TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- USA - New York
-- hot 97 morning show done messed up
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

quote:

Originally posted by Konijn firing someone for a matter of speech, however offensive it might be, is not the right move and sets a terrible precedent...

it's been done before.

i know but it's still a shitty move

eh

lots of corporations have policies for racist/sexist remarks. and most of the consequences involve termination of employment. this isn't any different. it's just that these remarks were made by corporate employees in a public forum.

quote:

Originally posted by Stassi i already posted the song, and its off jins site, its not going anywhere soon. and its not a freestyle.. by the way, i just got word the hot97 morning staff is fired.

GOOD!!!! HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH! i love it!

youre fired

quote:

Originally posted by dj tek youre fired

oh god... fellow penn alum with bad hairdo!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Konijn firing someone for a matter of speech, however offensive it might be, is not the right move and sets a terrible precedent...

it's called damage control


and it's a GOOD precedent

quote:

Originally posted by trunks1022 eh lots of corporations have policies for racist/sexist remarks. and most of the consequences involve termination of employment. this isn't any different. it's just that these remarks were made by corporate employees in a public forum.

yea, but this isn't an accountant offending people in the middle of a boardroom meeting; this is putting the clamps on someone who's paid to voice (outrageous and controversial) positions in a public medium.

if arbitron ratings had fallen as a result of the controversy and the morning staff was fired as a result of low ratings it would constitute a business decision and would thus be a different story. but the staff was fired solely for the content of their speech.

when you start firing people for the shit they say it can't help but send a chill down the spine of anyone who works in a similar forum or who produces a good for public consumption.

there's a thin line between being creative and iconoclastic and being vile; just ask damien hirst, howard stern, andres serrano, lenny bruce or jimmy the greek...

quote:

Originally posted by Konijn yea, but this isn't an accountant offending people in the middle of a boardroom meeting; this is putting the clamps on someone who's paid to voice (outrageous and controversial) positions in a public medium. if arbitron ratings had fallen as a result of the controversy and the morning staff was fired as a result of low ratings it would constitute a business decision and would thus be a different story. but the staff was fired solely for the content of their speech. when you start firing people for the shit they say it can't help but send a chill down the spine of anyone who works in a similar forum or who produces a good for public consumption. there's a thin line between being creative and iconoclastic and being vile; just ask damien hirst, howard stern, andres serrano, lenny bruce or jimmy the greek...

Honestly, after what they did and said the ratings for hot 97 were gonna go down, i can't tell the future but the reason i'm saying that is because hot 97 started falling off a while ago and after this it's not gonna give them a better image so i guess the managers of hot 97 were just doing the inevitable

quote:

Originally posted by Konijn yea, but this isn't an accountant offending people in the middle of a boardroom meeting; this is putting the clamps on someone who's paid to voice (outrageous and controversial) positions in a public medium.

so u mean to tell me that this didn't offend people in the public realm? outrageous and controversial does not excuse anyone from saying anything racist at all. your point there is invalid.

having a staff member explicitly say that he would like to shoot asian people in the course of an argument about an offensive song isn't exactly having a position on a controversial issue. it's blatant racism

quote:

Originally posted by trunks1022 so u mean to tell me that this didn't offend people in the public realm? outrageous and controversial does not excuse anyone from saying anything racist at all. your point there is invalid.

my point was that many things offend many sensibilities. the photographer andres serrano, who i mentioned in the previous posts, has made a career of displaying images that hundreds of thousands of christians have found to be sacrilegious (pics of christ submerged in urine and blood, etc); damian hirst is a sculptor who, among other mediums, likes to work with decomposing animal carcasses, again offending countless people; lenny bruce was a pioneering disc jokey in the 1970s -- the original 'shock jock' -- and millions of people protested him for his offensive antics; howard stern, a character i assume you're familiar with, has been fined millions for vulgarities and yes, racism, in his twenty years on the air.
-- the last point, incidentally, debunks your position that lowered ratings would naturally follow a flood of protests at hot 97...

i guess i'm just the resident civil libertarian here...

nah i didn't mention ratings...

i don't dispute any of what you said.

but i'm having problems in that you're still dodging the fact that this is racism. you haven't really acknowledged that this is so, and the boardroom/outrageous voice in public forum comparison dismissal bothers me a little bit. there's saying something to provoke discussion in a public forum, a la rush limbaugh, stern, etc, and then there's just outright offending someone, whether through implied or explicit statements, a la limbaugh again (with the mcnabb comments) and the dudes at hot 97.

oh well, can't win them all

this debate looks tasty, so I'll drop some opinions on this..

first off i must say in regards to ratings - this method is old! similar to VW's suicide bomber case which is invoked to boost ratings with negative publicity. Marketing at its best. However offensive the remarks made within the song only proves that they felt strongly enough to exercise their opinion in the chance of being an oppressor. And to stem even further along the racist movement, let's remember the origins of the staff who are the ones constantly voicing out their opinion of being oppressed. I just find it extremely hypocritical of the staff to poke fun within the race criteria and at the same rate be the ones who feel that on a day to day basis they are the ones being oppressed.

More ontopic to the previous replies and in regards to konjin's examples of offensive mediums in a public forum. 2 of the 4 mentioned teeter along expressions of art. There is a distinct difference between controversial art work and blantant racist remarks, especially racist remarks in a public forum. This is NYC, one the largest melting pots in the world. There is plenty of unjust that happens to every culture/society here in nyc, but to voice out on a public medium with corporate backing a racist remark, just doesn't do justice to any freedom of expresion. This was deemed many years ago with the N word, and to this day, that word isn't voiced publicly in public forums in any form of comedy. Believe me so, that if it was used, those would be sympathizing in the way the currently offended society would feel!

Now HOT97, the mentioning of Star and Buckwild, the whole cast and crew along with the integrity of the station has literally forfeited almost all its royalities. To voice on a public forum you have to be approved and licensed. This is to prevent anyone from speaking their opinion without being offensive. The actions demonstrated clearly do not abide by any guideline, rule, or regulation in which the position at the radio station requires. Forfeiting a weeks pay to the offended should have been done without hesitation, without incident, prior to the original act. Debating over losing their position shouldn't even be held. It's clear cut that any corporation or place of business within the public will not find reason to allow such activity to exist, whether its sexual harrassment or racism. And if a company turns the blind eye and lets it slide, it's similar to them justifying the wrong action. In my eyes, I've questioned the integrity of Hot97 and it's staff and I've now came to the conclusion and formed my own opinion about that company, corporation, business objective as a service to the community, and the sole individuals who are responsible for their own actions.

this is just sad to me. sad that someone would try their hardest to find "humor" in a tragedy that killed 150,000+ as well as affected the entire world.

people who make light of situations like these have serious fucked up issues.

i bet if some country was makin fun of 911 tragedy, they probably would have flipped the fuck out. contradicking assholes.. eat a cock.

i'm listening to it right now...who is the girl arguing with miss jones? and ew, can i just say, miss jones is the most annoying person i have ever heard in my life. and i'm only 3 minutes through.

miss info. i think it's mentioned that she's asian

quote:

Originally posted by trunks1022 miss info. i think it's mentioned that she's asian

ugh i'm seriously disgusted. after actually hearing it, it made me more upset.

quote:

Originally posted by trancEyes22 ugh i'm seriously disgusted. after actually hearing it, it made me more upset.

yeah i can't find the motivation to get past only reading the words and only reading about the argument

quote:

Originally posted by Konijn my point was that many things offend many sensibilities. the photographer andres serrano, who i mentioned in the previous posts, has made a career of displaying images that hundreds of thousands of christians have found to be sacrilegious (pics of christ submerged in urine and blood, etc); damian hirst is a sculptor who, among other mediums, likes to work with decomposing animal carcasses, again offending countless people; lenny bruce was a pioneering disc jokey in the 1970s -- the original 'shock jock' -- and millions of people protested him for his offensive antics; howard stern, a character i assume you're familiar with, has been fined millions for vulgarities and yes, racism, in his twenty years on the air. -- the last point, incidentally, debunks your position that lowered ratings would naturally follow a flood of protests at hot 97... i guess i'm just the resident civil libertarian here...

my friend, you have no soul

there was a line that was crossed. the first two people you mentioned were doing those works, b/c they are artists and those were works of arts in their minds. the parody was not art, just an inconsiderate, shameless crapfuck of a song. those "shock jocks" you mentioned are controversial, but not shameless. i bet even they would tell you that the line was crossed in that song. and never have i heard howard stern belittle a world tragedy. freedom of speech my ass. just think of the big picture before you say something

even howard stern, the king of spoofs didnt make any fun at this tragedy.

quote:

Originally posted by BxNemo goes to show you how stupid these hip hop homeboys and girls can be.

This has nothing to do with hip hop or the urban community. Just really stupid judgement.

JERK OFF!

Heres one for you

http://radio.about.com/cs/latestrad...a/aa051504a.htm

Give your two cents on that

quote:

Originally posted by DJ STEEVROCK This has nothing to do with hip hop or the urban community. Just really stupid judgement. JERK OFF! Heres one for you http://radio.about.com/cs/latestrad...a/aa051504a.htm Give your two cents on that

now now, no need for insults...

yeah no need to make any generalities on here, we all know whos really at fault...

as far as the racism goes, well of course i hated that but, as others have stated on this thread already, even more appalling was the fact that the shock jocks would make fun of this tragedy that has brought forth the empathy from the rest of the world. and there were some americans who died/got injured from the tsunami ffs.

quote:

Originally posted by djdl my friend, you have no soul there was a line that was crossed. the first two people you mentioned were doing those works, b/c they are artists and those were works of arts in their minds. the parody was not art, just an inconsiderate, shameless crapfuck of a song. those "shock jocks" you mentioned are controversial, but not shameless. i bet even they would tell you that the line was crossed in that song. and never have i heard howard stern belittle a world tragedy. freedom of speech my ass. just think of the big picture before you say something

whatever...

howard stern's sidekicks prank called news stations while newscrews were actually reporting on the world trade center bombing in '93 -- apparently no lines were crossed there since the man is still on the air. the examples i gave of artists, sculptors, djs, and sportscasters were not meant to be exhaustive but rather exemplars of the relativism of the obscene in various mediums.

you speak of 'controversies' and 'shamelessness' as though the two are absolute when in reality they're far from it, a point which brings us back to my original comment about the thin line between the iconoclast and the dirtbag. my worry, which you seem to run roughshod over, is that when cretins like ms jones are fired for offensive comments, the gap toward greater censorship of content -- whether in the arts or the airwaves -- becomes that much smaller.

and those who claim to be shocked that racist terms found their way onto new york's cosmopolitan airwaves clearly aren't tuning in as ethnic, racial, sexual, and religious slurs of all shapes abound on the radio dial. if you doubt how socially inured we've become to the offensive, turn on your television or read through the forums of tranceaddict, where terms bellitling italians, asians, blacks, recent immigrants, and the gay community are casually tossed around.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.