howard and Robin at DC-101 for a short while, until Fred replaced him and became "Earth Dog Fred." Fred was given the name, and did not work on WCCC as Earth Dog.( (talk) 18:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC))
Don't forget there was also the Think Tank at Washington, with Steve Chaconas, who left the show in early 1986 due to commuting schedules. This was when Jackie began working full time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)


"In the 1990s show Animaniacs episode Morning Malaise, Yakko, Wakko, and Dot enter the studio of "Howie Tern," a clear parody of Howard Stern." If it's a clear parody, wouldn't that make it unneccesary to say "a clear parody." If it's clear (which I agree it is), then the name CLEARLY speaks for itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:20, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

if everything that is clearly something makes it unnecessary to say so why would the term even exist? in fact, why say anything for that matter. (talk) 02:32, 22 September 2009 (UTC)


That picture is not Howard Stern.—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:19, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Can anyone else verify if File:HowardSternJuly09.jpg is or is not Stern? I looked at recent images of him and it looks like similar face shape, it just looks like he is without makeup/hair products. I'm not a fan and don't keep up with him, so if anyone can verify it or not, that would be great. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talkcontrib) 01:03, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Okay, a new picture has been uploaded (well, from 2000). --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talkcontrib) 01:45, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
It takes someone who is a fan to know what someone looks like? it wasnt him, it didnt look anything like him. thanks for correcting it. (talk) 02:06, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

King of all the media?[edit]

Bit of a weird claim. If for instance, I don't know, Matt LeBlanc decided to call himself the greatest and most witty actor ever would that deserve such a prominant place in his Wikipedia page. Except perhaps Matt LeBlanc is actually famous worldwide, ask someone in India, Japan, South Africa, Norway, UK and if they are the right age they'd of heard of him. This guy is a virtual no-body in the UK, i'd never heard of him. Seems a weird claim that's all! Cls14 (talk) 00:41, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

"King of All Media" is not a claim. It is what Stern began to describe himself in the early 1990s following his success across the media. It is a play on words with the association of Michael Jackson and "The King of Pop", although Jackson himself didn't call himself that.( (talk) 03:23, 9 January 2010 (UTC))
Who is Matt Leblanc? Anyway USA newspapers and lots of other sources refer him as that too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:49, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Matt LeBlanc played Joey in Friends. Bad example, if you ask me!


This article states that in 2004, he signed a 5 year contract with Sirius. So is his contract now over or has he extended it? Is he retired? (talk) 03:22, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

The contract expires on 31 December, 2010. According to Mel Karmazin's recent interview on Charlie Rose, contract discussions have not begun yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LowSelfEstidle (talkcontribs) 16:02, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
His contract did not begin until 01 January, 2006. He did not go on the air until 09 January 2006. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:28, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the info, that explains a lot! (talk) 02:24, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

he did mock selena's death[edit]

previously the article mentioned that howard stern only criticized selena's music, not mocking her death itself. but he did mock her death by playing gunshots over her music. it's sourced —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dozenkeeeeeps (talkcontribs) 07:33, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Is Howard Stern a foot fetishist?[edit]

Cause that's what they're saying here. (talk) 20:02, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Unsourced and not notable for Howard's biography article. (LowSelfEstidle (talk) 01:02, 25 March 2010 (UTC))
But it is for the other article? (talk) 03:54, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Images for the article[edit]

What suitable images should be included (and are allowed) in the article? Any suggestions? LowSelfEstidle (talk) 22:15, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Public Parts[edit]

Besides, Good Morning Vietnam, in the taste of good broadcasting, Private Parts seems to be the most value for viewing dollars. Is bias ok? Also, taking a bow? Puns are fun, yet sex education should be poetic. Thanks, to Mr. Stern, for all the heart felt air time. Seminole film school *) (talk) 16:14, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Selena commment[edit]

"They have no depth." Stern's comments outraged and infuriated the Hispanic community across Texas. Stern received a huge backlash when he further mocked Selena's murder itself, by playing gunshots over her music.[97][98]"

This is incorrect as I was a listener at the time and as every listener knows Fred plays the sound effects, and Howard usually has no control over them. Sometimes he requests a certain sound effect, but when he does you can usually hear him request it, which he did not on that occasion. I know the sources say otherwise, but they're incorrect. Quadzilla99 (talk) 12:00, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for using the Discussion page! Yes this section needs some work, I will do it soon, unless someone does so otherwise. Indeed Fred did play the sound effect. (LowSelfEstidle (talk) 21:38, 24 August 2010 (UTC)).
It does need work but its way better than it was in the past. Whoever added all the references did a great job. Quadzilla99 (talk) 06:59, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
That would be me. Hopefully the article will reach GA status soon. I'm not the best at clear, consise writing but I could do with a few folks to help make it GA. Could you help? (LowSelfEstidle (talk) 20:51, 25 August 2010 (UTC)).

It should also be noted that it is often claimed that he apologized for this. He has never apologized. He made a statement in spanish that was not an apology. -K —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:07, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Cultural references section[edit]

I do not think we need this back in the article. No references and it could end up being a long, unreferenced list. (LowSelfEstidle (talk) 11:13, 16 September 2010 (UTC))

Those kind of sections are usually dumping grounds for trivia anyway. Quadzilla99 (talk) 07:40, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Pirate Parts[edit]

The monumental film debut of radio co-host, H. Stern, has been inspirational the world over. How can there be another disc jockey quite as honest and relate actual ethics to as wide an audience as Stern. Bow. Guinness book of World Records should have records of H. Stern's works. Is it possible to print facts on Wikipedia, even if they are not directly related to articles? Poseidon75.204.105.82 (talk) 12:32, 19 December 2010 (UTC)


In the categories bit at the end, it includes "American Actor-Politicians"... I don't see that mentioned anywhere in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:24, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Not sure, but was probably in light of his six-month campaign for Governor of New York in 1994? LowSelfEstidle (talk) 19:56, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Early life and education[edit]

Howard printed an early CV in Private Parts which I think we can use to add some nice details. For instance, it might be nice to mention that his major at BU was in Broadcasting and Film, and that he taught students basic electronics in preparation for their own FCC exams from Jan - May 1976. Also, I could provide some clarification on why a first class FCC license is better than the third class, which was the minimum requirement for disc jockeys to be on the air. Let me know what you think if any of this is worth adding/other suggestions. Cheers. LowSelfEstidle (talk) 19:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Cultural effect[edit]

The section I added this morning was reverted, wholesale and w/o explanation. This is not the way to get along with WP editors. The kind way to edit where you have an objection is to make your objections known and suggest changes be initiated. Persons feeling proprietary ownership of individual articles may wish to step back for better perspective.Hilarleo Hey,L.E.O. 23:51, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

See the above section on cultural references. AaronY (talk) 01:29, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello AaronY, and Thank you for offering what a less conscientious editor failed at- a kindness. However it should be quite clear with a dictionary that a discussion of "effect" is hardly equatable to any collection- or discussion- of "references"! What I have begun is a WP:Verifiable report on the demonstrably unique- i.e. WP:Notable effects of an established career.
Your reference "above" does make one fact-based [& evergreen] argument: that certain sections "often become lists.."- which is in context more a warning than anything. So-Did you even get a chance to see what I wrote? I have certainly not begun any "list"! I have presented my attempt at a comprehensive outline of what serious thinkers and data have said on-topic. And I will promise not to make a list; though of course references to such archives off-site are par.
I would like to add however, that, IMO, the article at present does evidence some effects of a perhaps over-cautious, conservative fear of ridicule and the "guilt by association" often noted by Stern himself within his listeners. And this deletion does tend to confirm my assessment of conservative trepidations here. Nevertheless, I'm just about the facts. After a career of 30-some years, those facts do add up to something more than the "Terrorist Threat Level" portrayed around Stern- the SOS heard in what are in effect the competing media- and their religions of American politics. So unless and until I get more substantial criticisms, I do intend to continue working on this section as intended- that is, unless this is a fan article controlled by close personal interests. But again, I do wish to thank you wholeheartedly for your kindness, and I do remain open to continued constructive contribution;-) Hilarleo Hey,L.E.O. 03:39, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

File:Howard 100.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

Icon Now Commons orange.svg An image used in this article, File:Howard 100.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 03:50, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Super 8[edit]

So, on August 7th, lots of media reported that Stern is linked to a pirated Super 8.[1][2][3] Maybe not noteworthy enough by itself to mention in the article, but it there are any follow-up articles about further developments regarding this, it might be interesting enough to add something about it to the article? -- (talk) 15:00, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Howard's act in America's Got Got Talent[edit]

Bold text — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:38, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Although claiming to be a fan of America's Got Talent for a big reason for joining the reality based show, the true reason is that Howard was hoping to reinvent himself primarily appealing to the mainstream public. After being told by his inner circle that anything he touches would not be only successful but hugely successful, The former king of all media was hoping the AGT gig would lead to new offers in TV , movies and commercial endorsements. Unfortunatly, although a interesting interviewer (when he's not over psychoanalyzing a guest or talking about a guest's private parts), Howard Stern's talent is very limited and not much above par compared to millions of others celebrity seeking attention whores. As such, the ratings of AGT, after Howard Stern's hiring have steadily declined, and he primarily failed in bringing in the 18-54 demographic, a primary reason for which he was hired. His goal of re-inventing himself as a public friendly figure has failed miserably as he alienated millions of former fans and failed to generate the new media opportunities that was his original goal. This has made his former fans and Howard himself extremely bitter. I imagine in 20 years his bitterness will likely result in the failure of his superficial marriage and in the total isolation and loneliness for himself ala Howard Hughes.

"Shock jock" image[edit]

It's really not discussed much at all in the article, other than the sentence in the lede and maybe one or two lines in the article proper. There should really be an "Image" section in the article, because Howard Stern is really well known for being crass, rude, ect. There's tons of news articles that have been written about it. Such as:

"Why rude and crude still sells" - Bangor Daily News
"Rude, crude Howard Stern won't behave" - Chicago Sun-Times
"Howard Stern: Master of the Crude, Rude, Outrageous" - The Virginia-Pilot

And that's just a taste there. SilverserenC 08:14, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


In 2012, he became a judge on the television talent show America's Got Talent, replacing Piers Morgan. Ratings for season 7 plummeted as a result.[2][3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:00, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

usable picture?[edit]

Can someone check if this is a wash? --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 16:10, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Seems legit to me, filed under CC-by-2.0.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 16:47, 13 November 2013 (UTC)


In May 2013, Stern bought a beachfront home in Palm Beach, Florida, for $52 million. The home contains 12.5 bathrooms and five bedrooms with over 19,000 square feet of living space.[132][159] — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:29, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

FCC Fines - Use of "Allegedly"[edit]

Is it really OK to add the word allegedly  to the sentence From 1990 to 2004, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has fined owners of radio stations that carried The Howard Stern Show a total of $2.5 million for allegedly indecent programming ? I'm not so sure.

Allegedly  seems to imply a lack of verifiable fact, doesn't it? We may personally feel that the fines were undeserving and that the FCC is wrong. The FCC, however, didn't fine Stern for being allegedly indecent;Didn't The FCC fined Stern because it judged him to be indecent according to the law (their standards), right? For this reason, I do not think the allegedly should be used here. Maybe ending the sentence with ... for programming it deemed to be indecent. would be a better way to hint that not everyone agrees with the FCC's definition of indecency. Thanks in advance. - Marchjuly (talk) 05:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

I, for one, agree with this change. Famartin (talk) 05:42, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply Famartin. Sorry, I'm not sure which change you're referring to. Are you in favor of using the word allegedly ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marchjuly (talkcontribs) 06:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
That's a better way of wording it. How about just "...for content it considered to be indecent."? Thank you for the suggestion! LowSelfEstidle (talk) 16:43, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the input LowSelfEstidle. Your're version is fine with me. The lead for FCC fines of The Howard Stern Show might be where "allegedly indecent" came from. I think your version would be an improvement there too. Would you like to edit it? - Marchjuly (talk) 00:14, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Pig Vomit vs Pig Virus[edit]

User:Marchjuly undid my changes referring to "Pig Vomit" versus the current and incorrect "Pig Virus" nickname that Stern gave to Kevin Metheny.

I see IMDB is not a good place to cite from. but perhaps some discussion or research should have been done rather than a blind undo. Jkister (talk) 09:31, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Chapter 6 in Private Parts, copyright 1993, is named "Pig Virus". Famartin (talk) 10:18, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
See, that's great info. thanks! Jkister (talk) 10:40, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
The impression I have (and it would be great if someone could find a source on this) is that Howard always called him Pig Virus, but it got changed to "Pig Vomit" for the movie because it was funnier. But I could be totally wrong on that. Famartin (talk) 23:33, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
@Jkister: Nothing personal was meant by my revert and the edit you made was not taken as a personal insult. Sorry if it came off as such. You simply changed cited information regarding Metheny's nickname without providing a reliable source. For reference, the same information had been added quite a few times before and was reverted each time; Here are a few that I found going as far back as February 2006 ([4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]), but there may be more.
WP:BLPSOURCES says the following about material challenged or likely to be challenged:

contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion. This applies whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable, and whether it is in a biography or in some other article.

Since "Pig Vomit" has been reverted so many times, I think it's fair to say its use is contentious. The diffs I cited above are in the article's history for all editors to see. You have to search a bit, but they are there. I did look through the history before changing the name back. In addition, if "Pig Vomit" was so obviously correct, it would have probably been discussed on this talk page before. I did look through the archives for any reference to "Pig Vomit", but could not find any. That led me to assume, perhaps in error, that an edit sum citing the relevant Wikipolicy involved would be sufficient, and that there would be no need to go into further detail here on the talk page. This is actually the first time, as far as I can tell, that this is being discussed on "Talk: Howard Stern". This is a good thing, because now it might lead to something that can be used as reference by others trying to make the same change in the future.
For what it's worth, the book Howard Stern: King of All Media by Paul Colford is directly cited as the source for "Pig Virus". I haven't read that book; however, since that name change has been undone so many times before, it is safe to assume that Colford is being cited correctly. Changing "Virus" to "Vomit", even though it is just a single word, would be attributing something to Colford that apparently he did not say. Moreover, adding another source in support would mean that there would be two sources cited which apparently contradict each other. The IMDb page you cited clearly says "The content of this page was created by users. It has not been screened or verified by IMDb staff.", it also is a page for the character "Kenny Rushton" in the movie Private Parts. So, your edit essentially changed properly cited information from a reliable third-party source about a real person named "Kevin Metheny" to something cited from an unreliable source about a fictional character named "Kenny Rushton". Your edit sum says "Rushton's nickname was indeed 'Pig Vomit'"; I don't think anybody would dispute that fact. "Kenny Rushton", however, is not the person being discussed in the article. For reference, there is also this article "Kevin Metheny, a.k.a. 'Pig Virus,' riles WGN Radio's Chicago fan base" from the in 2010 cited on the "Kevin Metheny" page you referenced above which further supports the Colford cite. This is also something I looked at before undoing your edit.
Your characterization of me as an "Ignorant Edit Bully" seems to be based upon these two assumptions: (1) That an editor (i.e., you) who is knowledgeable about a particular subject corrects an obvious error in an article about said subject, and (2) a Wikipedia "zealot" (i.e., me) comes along and reverts the edit, regardless or its merit, because they feel threatened in some way and are simply not smart enough to understand that the edit is an obvious improvement. I can certainly say that (2) is not the case. As for (1), there is nothing obvious about changing "Virus" to "Vomit" as I hopefully have shown above.
Once again, please re-add the information if you truly believe it belongs there. If you properly cite it, maybe it will stick this time. I am more than happy to admit when I am wrong. Peace. Face-smile.svg -Marchjuly (talk) 12:42, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: you're completely on-point here and I am in the wrong. You clearly meet none of the criteria for IEB and I find your explanation above quite astounding. I missed the contentious nature of the nickname and did not do the homework that you did. My reaction was inappropriate and should have been averted by (in my opinion) a more sensible WP:BLPSOURCES policy. My apologies all around here. Jkister (talk) 10:12, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
@Jkister: Thank you for your kind words. We are all just trying to make "Howard Stern" the best article that it can possibly be, so sometimes our enthusiasm to do so gets the best of us. In hindsight, I would've been better off using less jargon in my edit sum, and not assume that everyone else would get my drift. Oh well, live and learn. Next time I'll try not to make the same mistake. Face-smile.svg - Marchjuly (talk) 10:30, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Second sentence of lead does not reflect reality / is promotional?[edit]

I know very little on the subject but the second sentence in the lead seems dodgy. "He is best known for his radio show which has aired on Sirius XM, a subscription-based satellite radio service, since 2006." That sounds like an unwarranted promotion for Sirius XM: Howard Stern is best known for his radio show, which has been nationally syndicated from 1986 to 2005. Does the fact that it's on Sirius since 2006 really deserve a mention in the very second sentence of the article? Doesn't seem very encyclopedic to focus on the more recent activity. (talk) 14:08, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

I don't see a significant problem with it. Certainly since his move to Sirius, he's making a lot more money while being available to far fewer, so its notable. Famartin (talk) 18:53, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Howard Stern. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:38, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Occupation - Comedian?[edit]

Under occupation, is there a particular reason comedian isn't listed? I would think comedy being the major genre of his radio show would suggest his occupation be reflective of that. Unless comedian refers solely to stand up, in which case, I believe there was a time Howard was doing a nightclub comedy act that may apply in that case. Just a thought... I know a lot of comedians who refer to Howard as a source of inspiration for a generation of comedians a la Johnny Carson. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam.goldfarb (talkcontribs) 06:07, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for using the talk page! Howard has mentioned in the past that he doesn't see himself as a comedian per se, more of a satirist, a term he used in his statement during the Selena controversy in 1995. He does write a few things here and there, but that mostly comes from Fred and Jackie, et. al. Plus he hasn't done any stand-up. LowSelfEstidle (talk) 17:03, 1 January 2017 (UTC)