You have absolutely no idea what the hell you're talking about. Not only that, but I'm taking this ridiculous, ignorant opinion of yours personally, as I am a Howard Stern fan (as I have been for years).
Little too close to home with my stereotype?
Believe it or not, people have desk jobs where they are allowed to listen to talk radio. I listen to the show at work (as a lot of people do). Howard Stern has had up to 12 million listeners in terrestrial radio (easily the most successful radio show of all time). Close to 7 million now are paying subscribers (and a large percentage of that should be credited to Stern). So these people probably have jobs at least, because I doubt parents of kids who live in their basements are paying for their kids to listen to the radio all day.
Your facts are so wrong it's quite sad. First of all, the radio show with the largest audience, per Arbitron ratings, is the Rush Limbaugh Show with a minimum of 13.5 million listeners weekly since 2005. Secondly, I wouldn't call either Stern's or Limbaugh's shows "the most successful radio show of all time". Both have a narrow audience, albeit one that measures in the millions. But both are highly polarizing and incapable of reaching out to listeners outside the targeted demographic.
And there are more than 10 million people with Sirius satellite radio now, although there's no way to tell how many are Stern listeners or how many subscribed because of him. Sirius was growing before Stern migrated there, and they would continue to grow without him. And XM was kicking their butt before Stern, and they're still kicking their butt - so he didn't help that much.
Further, I'm not referring to kids living in their parents basements, but working individuals that have the means to subscribe themselves, but not the motivation to get out and start a life on their own.
If you heard the show you'd know that many successful people are hardcore fans of the show. And everything you said is completely wrong on so many levels. Having an education doesn't mean it's wrong to listen to the show (where all kinds of topics are discussed on a daily basis, including politics, for your information). Now if you're uptight or religious, that's another thing, and obviously not everything on the show is gonna be to everyone's liking, but the show's prolonged success would indicate to anyone with half a brain that it's more about strippers and midgets (more than 20 years as the #1 radio show in the U.S., also #1 in Toronto morning drive time throughout the 90's until the Canadian government took the show off the air in Canada because they misinterpreted a comment Howard made about French people). But you obviously know too little about the show to understand any of that.
The Howard Stern Show is about Howard Stern. Period. All subjects brought up therein are simply talking points for comedic value, or to provide a backdrop for the show. Anyone listening to that show for news or political information is in the wrong place. The vast majority of the content on the show is lowbrow smut and pertains to strippers, porn, Pejorative Slurs, the homeless, etc. Anything and everything can and is targeted for ridicule. Howard Stern is to radio what "Airplane" is to movies, nothing more (apologies to "Airplane", but it's the best example I can come up with right now).
Howard himself has talked about going to the Rangers' games at MSG recently, even dropped Jagr's name a few months ago, and also said that in the early 80's he was into watching the Islanders on TV. Gary (Bababooey), was also a big Islanders fan in the early 80's. Also, Scott Ferrall has a 4-hour sports talk show on Howard 101 and the sport he talks about the most is hockey, because he's a huge fan (he used to call Thrashers games on the radio in 1999 and his show is really fun to listen to). But hey, what the hell, the Stern audience probably doesn't even know what NHL stands for.
Woopty do. So Stern and others on his channel have talked hockey. What don't they talk about? I'm sure they mention eating. Quick, get someone from the Food Channel to contact them. I'm sure that would tie in nicely too
Sorry about going off topic, but it's this guy who simply should not have replied, period.
I'll let Howard Stern speak for himself (he said this in 1997):
"Television has changed… Standards have gone down to an all-time low, and I'm here to represent it. It's a miracle. I prayed to God for this." -- Howard Stern
Gosh, seems like I was so way off with my stereotype
Oh and as for the whole cage fighting, UFC, martial arts audience - it's a lot bigger than hockey's, and even though I don't like that sort of stuff myself, I wouldn't put it down the way you did. Just another reason you're totally ignorant.
First, I'm not so quick to say that cage fighting has a larger audience than hockey. It may, it may not. Hockey is certainly bigger where I live. But I frankly don't care either way. The fact is cage fighting appeals to a more primitive, caveman like mentality. Right up Stern's alley.
Right. Advertising in the USA on a pay service to a diverse audience where probably 70% of the listeners are men in the 18-49 demographic is completely useless. LOL... And the 6 million people who watched the All-Star game on FOX in 1996 are NEVER going to come back to the game, especially with Sidney Crosby in the league, who totally sucks! Bravo!
Stern's demographic has NEVER translated well to TV, not even for Howard himself. Maybe it works for something very primitive like cage fighting, but it would be a complete waste of advertising dollars for hockey. Why? Because Mr. Shock Jock's success is solely due to his shtick. There's no market there, it's a one trick pony.