By FCC standards, Oprah more dangerous than Stern

'I've seen the future and it is John Tesh ... music. Pre-recorded.'' -- Sandra Tsing Loh, a 42-year-old mother of two, who was fired from her weekly public radio gig after an engineer forgot to bleep the f-word from a recorded bit about Bette Midler.

This is how insane things have become: One morning last week, the general manager for the flagship station of Howard Stern's radio show told Stern not to play an excerpt from ''Oprah'' because the salacious content could result in a massive fine from the FCC.

Again: Oprah was deemed too racy and risky for Stern.

I've studied the transcripts of the ''Oprah'' show in question, and the sad thing is that the GM made the correct call, given the current reactionary environment. In fact, Stern has just been hit with a $27,500 fine from the FCC for a three-year-old show in which he discussed the same subject matter that came up on a rebroadcast of ''Oprah'' last week.

In both cases, the hosts were talking in graphic detail about creative slang terms for unusual sexual activity. If anything, the ''Oprah'' stuff was more ''obscene.''

So why is the FCC targeting Stern but leaving Oprah alone?

In the meantime, John Tesh, the former ''Entertainment Tonight'' anchor, was being interviewed on TV recently about crackdowns on ''offensive'' material on the airwaves.

''I'm very excited [about the crackdowns]!'' said Tesh.

Tesh would have been a big fan of Russia circa 1955 as well.

You want to talk about offensive material? Have you heard the schmaltzy crap Tesh composes and performs? I think we should ban all Tesh music before it turns us into a nation of candle-lighting, zombified wimps.

Freedom of choice

Ah, but if I don't want to hear Tesh's music (or his radio show), I don't have to rely on Congress to be my Big Brother. All I have to do is make the choice to avoid it. Tesh and his ilk just don't get that they can make the same choices regarding programming THEY consider offensive.

Good for Mancow for suing that obsessed guy who seems to be devoting his life to filing FCC complaints about the Cow's radio show. But whether you have a Mancow tattoo on your arm or you'd rather eat dirt than listen to him, shouldn't that be up to you?

I'm a Howard Stern fan, but I know people who can't stand him. Somehow, without government ''assistance,'' they've managed to avoid Stern in the same way that others evade the sound of Rush Limbaugh's voice.

Not that the debate should be about individual tastes. I'd rather hear Freddy Krueger drag his nails across a chalkboard than listen to the lunatic ravings of Ann Coulter -- but if there was a government-endorsed movement to silence Coulter, I'd be the first in line to protest on her behalf. This is America, and even a stick-thin harridan with an irrational hatred of liberals deserves to be heard! Life in America in 2004 shouldn't be so different from life in America in 2003 just because Janet Jackson's nipple-shielded breast flopped out on TV for a second.

As for the standard counter-argument that the airwaves ''belong to the public'' -- I couldn't agree more, and there's already a device in place to keep track of such things. It's called the ratings book, and a hell of a lot more people prefer Howard Stern to the likes of John Tesh.

The FCC won't let me be

Now that the FCC has the power to levy fines of up to A HALF MILLION DOLLARS for a single indecency infraction, adult-oriented hosts are engaging in self-censorship, lest they be hit with career-ending fines. Already the FCC has proposed a $247,000 fine for ''Elliot in the Morning,'' a Washington, D.C., jock, for his ''graphic and explicit'' comments about porn star Ron Jeremy.

Jeez. You can plead guilty to a variety of felonies in this country and you might be able to avoid jail time by doing community service and paying fines -- but the fines are nowhere near as huge as the suggested financial penalties for talking about sex on the radio.

Yet even some journalists are applauding the New Dark Ages. Syndicated columnist Kathleen Parker wrote: ''As a big fan of the 1st Amendment, I'm as reluctant as anyone to urge curbs on speech'' -- and then she urged curbs on speech.

''In the free marketplace, you're welcome to say whatever you like, but if the people don't want to buy what you're selling, no whines,'' wrote Parker.

Huh? Who are these ''people'' who don't want to buy what Stern, Mancow, et al, are selling? Certainly not the millions of listeners who made these guys so popular.

''As long as the airwaves remain in the public domain, the public has a right through the government to stifle the profane rants and juvenile outbursts of our lesser-evolved brethren,'' wrote Parker. ''Ain't democracy grand?''

Yes. It is. That's why we're fighting for it. Now please explain to me how the FCC's draconian actions fit into any working definition of democracy.