<$BlogRSDUrl$>



Friday, May 18, 2007

Opie & Anthony Fans Try To Play Spoiler

May 18, 2007
Tyler Savery

They are standing up for free speech. They are shouting out against censorship. They are letting everyone they know about how they feel. They are Opie & Anthony fans.

The problem........

They have picked a terrible, tasteless, and classless thing to rally around. Like it or not, this issue is centered around the comments made in the original show where a description of rape was aired. This is the focus, and this is the root cause of the suspension. The public perception ties to the original show, not the apology, and not the show where Opie & Anthony acted insicere about the issue (this final act is what drew the suspension).

Ask any American if they believe in free speech, and you will get a resounding YES for an answer. Ask any American if they for censorship and you will get many answers, but most are reasonable in their thinking.

What Opie and Anthony fans have decided to do is rally around a duo that right now is under the spotlight for encouraging criminal and violent behavior. A poor choice to say the least.

Does it feel good to rally around the description of, and egging on of a discussion about rape?

Would these supporters be so bold if Opie & Anthony had had a discussion about rape of minors?

What is the opinion of these folks if we take the actual words, and instead of Codi Rice, substitute in "6 year old girl"? Lets see just how many would support the duo then.

Opie & Anthony On XM Radio - Transcript - (substitutions in red)

(Guest) Homeless Charlie - "I tell you what...what's the George Bush b---h on Girl...? 6 year old girl"

O&A - "6 year old girl"

Charlie - "I'd love to f--- that bitch dude" (laughter)

Charlie - "She's the F---in man"

O&A - "yeah"

Charlie - "I'd F...that bitch...."

O&A - "I just imagine the horror in the 6 year old girl's face...."
- "(laughter) ..... as she realizes what's going on"
- "...as you were just holding her down and F'n her."

Charlie - "punch her all the F'n face, shut the F--- up bitch"

O&A - "that's exactly what I meant"
(laughter in background)

Charlie - "you know F--- it .... and George Bush wife? I'd F--- that bitch to death"

O&A - "yeah?"

Charlie - "Oh yeah. She needs a man."

O&A - "You digging her?"

Charlie - "Oh I love it"

So, the question is this. Do you still want to rally around such statements? Or would you express outrage at them? Where do you draw the line?

This is a very touchy subject. Everyone wants freedom of speech, and no one wants censorship, but people do want the content on radio to fall within some sort of boundary. It is perfectly fine to enjoy the Opie & Anthony show. They are humorous most of the time, and deliver an entertaining program. BUT.......that does not mean that you need to support everything they say. It is perfectly acceptable to sometimes disagree with what they say or do.

The problem here is that these fanatics are so caught up in the moment that they do not actually think clearly. They find themselves thinking they are making a statement to XM in protest, when in reality they are making a statement that it is okay to encourage criminal behavior.

a prank is one thing..........a rape is another. Think of a 6 year old girl and tell me if you feel the same way.

Think about this......You are standing up for "freedom of rape speech".....Does that make you proud?

If you are one of the "protesters", have read this far , and still don't get it, I would encourage you to rent the Jodie Foster Movie titled "The Accused". Watch the rape scene. Look at all of the bar patrons cheering on the event. Now look into the mirror......that is you. is that who you want to be?

Being a pest is one thing. Being a rape supporting pest is another. If you have any gumption at all, you would make speak as loudly against what was said as you have against XM. Telling opie & Anthony that you are a fan is great. Telling them that you feel they crossed the line would be a statement far more bold.

Think about it.

5/18/2007 08:12:00 PM


SSG Has Merged. You Can Read All Of The Latest SSG Content By Clicking Here



22 Comments:

  • You don't get it do you? They were suspended for the comments Homeless Charlie made. They were suspended for talking about free speech on Monday of this week. See they were censored by XM to not stick up for themselves being they never made the comments. And so XM suspended them for speeking up for themselves. Do some research will ya?

    By Blogger EvilHomerJ666, at May 18, 2007 8:48 PM  


  • Wow another person who doesn't research the facts? Goto XMradio.com and look under press releases to see why they were suspended. Not because of the comments of a homeless man, rather because they were talking about free speech on Monday. Pests are standing up for the show because they were told not to say anything. We believe thats censorship. When the channel they broadcast is labeled as UNCENSORED content. Your whole blog is moot now. And I know you won't post this cause it would make you look bad. Jesus do some research first.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 18, 2007 8:55 PM  


  • I'm a Stern fan, but you've got this wrong, they were fired not keeping hteir mouth shut. Yes it's their fault, but it wasn't for what the homeless man said.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 18, 2007 11:08 PM  


  • This is quite sad.....

    Two comment from people who believe that this issue rests with the events of the 14th, and not to the other comments made earlier.

    Clearly they were spoken to about the initial rape scene comments. This is what had them giving an "apology" in the first place. The comments of the 14th demonstrated that they did not comprehend the severity issue at all.

    I am quite familiar with what was said on both occassions. What you are failing to understand is that it was Opie & Anthony, not homeless Charlie who made the said,

    "O&A - "I just imagine the horror in Condi Rices face...."
    - "(laughter) ..... as she realizes what's going on"
    - "...as you were just holding her down and F'n her."

    Do you think those comments are fine? bappropriate?

    As for my blog being moot......

    If having the courage to feel that what was stated was wrong, than call SSG moot. I have listened to opie & Anthony from their beginnings in Boston. They have a good show. Sometimes they aggrivate me, sometimes I laugh my butt off.....BUT.....I do not agree with everything they say, and am able to determine for myself what goes too far. Seems that many of their listeners can't distinguish this.

    I ask this. What is wrong with making a strong statement that those comments went to far. i have yet to see this group of protesters ave the courage to say it. That is truly sad.

    If you have read this site at all you will understand that personally I believe that XM should have taken another route, such as fines. I also comprehend that that route may not have been available to XM. further, i believe that individuals have the capability of changing or blocking channels.

    I am all about free speech. I am all about avoiding censorship. I do not accept comments such as the ones made are in any way appropriate.

    If you take the time to read the transcripts you will see that it was Opie and Anthony that made the rape type comments. Do not try to hang those on a homeless man.

    For the second commenter on this page......please note that your comment was published. Also note that you have every right to ignore content that you do not want to read.....a novel concept. Making a "whole blog moot" because I expressed an opinion......gee, kind of like giving up 130 channels because one show got suspended.

    Like it or not this whole issue centers on the rape scene comments. That is how the whole media see's this story. People can try to shift the focus to free speech, but if you look in your heart you will understand that the ROOT issue here were the initial comments.

    By Blogger SSG, at May 18, 2007 11:10 PM  


  • Its interesting that the pests are in denial about the original offense as though that has nothing to do with why O&A were suspended. For all those that are defending O&A's right to say anything, O&A did initially apologize -- they admitted they went too far. If they didn't want the limits that XM requested, O&A should have resigned -- but, no, they took the "pussy" way out and went on the air and mocked XM management.

    O&A proved they are actually gutless in standing up for their so-called "right" of uncensored content. They knew they had limts and chose to ignore them. Then, they apologized, then mocked the apology. Thus the suspension.

    They can always quit and try to find another forum where they can laugh about raping women -- if means that much to them.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 19, 2007 11:43 AM  


  • interestingly, of the cvomments received so far, none of them have stated that the original issue was a case of stepping over the line.

    When it comes time to step up to the plate in that department they are all lacking.

    I appreciate the fact of discussion about censorship and free speech, and support their right to protest XM over those issues. However, they should be just as loud in making a statement against what was said, and to date, very few actually step up to the plate.

    By Blogger SSG, at May 19, 2007 11:53 AM  


  • Debbie Wolf the leader of PAC(the people protesting)said people do find these comments offensive. But the comments were made by a homeless man who was in a drunk rant. Along with the ranting about Condi, Laura & the Queen he went on about Al. Sharpton & Jewish People.

    What Anthony said while laughing was not offensive to me. People are sitting here thinking "wow they laughed at rape". No they laughed at what this homeless man was saying all together. The clip that was played was 30 seconds of a 2 minute rant. Am I gonna congradulate you on standing up and saying it's offensive? Hell no. A lot of people are doing it so don't act like you are the only one.

    And as for your comments on how I can see the arguement for censorship. No you don't since understand our stance. You did decide to twist the story to make it appear they were suspended cause of the homeless mans comments.

    You tried to get more people on your side by substiuting a grown woman with a child. Now in this part you have touched on something good yet bad as well. You are exposing the fact that people child molestation different then rape.

    We should not see them as different. But you are falsifying the story to draw on the notion that people view harming a child worse then an adult. And that is merely playing on the same thing you should be exposing.

    By Blogger EvilHomerJ666, at May 19, 2007 4:34 PM  


  • Anonymous said:

    "For all those that are defending O&A's right to say anything, O&A did initially apologize -- they admitted they went too far. If they didn't want the limits that XM requested, O&A should have resigned -- but, no, they took the "pussy" way out and went on the air and mocked XM management.
    "

    They appologized for the comments that WERE made. Not for the comments that they made. They read the same appology that was given out in a press release by XM. Beacause the big wigs at XM made them appologize on air. If you would have heard that show you would have known they didn't feel they needed to. But you merely spew your drivel on misinformation.

    By Blogger EvilHomerJ666, at May 19, 2007 4:37 PM  


  • Debbie Wolf is protesting something, and that is great.

    The fact of the matter is that it is Opie & Anthony's show, and they carry the responsibility for what happens on it.

    The homeless man diod not go into a rape description....Opie & Anthony did. Please reacll that it was them, and not the homeless man that stated this:

    "O&A - "I just imagine the horror in Condi Rices face...."
    - "(laughter) ..... as she realizes what's going on"
    - "...as you were just holding her down and F'n her."

    Now, as for congratulations.....I did not ask for congratulations, and don't expect it. Common sence clearly dictates that the comments were over the line. Further, if "a lot of people" feel the same way, shouldn't that tell you that a line was crossed? Again, common sence.

    As for your comments about "twisting the story".....i would suggest that you read the other articles on this very site. Further, it blatently clear what the ROOT CAUSE of the suspension was. Only a fool does not realize that this leads directly back to the segement with homeless charlie.

    The example of substituting a child was to show how this situation is very bad. It was designed to be shocking. If you were not aware, for most people rape is shocking....but it appears that there are those that do not see rape as a big deal, and perhaps this would be an example that they can draw a distintion to. I feel sorry for them.

    The poiunt here was that the suspension of Opie & Anthony is perceived to be about joking about rape, and when you look at the root cause, it is what this is all about. To rally around that is simply a bad idea....unless you take the time to also clearly make a statement that the comments did indeed go over the line, without setting the blame on some homeless guy.

    as I stated, standing up for free speech and standing against censorship is fine......using a description of a rape as your cause for protest is foolish.

    By Blogger SSG, at May 19, 2007 4:54 PM  


  • 1. We are not using rape joke as cause to defend free speech.
    2. We are not rallying around them because of rape. IF XM suspended them for the joke thousands of people would have understood. But XM clearly stated it wasn't cause of that. So we protest the cause for suspension. They were suspended in XM's own words for the comments that were made on a different show. Again you are trying to twist the story to make yourself look good and the pest to look bad.
    3. You said the homeless man didn't go into the rape description yet what you originally posted clearly contradicts that. He obviously said he wanted to f*ck her and punch her. But that part you substituted or left out. Anthony responded to the comments he made.
    4. You want to act all high and mighty thats fine, but don't expect people to take you seriosuly when you outright lie about or ommit parts a story.

    By Blogger EvilHomerJ666, at May 19, 2007 5:06 PM  


  • 1. I would suggest you read the story over again......you will see that homeless charlie states his comments AFTER O & A. go ahead, re-read the story.

    2. You are deciding to center your protest around an incident that was derived from comments about rape. any reasonable person knows that this is the central issue.

    3. The rape comments were made. XM made O & A apologize because of the severity of the situation. O & A then went on to basically mock their apology. O & A were suspended. Do you agree with this timeline? If so, then you can see what the ROOT issue here is.....it was the original comments.

    4. I am not acting hihgh and mighty......I am showing a bit of class and standing up against what was said, and letting people begin to understand the actions. You still want to act as if the rape comments had nothing to do with this. You are in denial.

    5. I would once again suggest that you read the transcript prior to making your accusations about what I wrote. Here is the comments again....

    Caller "Homeless Charlie": I tell you what. What's the George Bush bitch? Condolleezza Rice? I'd f-ck that bitch. I'd like to f-ck that bitch dead.

    Hosts: (Uproarious laughter.)

    She needs a f-cking man.

    Host: Yeah.

    Charlie: I'd f-ck that bitch (inaudible).

    Host: I just imagine the horror in Condolleezza Rice's face when she realizes what's going on.

    Host 2: As you were just holding her down and f-cking her.

    Charlie: (Cackling).

    Charlie: Punch her in the f-cking face. "Shut up, BITCH!"

    Host 1: (Laughing hysterically.)

    Host 2: That's exactly what I meant.

    Your assertion has the comments of homeless charlie and O & A backwards.

    So, "evilhomer"....do you feel that the comments of Opie and Anthony went over the line?

    The ball is in your court

    By Blogger SSG, at May 19, 2007 5:23 PM  


  • Balls in my court? Sorry I don't swing that way, maybe Steven Carr will like your balls in his court but not me. I sure ain't no Dragon Wagon.

    Your transcipts of what happened are WRONG. I have the auido of the whole show. Would you like it?

    Caller "Homeless Charlie": I tell you what. What's the George Bush bitch? Condolleezza Rice? I'd f-ck that bitch. I'd like to f-ck that bitch dead.

    Thats where the "Rape" conversation started so tell me again how did OnA start it?

    Did Anthony go over the line? No, not in the context of what was said, in my OPINION. Fueling the comments of a homeless man can be radio gold sometimes. Do I think Ant's comments were gold, no. But thats the risk you take when you are in radio.

    The ROOT of the problem is that XM advertises uncensored radio. When the comments were made XM decided it was not going to look good infront of the FCC because of the merger. So XM made the decision to tell OnA not to talk about the situation. That is CENSORSHIP. And that is the root of what we are standing up for.

    Will a lot of people find the joke in bad taste? Sure, guess what you can change the channel or block it for that matter. And you left out the COMPLETE transcripts of what happened. Again I have the audio of the whole show, would you like it? You substituted parts of the conversation for your own words to make it seem more outrageous. Thats pretty selfserving to make you look high & mighty.

    By Blogger EvilHomerJ666, at May 19, 2007 5:35 PM  


  • 1. Balls in your coutrt is a well known sports saying. Your thinking of it as related to a sexual inuendo tells us about what type of person your are, and perhaps why you feel the way you do.

    2. Your transcript seems to match what I posted in the article.....would you care to acknowledge that? You were originally stating that I got that wrong, and it was you that the the "punch' comments comming before the O & A "holding her down comments".

    3. You are jumping to a conmclusion with your "merger comments". Do you have ANYTHING to substantiate that, ore is it simply an opinion on your part?

    4. The audio and the transcript is pretty well known at this point. I already have it, and have heard it.

    5. I do not claim to be high andss mighty.....In fact, my stance pretty much mirrors the stance of the average person ouyt there.

    you're up to bat....(hope you don't draw inuendos into that analogy as well)

    By Blogger SSG, at May 19, 2007 5:50 PM  


  • Man, did you ever stir up the Pest nest!

    Good to see you have the courage to call it the way you see it, knowing the response that you would get. Know that there are others out there that support your position.

    Keep up the good work.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 20, 2007 10:19 AM  


  • "Being a rape supporting pest is another."

    I think this is a weak attempt at trying to make a bold statement.

    Just this weekend Saturday Night Live ran a skit about a guy making out with and loving a dog, with images of full tongue kissing. Does that mean that SNL and the people who enjoy it support and condone bestiality? OR, was it simply a joke...albeit equally as unfunny as the jokes told on O&A.

    (This example was off the top of my head and I could probably think of plenty more that are far worse on free broadcasts never mind paid programming that is marked as explicit)

    For the record I am a Howard Stern fan BUT I am also from Boston so, I have listened to both Howard and O & A since I was a kid.

    By Anonymous SiriusBuzz, at May 20, 2007 6:40 PM  


  • For those out there that believe that O&A's suspension had nothing to do with their conversation with the homeless man, do any of them believe they would have been suspended if the conversation with the homeless man had not taken place?

    Its pretty simple to understand why they got suspended if you take the emotion out of it. Clearly O&A have never been truly "uncensored" on XM. There is no way XM would allow them to repeat the sex in the cathedral incident. O&A knew there were some lines. Maybe they didn't have the sense to know laughing about and encouraging a discussion of "rape porn" as it was described on CNN today, was over XM's line.

    So once it happened, XM told O&A they had crossed a line and that they should apolgize for it. Its true, they didn't get fired for crossing that line the first time, because O&A appeared to understand that laughing at "rape porn" was unacceptable content on XM channels. But then O&A essentially told its audience that they didn't really mean that apology and that in fact they should be able to say anything they wanted.

    That, of course, was not the agreement they had with XM and thus they got suspended -- for crossing the line with rape porn, acknowledging it, then thumbing their noses at that line and XM management.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 20, 2007 6:44 PM  


  • SSG, lets agree to disagree.

    Did O&A cross the line? Yes.
    Should they be punished? Hell no.

    Why? Because people listen to O&A for exactly those reasons: They continuously push the line of decency. Occasionally, they cross over it. But you know what? The channel that broadcasts O&A is clearly labled as a XL channel which means extreme language and ADULT content.
    For some reason, you think that O&A telling jokes and laughing at rape somehow condones those actions. I laugh at stupid stuff all the time, it doesnt mean that I condone them. It doesnt even mean that I like them. It just means that in the context of what is being said, I find it halarious.
    As a disclaimer, I have never listened to O&A and dont plan to start now. I do however listen to the uncensored comedy channels almost exclusively. They have rape jokes on there as well, how come you dont make issue of that? They have murder jokes too. Better start a blog about those.
    People have the ability to censor stuff themselves. If they dont like the channel, they can call customer care and have the channel blocked. Or since they are adults and should be ACTING like adults, they can simply choose not to listen. I am sick and tired of people wanting big business and governemnts to start stepping in to protect them. Cant adults make up their own F**KING minds and do what they feel is right rather than protesting the company to do it for them?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 20, 2007 8:35 PM  


  • This article has generated a lot of comments, and it seems that the point of the piece has been lost in the debate.

    This is about what people decide to rally around. In my opinion, the Opie & Anthony comments are not a shining example of what people should rally around.

    Free speech, and censorship are very polarizing subjects. Why pick "THIS" example to show your point, and if you decide to pick THIS, why not speak out to address the fact that these comments were indeed over a line.

    When considering your rally, you need to be cognicent of the attitudes and thinking of the majority of the people out there. If your rally wants to have success, you need to get the support of the masses.....not just the passionate fans.

    There was an opportunity to make some bold statements that would resonate with more people. that chance is now lost.

    By Blogger SSG, at May 21, 2007 10:27 AM  


  • "Why pick "THIS" example to show your point,"

    Because THIS example is the only one that has wound up getting them suspended.

    "and if you decide to pick THIS, why not speak out to address the fact that these comments were indeed over a line."

    Because it doesn't matter how far over the line they were. There are no laws limiting what people are allowed to say (I know I know cant yell fire in a crowded movie theater but, you know what I mean).

    Do you think O&A really wanted to see her raped? If yes, then and only then would I agree what they did was wrong.

    By Anonymous SiriusBuzz, at May 21, 2007 6:10 PM  


  • Line two of my post says that I think that O&A crossed the line.

    I also state that I am not even a fan of O&A. Never listened to them before (except for clips here and there posted here and other sites because of this issue) and dont plan on listening to them again.

    My argument is not in support of O&A. It wouldnt matter if it was O&A, Bubba the Love Sponge, Howard Stern, Martha Stuart or Opera. My argument is AGAINST the censorship of an uncensored channel. XM came up with the whole idea of uncensored channels, labled them Extreme Listening (XL), put in a method of allowing those channels to be blocked for decency sake, puts multiple advertisments/warnings stating all of the above multiple times per hour.

    And then XM suspends two of its most listened to DJs for doing everything that it warned listeners it would do?

    As some famous person said (and Im far too lazy to look up who it was right now) "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

    BR.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 21, 2007 9:03 PM  


  • buzz....

    "Why pick THIS example to show your point"

    Actually, that is the very question I was posing to those protesting.

    My contention is using this event as a foundation for a protest is not the wisest of choices.

    Realistically speaking there has always been a limit (whether people want to acknowledge it or not) to what opie & Anthony, Stern, or anyone else can say. We know that O & A would not pull another "menino" or "St. Patricks" stunt. That line was already drawn.

    I have always taken the position that I wished there was another route instead of suspension. I have also been clear that edgy content is expected on their show.

    The rape comments were bad, the mocking of their apology was bad, people using THIS as their foundation for protest is bad.

    What we have here is a bad situation.

    I love free speech, and I love freedom of expression. I am also aware that sometimes free speech and expression can be very hurtful.

    By Blogger SSG, at May 21, 2007 11:01 PM  


  • "Actually, that is the very question I was posing to those protesting."

    I know that is why I responded to it with your original statement in quotes. Maybe you misread me or maybe I wasn't clear.

    Either way, I just added your link to my site!

    By Anonymous SiriusBuzz, at May 22, 2007 3:44 AM  


Post a Comment


SSG is not a Financial Advisor. Read Disclosure: HERE

--------------------------------------------------------


Sirius Radio TSS-Radio Blog Sirius Answers Credit card merchant account


DIGITAL FREEDOM - BILL OF SIGHTS AND SOUNDS


Search by Label


Links


Logo Design:
Jeremy Sprout

Designed by
miru designs

Powered by 

Blogger