[MaxPower2k3]

someone at Engadget asked a couple of rather poignant questions to the CEO of XM at CES today, and they posted videos of his responses. they're WMV, so i only got audio, but they're pretty funny. here's the questions:

“What impact do you think Howard Stern going to Sirius is going to have on your business, and how close did you come to signing him?”

and:

“Dr. Laura over the past couple of years said that gay people are biological errors. You talked before about decisive programming (i.e. Stern), I wonder what XM’s position is on hate speech was and if you condone it. And why would you associate yourself with her after you said you wouldn’t associate with Howard Stern because of controversy issues. Are you going to loose subscribers, and do you feel gay people are biological errors?”

video of question 1

video of question 2


Edit: Full engadget article

[alligator]

Did he say "half a billion dollars"????? Wow.

[MaxPower2k3]

Originally posted by alligator:
Did he say "half a billion dollars"????? Wow.

yeah, Stern got somewhere around $500 million for his Sirius deal. I'm sure it'll be well worth it for Sirius, considering how many new users they've already gotten. before that, XM was the clear leader in satellite radio. Now, Sirius has at least leveled the playing field, if not pulled ahead.

[sideus]

XM is awesome. Have it in my car. Good stuff.

[euchomai]

Originally posted by MaxPower2k3:
yeah, Stern got somewhere around $500 million for his Sirius deal. I'm sure it'll be well worth it for Sirius, considering how many new users they've already gotten. before that, XM was the clear leader in satellite radio. Now, Sirius has at least leveled the playing field, if not pulled ahead.

Please find me a link of Sirius leveling or pulling ahead. I tried to find that but only found that XM has 2 million subscribers and Sirius has 500,000. I'm just curious, not trying to be inflammatory. This is an article from Dec 27th, pretty large lead XM has it seems.

What I found is this:
NEW YORK (Reuters) - XM Satellite Radio Holdings and Sirius Satellite Radio on Monday said the companies surpassed their full year 2004 subscriber targets, boosted by the holiday shopping season.

XM, the top U.S. satellite radio service provider, said it topped its full year goal of 3.1 million subscribers.

Sirius, the second largest provider which recently lured controversial radio host Howard Stern to join its programming roster and Mel Karmazin, former president of Viacom Inc. (Research), to be its new CEO, said it surpassed one million subscribers.

[Superchicken]

But Doctor Laura is saying what all the gay activists are saying. I can't tell you how many times I've heard people state that homosexuality is simply biological. Obviously humanity would have not started out homosexual or we would not have procreated. Thus any child had by two heterosexual people, if homosexuality was biological in origin, would be a freak/mutant etc.
Which is why I think it's far more reasonable and respectful to take the evidence that links it to psychological factors. If homosexuality was genetic, all you'd end up with is people trying to make hormonal and chemical cures that will make people straight. Which will cause a lot more harm than admitting that yes, there do seem to be strong indications it's a psychological condition. People seem to pretend if it's psychological then they're nuts or there's something wrong with em. And the fact is if you don't think it's wrong to be someone who enjoys certain types of food because of psychological conditioning.

Blah... forget it nobody listens anyway.

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

Man he got him good at the end of the second question. He didn't know how to answer that one!

[mdc]

is it just me or did that second one kinda go against his first answer?

they will have dr. laura even though she offends some people, but they won't have howard because he offends some people?

maybe he first answer was a lot of blah blah blah covering the fact that they didn't want to pay $500,000,000 for him? and the 2nd answered proved that.

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

Originally posted by mdc:
is it just me or did that second one kinda go against his first answer?

they will have dr. laura even though she offends some people, but they won't have howard because he offends some people?

Yup that is the beauty of it. Not to mention he speaks of freedom of speech and opinions yet he got scared with the KKK question even though it is valid. His contradiction is worthy of MacNN discussions of gays/Christians

[DeathMan]

I think she can say its an error from a purely genetic point of view. If the purpose of genetic mutation (good or bad) is to improve and further the species, strict homosexuality is definitely an error.

However, its pointless to put a human issue in the same type of thoughtless terminology. In this case, she is justified in calling it an error, but not for the reasons that she's saying it. She says its an error because she thinks its "wrong." Which is stupid because you can't say what is right and wrong for a person's sexuality, that's sort of their choice, and not everyone has the patented "Dr. Laura" BeliefSystem.

Which gets me to my point. At some level, it looks like we have a genetic disposition toward getting down with one gender or another (or both), but at the same time, the human in us can really decide how we want to live based on our own value systems.

I don't think that is an error.

[Big Mac]

Originally posted by euchomai:
Please find me a link of Sirius leveling or pulling ahead. I tried to find that but only found that XM has 2 million subscribers and Sirius has 500,000. I'm just curious, not trying to be inflammatory.

Howard just recently referred to Sirius passing 1M subscribers. So they haven't surpassed XM yet - Stern would be crowing otherwise. But with Mel Karmizan and Howard Stern behind Sirius, XM has serious cause for concern.

[sideus]

XM is over 3 million subs now.

[screamingFit]

Does anyone really think that Stern is worth half a BILLION dollars? I've sat through his show on the radio and VH1 a couple of times. I even saw his stupid movie. I seriously don't see what the draw is to him.

"oooo...there's a girl in the studio taking off her top."
"oooo...I'm making fun of a guy with a speech impediment."

He better be making one hell of giant donation to the tsunami relief charities!

(This isn't to say I'm just singling out Stern for making too much money. There are many people who are way overpaid for what they contribute to society.)

[ringo]

Originally posted by mdc:
is it just me or did that second one kinda go against his first answer?

they will have dr. laura even though she offends some people, but they won't have howard because he offends some people?

maybe he first answer was a lot of blah blah blah covering the fact that they didn't want to pay $500,000,000 for him? and the 2nd answered proved that.

It was all just a load of PR bulls**t anyway because XM has Opie and Anthony (With Jim Norton) who are usually going to be more offensive to your average listener than Howard could ever be. He should have just said that Howard is way past his prime and left it at that.

[Superchicken]

Originally posted by DeathMan:
I think she can say its an error from a purely genetic point of view. If the purpose of genetic mutation (good or bad) is to improve and further the species, strict homosexuality is definitely an error.

However, its pointless to put a human issue in the same type of thoughtless terminology. In this case, she is justified in calling it an error, but not for the reasons that she's saying it. She says its an error because she thinks its "wrong." Which is stupid because you can't say what is right and wrong for a person's sexuality, that's sort of their choice, and not everyone has the patented "Dr. Laura" BeliefSystem.

Which gets me to my point. At some level, it looks like we have a genetic disposition toward getting down with one gender or another (or both), but at the same time, the human in us can really decide how we want to live based on our own value systems.

I don't think that is an error.

I don't think it's an error either, but I still don't understand why the gay activists want to push this sort of type of agenda. It makes homosexuals seem like a different branch of humanity or something like that. Which is not true, if gay people want the same rights and to be treated like everyone else why are they trying to pretend like they are not like everyone else? Though I suppose part of it is that it gets rid of any "blame" but if these groups are convinced that they're right, then who cares about blame?

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

Originally posted by Superchicken:
if gay people want the same rights and to be treated like everyone else why are they trying to pretend like they are not like everyone else?

What the hell are you talking about?

[Superchicken]

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
What the hell are you talking about?

I'm talking about bad marketing of sexuality that could in the future be used to justify the genocide of millions if not over time billions of children believed to have some sort of homosexual gene combination. How many straight parents do you think want a gay baby? How long before you think we see parents checking out their babies' genetics and deciding if they want to abort or not? Designer babies are not so far away.

[MaxPower2k3]

Originally posted by Superchicken:
I'm talking about bad marketing of sexuality that could in the future be used to justify the genocide of millions if not over time billions of children believed to have some sort of homosexual gene combination. How many straight parents do you think want a gay baby? How long before you think we see parents checking out their babies' genetics and deciding if they want to abort or not? Designer babies are not so far away.

so.... gay people wanting to get married will cause mass genocide?

[ironknee]

[sneaks in]

BABABOOEY!

[/sneaks out]

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

Originally posted by Superchicken:
I'm talking about bad marketing of sexuality that could in the future be used to justify the genocide of millions if not over time billions of children believed to have some sort of homosexual gene combination. How many straight parents do you think want a gay baby? How long before you think we see parents checking out their babies' genetics and deciding if they want to abort or not? Designer babies are not so far away.

Don't you think the bigger problem is people who would actually kill their baby because they will be born gay. Sick people.

And I was wondering what you meant by "if gay people want the same rights and to be treated like everyone else why are they trying to pretend like they are not like everyone else?"

Who is pretending they are not like everyone else?

[ThinkInsane]

If I want political stuff, I'll go to a political website. If I want to keep abreast of the latest new gadgets, I'll go to a gadget website. If Engadget is going to start combining both of those things, I'll go elsewhere to get my gadget news. I wish people would realize that combining your political leaning, your religion, or your sexual orientation with your business is not good business.

I also wish people would learn exactly what the right to free speech is, because many, many people seem to think they know exactly what it is, while in reality, they haven't got a clue.


Oh, and in my humble opinion, both Dr. Laura and Howie suck. They should mate and create a pack of undesirable, obnoxiously ignorant, hideously unattractive babies. I can't believe anyone would give a half a billion dollars to a guy I would park my car on for a diet soda. I guess my idea of value is different than that of Sirius.

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
If I want political stuff, I'll go to a political website. If I want to keep abreast of the latest new gadgets, I'll go to a gadget website. If Engadget is going to start combining both of those things, I'll go elsewhere to get my gadget news. I wish people would realize that combining your political leaning, your religion, or your sexual orientation with your business is not good business.

Ya but the whole point of the show was CONTENT, not the technology. His question was valid based on what he said about Stern.

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by Superchicken:
But Doctor Laura is saying what all the gay activists are saying. I can't tell you how many times I've heard people state that homosexuality is simply biological. Obviously humanity would have not started out homosexual or we would not have procreated. Thus any child had by two heterosexual people, if homosexuality was biological in origin, would be a freak/mutant etc.

No more than Italians are freaks/mutants — or, as Laura put it, errors. Because the first humans? They weren't Italian.

Originally posted by Superchicken:
Which is why I think it's far more reasonable and respectful to take the evidence that links it to psychological factors. If homosexuality was genetic, all you'd end up with is people trying to make hormonal and chemical cures that will make people straight. Which will cause a lot more harm than admitting that yes, there do seem to be strong indications it's a psychological condition. People seem to pretend if it's psychological then they're nuts or there's something wrong with em.

That's the same fallacy you're making with genetics. Anyway, psychology is heavily influenced by genes, so making it an either-or proposition is pretty silly to me.

Originally posted by DeathMan:
I think she can say its an error from a purely genetic point of view. If the purpose of genetic mutation (good or bad) is to improve and further the species, strict homosexuality is definitely an error.

No more so than menopause, and I don't see Laura jumping on middle-aged women (maybe because that one comes too close to home). Just because something makes you less likely to reproduce doesn't make it necessarily harmful to your genes' viability.

[milhous]

just watch, at some point, they'll merge.

[olePigeon]

Enjoy it while you can. They're only there to kill off free radio, like cable's done with TV. Soon you'll be paying $60/month for what used to be free, AND you get commercials.

[olePigeon]

Being genetically gay comes down to a few chromosomes. It is a mutation, but not a disease. However, it's a mutation like any other, and that's what makes people unique. Dr. Laura doesn't condemn dwarves or albinos because her God book doesn't say it's wrong. But she'll condemn homosexuals because it's in there.

I'm glad that question came up. Dr. Laura spreads all that hate speech under the guise of Christianity. Part of the reason I don't particularly care for most organized religions.

Before anyone responds, no, just because the Bible says so doesn't mean it's right.

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

Originally posted by milhous:
just watch, at some point, they'll merge.

Stern and Laura?

[olePigeon]

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
Stern and Laura?

Whoa. Anti-Christ.

[Paco500]

I think you all are condemning Dr. Laura for spouting Christian-based hatred when, I'm pretty sure, you should be condemning her for being Jewish-based hatred.

You really should be bashing her for being a judgmental, closed minded bully. Neither Christianity nor Judaism teach that sort of behavior. She's a spiritual error.

[Paco500]

Originally posted by olePigeon:
Before anyone responds, no, just because the Bible says so doesn't mean it's right.

The Bible really doesn't have too much to say about homosexuality. Jesus was quiet on the subject. There was some old testament stuff, but they were just as uptight about eating the wrong foods, wearing the wrong fabrics, and letting the ladies in the temple during their "time." Homosexuality is in no way singled out- it just makes people squirly so they get worked up about it.

Paul was the main voice against homosexuality in the New Testament, and he was down on sexuality in general- saying, basically, only the weak should marry. The truly holy should stay celibate.

The Bible says lots of stuff is wrong that the modern church doesn't get worked up about. Perhaps it's hypocrisy, I dunno.

[Superchicken]

First off Laura is not Christian, she's Jewish. Second I'm not supporting her view. That said yes Psychology is highly influenced by genetics. I was not trying to make it an either or. There are certainly genetic predisposition's. If you looked at lounge posts by me in the last year or so you'd find nothing that I've said that disputes this fact. That said, those predispositions may not inherently make a child gay. Some of them may simply make that child more likely to end up in situations where they are likely to develop into someone who is homosexual (or as some authors have suggested remain homosexual though that's a whole nother issue). But I am saying if we end up with people mapping genes and saying THIS IS THE GAY GENE! Then there's a decent possibility that those will be targeted by sleeze balls with the intention of protecting mothers from having those dreaded gay babies.

I'm not saying that that would be right at all. I know a lot of very kind, and wonderful gay people (many who don't post here ) and I wouldn't want any of them to have been aborted or anything like that. But I can't fix humanity (nor can I stop short sighted guided and doctored research) but I can warn against the problems of humanity. Very few "red blooded horny hetero men" would want to know their son was going to be a "fag". While I would love to say make the population less stupid and small minded. I can't force that to happen, and I'm simply saying. There's a good chance this research will be used to justify the murder of a whole lot of people.
Though this is also another reason to fight against abortions... I wouldn't be near as worried if those were not allowed.

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

Originally posted by Superchicken:
But I am saying if we end up with people mapping genes and saying THIS IS THE GAY GENE! Then there's a decent possibility that those will be targeted by sleeze balls with the intention of protecting mothers from having those dreaded gay babies.

Right and if we find the fat gene parents who don't want fat kids will kill those also.

[CollinG3G4]

Gay genes, Fat genes.... The real scientists are working on serious genetic issues like inherited cancer. Some people would be much better off if they would stop mixing actual science with political hogwash.