quote:
i think he's more intelligent than he'd like the majority of his audience to know, and that his show is a bit insulting to women. actually, i always had more of an issue with the woman who served as his dimwitted (hi, franta!) sidekick, not seeming to care about how she allowed herself to be played.

dimwitted?

lordy, m'lady -- robin is the smart one on the show! (seriously!)

i know people like you n'franta like to dismiss the show as being scum or LCD kinda stuff, but...

there's actually a lot to it. everyone on there speaks their mind, and says all the stuff they want to, instead of the stuff they're supposed to (and, quite frankly, most of the time, saying what you want to say would make you the 'LCD' as well!)

but they say it, anyway, decorum be damned. does that make them a raunchy show? to some, certainly. but, when you actually follow the show for a while, you eventually realize that they're just being themselves. yeah, sometimes they're rude, sometimes they're mean, sometimes they're this and that... but EVERYone is like that -- or wants to be at least (just read around this board for cryin out loud! )

so does he appeal to the lowest common denominator? maybe. is that so bad? does oprah? lets start a comparison here -- lets compare audience demographics (majority-speaking).

howard: business men on their way to work.
oprah: housewives.

at worst, those audiences are equal.

further, i guarantee you, there are more "trailer parkers" watching oprah than howard.


so, lets compare show hosts, and their perceptions.

howard: non-listeners (franta included) see him as an egomaniac, supposedly controlling all men to think his way.

oprah: non-listeners see her as a woman-guru, supposedly controlling all women to think her way.

again, at worst, these are equal.

lets compare average daily guests:

howard: strippers, freaks, porn stars
oprah: housewives, divorcees, victims

taking the above comparison a lil further -- a commonality between the two (and any talk show host) is that there is always the aspect of "taking advantage of your guest." they need the guests to get and/or maintain ratings. thats it. but do the guests, themselves, benefit? lets compare that, with each show's average guest (detailed above).

howard's guests: get exposure, "fame," jobs and money.
oprah's guests: get to cry on tv, or receive various forms of "tough love."

so who is being taken advantage of?

lets compare how each host uses' their show as a vehicle

oprah: uses her show to discuss woman's issues, and bring them to the forefront.
howard: uses his show to discuss man's issues, and bring them to the forefront.

"but howard is disgusting -- he talks about masterbation and farting"

true. but, lets face it, those are guy issues!

and, quite frankly, i think talk about menstruation and woman under arm fat is just as, if not more, nausiating. yet one is perceived as being worse, when, again, i feel that, at worst, they are equal.

lets compare how they handled the 9-11-01 tragedy

oprah: was off for a few days, then came back and talked her audience thru the grieving.
howard: stayed on the air THAT DAY (mebbe 2 miles from the wtc) in a 'calming' effort to his audience. he came back the next day, and did another show, in an effort for "normalcy." in fact, he went in every day after that.

there's more...

further, howard started his own fund, in conjunction with giuliani's, and his audience raised millions of dollars (howard matching every penny with his own money).

still more...

some of the "trailer trash" that listens to his show dont have much money. howard publically asked for no more than a $5 donation, and because they respect him and the show and the events, people were more inclined to give to that fund (even above and beyond giving elsewhere)

STILL more...

those at the wtc to help out for hours, days, and weeks after... the rescuers, the brave and noble squads that reported there to help out... they werent listening to oprah.

they had stern on.

lowest common denominator?

says you!