COVER STORY : Radio in the Raw : To Howard Stern and Mark & Brian, the sexually explicit material in their morning shows may be fun. But it’s comedy that couldn’t be on TV--and some people don’t get the joke

It’s 8 a.m. Do you know where your children are?

If they’re listening to “The Mark and Brian Show” on KLOS-FM (95.5) or to “The Howard Stern Show” on KLSX-FM (97.1), this is what they might have heard in the last few months during morning drive-time:

Monday, Oct. 21: Mark and Brian interrupt Chuck Moshontz’s news report about Oliver North apparently implicating former President Ronald Reagan in the Iran/Contra scandal to go live with the sounds of a caller purportedly having an orgasm with her husband. When she finishes, Mark and Brian ask the couple if they could induce another one after the news. They say yes, the news continues and then she is heard again, apparently having another orgasm.

Friday, Dec. 13: In what is continually referred to as a Christmas party, Stern’s show features a marathon spanking session. Women described as dancer - strippers come into the studio and are said to disrobe. Howard supposedly leans one of them over his lap and spanks her. Then two male dancers come in, apparently take off their pants and are said to be spanked by Robin Quivers, Stern’s sidekick. Then another woman, Rachel, comes in and spanks Howard--although he claims to have left his underwear on, explaining , “I’m a married man.” Rachel says she wants to try something with one of the other women. One volunteers. Howard asks her if she is a lesbian. “No, but I’m willing to partake if it’s going to be fun,” she says. From the comments and hoots of amazement that follow, listeners are led to believe that Rachel spreads a cream - like concoction on the other woman’s breasts and licks it off.

Among casual station hoppers, industry veterans and even die-hard fans of these morning personalities, the reaction to much of what is being broadcast during morning drive time is the same: How do they get away with this stuff?

At a time of widespread protests by conservative organizations against a range of artistic endeavors, radio has remained unscathed. Indeed, radio programming seems to be going further than ever, pushing the envelope of acceptability--not merely with graphic discussions of all types of sexual behavior and bodily functions but also with occasional live “demonstrations.”

“What you basically have is sex radio, much like X-rated movies,” observed Ken Minyard, host of the popular “Ken and Barkley Show,” which airs weekday mornings on KABC-AM (790) in competition with the shows hosted by KLSX’s Stern and KLOS’ Mark Thompson and Brian Phelps. “You can do things on radio now that you couldn’t have done at all 10 or 15 years ago.”

Industry consultants say this style of programming--a few notches beyond what passed as “shock radio” a few years ago--is growing in popularity around the country. Its presence in Southern California intensified with the arrival of Stern’s controversial show last July, which seems to have spurred Mark and Brian to step up the frequency and explicitness of their sexual material.

Some listeners object and have voiced their complaints to KLSX and KLOS in letters and phone calls. But there has been no major outcry or organized protest.

“I get the impression from people I talk to in the radio industry--and not just in L.A.--that there is a bit of amazement that people on radio are getting away with as much as they are,” said Ron Rodriguez, managing editor of Radio and Records, an industry trade publication. “There seems to be a trend toward racier radio in the mornings. And certainly the more successful Howard Stern becomes, the more he’s going to be emulated.”

Stern, whose 10-year-old show originates from New York, is the top-rated morning personality there; in Los Angeles, KLSX’s ratings have jumped from 21st to 14th place since he was piped in. Thompson and Phelps’ KLOS show, meanwhile, has been the No. 1 morning radio program for nearly two years.

“It’s hard sometimes to compete with somebody (performing oral sex) on the other station,” said Rick Dees, formerly L.A.’s top-rated morning deejay, whose program on KIIS-FM (102.7) also goes up against Stern and Mark and Brian. “It’s ‘poo poo ca ca’ humor. I listen to it and say, ‘Gee, there’s so much more to talk about, so much more to make people laugh.’ ”

Though the raunchy segments in each of the shows are only one aspect of several hours of banter, comic bits, sociopolitical commentary and just plain silliness, they can come at any time, without warning, and for prolonged periods (more frequently on Stern’s show than on Mark and Brian’s). Not all of the material may be for real--even the hosts can’t vouch for the truthfulness of what their callers are saying or doing--but the impact is the same.

“You wonder what the effect might be if 12- or 13-year-old kids are listening to the stuff that goes on--the sexism and the exploitation of sex to the degree they have it, the blatant language,” Minyard said. “There is definitely a question there and it’s a problem.”

Tuesday, Jan. 14: Mark and Brian query their staff on what sexual acts they had never participated in but would like to try. The traffic reporter says he’d like to have sex with two women; their producer says she wants to try it with two men, noting that she had tried it once before but wants to get it right.

Thursday, Jan. 23: Dazzled by the beauty of his guest, actress Tawny Kitaen, Howard Stern details how he would satisfy her sexually and tells her that his wife suffers knee problems and, as a result, only likes to make love on her back. Stern’s wife later phones to report on the air that she found the interview so embarrassing that she had to turn the radio off because their children were listening. “Why would you let the children listen to this crap?” he asks. When she takes issue with his description of their sex life, he asks, “When was the last time you were up on all fours?”

Thompson, Phelps and Stern declined to be interviewed for this story, but executives at KLOS and KLSX staunchly defended their programming. While acknowledging that their morning stars sometimes exceed the bounds of good taste, they argued that the vast majority of the content is acceptable, and that all of it is meant in the spirit of fun.

“There have been things that Mark and Brian and (personalities at) other stations have done that have been tasteless or even offensive,” KLOS program director Ken Anthony said. “But it’s a spontaneous medium. Things happen. That’s one of the things about radio. It’s not like television, which is largely taped. We’re live and in living color. . . . I certainly don’t condone that kind of stuff and we’ve obviously had conversations about it afterward, but it’s the kind of thing where sometimes a moment happens and maybe they went too far.

“The majority of the time it’s fun-loving and entertaining and on occasion it can take a turn which I don’t even think they want it to go in. Part of the entertainment may be of a sexual nature or may not please everybody, but for Mark and Brian, shock is not their thing. Their thing is honesty with their audience.”

(In response to requests for an interview, Mark and Brian issued this statement: “We’re not really sure what we do. We don’t ever get to hear ourselves.”)

As for Stern, he “is actually a good role model,” said Andy Bloom, program director at KLSX. “Listen to what Howard talks about. People were angry in this city because Howard immediately said what everyone now seems to be saying about Magic Johnson, that, ‘Wait a minute. That’s not the way to lead your life. That’s wrong.’ Howard is repeatedly saying, ‘If there are any kids listening, don’t take drugs. I know. Just because I was stupid, don’t you be stupid.’ And for all the flirtation that goes on, you’re talking about a man who’s been married for at least 15 years and has said on the air that he’s been monogamous for 18 years. He talks about eating healthily. He talks about his lifestyle. The guy meditates.”

The station officials maintain, moreover, that their shows are primarily reaching an adult audience and are not intended for children. “There are virtually no teens in his audience,” Bloom said of Stern. “Teens generally don’t understand what Howard’s talking about or aren’t interested in what Howard’s talking about. . . . It’s satire, and to understand this satire you basically have to be an adult.”

Arbitron ratings data tell a different story. About 40,000 people between the ages of 12 and 17 tune in to KLOS during morning drive for at least 5 minutes during any given week, and about 16,000 to KLSX, according to Arbitron. How many younger children might be listening is unknown: Arbitron does not measure the listening habits of anyone under 12.

Robert R. Butterworth, a clinical psychologist who specializes in treating adolescents, believes these programs have the potential to desensitize young people, demean sex in their eyes and, above all, confuse them.

“We’re making kids crazy,” he said. “In a sense, we’re saying to them, ‘Say no to sex’--that’s the official position. But then we’re saying, ‘Say yes to talking about sex and its exploitation.’ In psychology there’s a term called double bind , which means you’re giving two messages. We’re putting kids in an environment where there are two messages and they don’t know which one to follow.”

Others in his field share his concern, he said, but have chosen not to speak out because they don’t want to be perceived as prudish or against freedom of speech.

“A lot of people that work with kids have a tendency to not know how to deal with this because we don’t want to be in the same camp with religious fanatics who seem to be censoring everything,” he said. “It’s really putting us in a quandary. I’m a psychologist and I’m not a prude, but sometimes these shows are embarrassing to me.”

Stern, who, like Thompson, has two young children, recently voiced concern about his daughters listening to his show. When his wife called to complain about the Tawny Kitaen interview, he told her on the air, “Come on, seriously, make sure the kids don’t hear that stuff.” When she asked how to do so, he said, “There’s a real good way: Turn the radio off. Seriously, that’s something that really does annoy me. I have a certain image in my house; I’m a very upstanding guy in my house.”

Wednesday, Nov. 6: Stern , complaining about the plea bargain struck with Paul Reubens, a.k.a. Pee-wee Herman, says justice has not been served because Reubens had committed a crime by masturbating in a public place. “There’s nothing wrong with masturbation. Nobody does it more than I. . . . (But) I have a right to sit in a theater without being sprayed by Pee-wee’s love gunk.”

Wednesday, Nov. 20: Mark and Brian read from a women’s magazine tip sheet on how to spice up lovemaking. The suggestions range from talking dirty to anal sex to making love in places other than the bedroom--such as a kitchen counter. Brian says that that is where Mark’s son, Matthew, was conceived. Mark says, “That’s right. One leg on the ‘fridge, one leg on the stove.” There follows a discussion of oral sex in the car, with Brian revealing the best place he’d ever received it and the two of them discussing whether they stopped the car for their orgasms.

The religious groups to which Butterworth refers have remained uncommonly silent on the issue of morning radio shows. So have media watchdog groups.

The freedom on morning radio shows is a stark contrast to what some consider an atmosphere of artistic censorship prevailing in other entertainment media. While the Federal Communications Commission receives a host of complaints from television viewers, for example, there are only sporadic objections about raunchy radio programs.

“The standards for what offends seem to be radically different for the two audiences,” said Roger Holberg, supervisory attorney at the FCC. “Radio has to have gone really far, much farther than television, to elicit complaints.”

“Some of the TV complaints I find completely innocuous,” Holberg continued. “We’ve had complaints from people about brassiere ads, bathing suit segments, feminine hygiene products. An example of a TV complaint recently was over a bathing suit revue sort of show. There was no nudity, no off-color language. We’ve had complaints when local magazine-formatted shows have done things like that, and yet in the same community there might be a radio station that’s airing much more explicit language and no one complains. I can’t account for that.”

Floyd Abrams, a Washington, D.C., attorney who has defended many media organizations on First Amendment grounds, believes the differing reactions can be explained by the nature of radio: “Pictures are threatening. And the groups that are particularly troubled by what they view as excessive in the media are especially troubled by pictures.”

The Rev. Louis Sheldon, chairman of the Orange County-based Traditional Values Coalition, said it’s simply a case of trying to maximize limited time, money and energy--and radio is perceived as mainly having only local impact while television’s is national.

“Where do you put the bucket when the roof is leaking in so many places?” he said. “You have abortion, you have pornography, you have the television issue, homosexuality, religious liberty. Then you have the public schools. You usually go after the larger leaks because you feel they’re doing more damage.”

Other soldiers in the fight against obscenity and indecency seem almost to throw up their hands in defeat when it comes to morning radio. They maintain that people are not protesting because they have gotten so used to what they are hearing.

“We’re always encouraging people to go to the FCC, but people become desensitized,” said Patty McEntee, public relations director of the New York-based Morality in Media. “People are getting bombarded from every direction. It gets to the point where people keep hearing material that’s obscene and they assume it’s legal. This material is increasingly legitimized by being available in a mainstream format. The young generation has grown up with it so they see it as normal.”

Still others contend that potential protesters are deterred by the complaint process, which is time-consuming and requires extensive documentation.

“We do tell people (that) without a tape or transcript and time and date of broadcast and call sign, we can’t take action,” the FCC’s Holberg said.

In their surprise and dismay over something offensive, few people think to rush to a tape recorder to document what they are hearing.

Last September, for example, Thomas E. and Pamela G. Borcich of Long Beach wrote to the FCC to complain about a portion of the Sept. 5 “Mark and Brian Show” that, Holberg said, concerned “people claiming they could expel air from their vaginas in a noisy manner.”

“A significant child audience can be expected between the hours of 6:30 to 7:30 in the morning--and there was little if any care used in selecting the subject matter,” the Borcichs wrote. “. . . Please realize that somewhere there must be a line drawn to stop this type of programming--the show and programming continually digs for subjects which have absolutely no artistic or redeeming qualities. Today’s ‘Mark and Brian Show’ had 30 women callers using their vibrators on the show.”

The complaint was dismissed in December because no tape, transcript or “significant excerpt” was provided with the letter, Holberg said, precluding the FCC from reviewing the episode in context.

The regulatory agency currently is reviewing 22 complaints of indecent radio broadcasts across the country, most of which center around the banter of morning deejays, Holberg said. Only one of them is from the Los Angeles area: Last August, Shari M.D. Martin of Los Angeles wrote the FCC about three “exceedingly repulsive” Howard Stern shows broadcast in late July and early August, describing them in substantial detail. One discussed masturbation, another used profanity and the third centered around a regular Stern feature called “Lesbian Dating Game.”

In the last four years, 14 radio stations nationwide have been fined by the FCC for indecent broadcasting, which is defined by the FCC as “language or material that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory activities or organs.” Fines have ranged from $2,000 to $20,000.

A Stern show that aired in December, 1988, was cited for indecent broadcasting by the FCC, leading the commission to levy a $6,000 fine against the company that syndicates his show, Infinity Broadcasting Corp., in November, 1990. But the matter has been held up by appeals and the fine is still pending, Holberg said. (Stern suggested on the air Jan. 22 that the case would wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court and predicted that, given the court’s conservative makeup, his show would be dead within five years.)

Wednesday, Oct. 2: Stern’s guest is sex therapist Ruth Westheimer. Among his questions: “Can a man break his penis?” “What’s the biggest penis on record?” “Does a man-made vagina (in a transsexual) feel like the real thing?”

Monday, Sept. 23: Brian recounts how he had asked Mark’s wife if he could borrow the copy of Penthouse magazine that she had purchased for a recent airplane flight, and that she’d said no. Mark asks why he wanted it. Without a moment’s hesitation, Brian responds, “To masturbate with!”

For every person who publicly decries such broadcasts, there are several more--inside and outside the radio industry--who staunchly defend the rights of creative personalities to say whatever they choose.

“I hear disc jockeys doing stuff that I personally find in really bad taste or offensive, but the First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech, even if that speech is obnoxious to somebody,” said radio programming consultant Dan O’Day. “I hear disc jockeys who are racist, who are sexist, who are homophobic, and they express that on the air. . . . I find it much more discouraging that stations allow somebody to go out and be hurtful, than if somebody is offensive.”

“(The concern with children listening) hits home with people and makes sense. It’s legitimate,” said Jeff Cole, who teaches a media ethics course at UCLA. “But we cannot program all of our TV and radio stations as if a parent was sitting with their incredibly naive child. . . . All you basically have to know as a parent is that Howard (Stern) is on in the morning and on 97.1, and if you’re in the car with your child, avoid 97.1.”

Broadcast consultant John Lund tends to take a similar approach, akin to “let the buyer beware.”

“If the listeners didn’t like it, they wouldn’t listen, and if they didn’t listen, the ratings would go down,” Lund said. “So the fact is that listeners must like it.”

Indeed, that is the argument that most station officials make: These programs are among the most popular in a competitive market.

“Most markets have at least one shock jock,” said comedian and former radio personality George Carlin. “The people who run these radio stations are these so-called pillars of the community, but they’re not above making a buck, so they’re willing to stretch the moral envelope. I just look at it as one more example of a kind of two-faced, hypocritical society.”

Carlin is a veteran of the freedom-of-speech battles in radio. In 1973, WBAI-FM, a New York station licensed to Pacifica Foundation, played an album selection from Carlin’s comedy record “Occupation: Foole,” entitled “Filthy Words,” as part of a program specifically about contemporary society’s attitude toward language.

In response to a complaint filed by a listener, the FCC issued an admonition to the station, ruling that the broadcast was indecent, particularly because it aired in the daytime. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ruling in 1978, allowing the commission to ban the use of the now-infamous “seven dirty words” in Carlin’s routine.

“We’ve come a long way,” consultant Lund observed. “You may still not be able to say some of those words, but you can say the medical or physiological version of those words.”

That doesn’t necessarily mean, however, that the “anything goes” broadcast style is here to stay.

“Broadcasting changes,” Lund said. “Right now this may be the hot new thing, then two years from now there could be a lot of public indignation and advertiser picketing, and all of a sudden a broadcaster would say, ‘I don’t think I need this anymore. Maybe I need someone who shuts up and plays some music.’ Then all of sudden it goes the other way.”