|
September 7, 2010 | 7:45 pm Will Howard Stern Leave Sirius? Or Vice Versa?Posted by Rob Eshman Howard has been hinting that things aren’t working out between him and Sirius. In four months, his contract is up, and there’s a good chance, judging by his comments, he won’t renew. But he doesn’t seem particularly upset: He seems to have an option under wraps that will allow him to do his uncensored show through a different delivery system.
2. They think they can retain the subscribers he brought in without him. Put Howard in the window, attract a lot of PR and subscribers, then move him out and move in some cheaper model. This is my Howard as a Loss Leader Theory. 3. Howard’s contract demands are unreasonable, would set a bad precedent, would give him too much control over the company, would hurt the bottom line or investor confidence. 4. Somebody important at Sirius just doesn’t like him. 5. The company has figured out a new revenue model that doesn’t depend on brilliant, original content. Maybe there’s more money in the actual hardware business. Maybe they want to just be a conduit, renting out satellite and radio technology, not a content provider. Those are the rational reasons. But we live in a world where serious companies make the dumbest , most self-destructive decisions imaginable, dragging down whole business sectors, whole countries, in a wake of short-sightedeness and arrogance. GM, AIG, Goldman Sachs, Merrill, Bear Stearns, Nationwide. So maybe that’s what’s going on.
But I’m no financial analyst. Others, much smarter than me, have written that Sirius, with its billion-plus revenue, will experience Howard’s departure as a blip, maybe a bad year, but it is sufficiently diverse that it will recover. Writing on his blog Seeking Alpha, Relmor Demetrius says that Sirus has already proven it can get millions of subscribers for reasons other than Howard:
September 6, 2010 | 8:30 am Robert Schimmel z"lPosted by Rob Eshman The comedian, writer, thinker and mensch Larry Miller has a beautiful tribute to Robert Schimmel on his blog today. Schimmel was a regular Howard Stern guest. As funny as his stand up was, there was something in the interactions between him and Howard that unleashed an even funnier, even darker side. In some deep ways, those two understod one another. Miller understood Schimmel too. Here’s an an excerpt from the blog:
Rest in peace, Bob Schimmel.
August 26, 2010 | 3:04 pm 10 Ways Howard Stern’s Retirement Will Hurt the WorldPosted by Rob Eshman This blog is devoted to examining the effects of Howard Stern on the culture at large. These days a lot of his on air discussion revolves around whether or not he’ll renew his contract with Sirius and stay on the radio as a morning broadcaster. I can’t imagine what it’s like going through such a major life decision so publicly. Quite an industry has grown up around one man—doing anything other than simply renewing will upset the status quo for a lot of people. But I don’t care about them. At least, not for the purposes of this blog entry. What I’ve been wondering is what happens to the culture, to society, without Howard? I’ve come up with 10 effects. They’re all bad. 1. There will be less innovation in broadcasting. Howard has always been at the cutting edge of the industry. He took radio to the edge of social acceptability, until society had to catch up to him. He perfected some aspects that already existed, and invented others. I give him credit with pushing the reality show format, with introducing real life—sex, pornography, frank talk—into a very plastic medium, with finding incredible talent, with pioneering forms of satire and social commentary (see the celebrity sabotage, the societal outcasts he turns into ongoing characters, The Howard 100 News). His move to Sirius didn’t create satellite radio, but enabled it to survive. The fact that Howard has survived major show shake ups, even thrived after each one was predicted to ensure his doom, shows that he is still capable of growing and changing. There’s no one else who looks ready to push as many boundaries or develop as many new, untested ideas. 2. There will be one less powerful voice to combat the phonies, hypocrites and demagogues on our airwaves. Nobody as big as Howard speaks as frankly and as honestly about the Limbaughs, Schlesingers and Becks. Howard is not afraid to take them on, and he is more than their equal on the air. Though he is not overtly political, he can rise up and bash them down in a way that no one else—other than Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert—really can. Howard, Robin and Fred are as classic a comedy team as American entertyainment has ever produced. Their timing, their individual strengths, their teamwork— all of it honed over decades of working together—that will not be repeated any time soon. 4. There is no one to replace Howard as a truly great, on-air interviewer. Jon Stewart, Steve Colbert and Rachel Maddow are all excellent, but their format is so limiting. The rich, famous and powerful who had the balls to sit with Howard face an interviewer in a forum that is as close to no-holds-barred as exists in broadcasting. No language, topic or time limits—and an interviewer as smart and articulate as any guest. Jon Stewart won’t go there. Howard will. 5. There is no bullshit meter in mainstream media as accurate and as outspoken as Howard Stern. Howard understood that outing hypocrisy is entertaining. Whether its politicians, news stories or celebrities, Howard has a canny sense of when the public is being fed a line of crap, and he can relentlessly attack the crap-feeders. 6. There is no one who is both as childish and as mature. Howard innovates, but he is also rooted in the Boomer generation. He is not divorced from history, and it’s refreshing to hear someone who can talk about contemporary culture, but with a sense of what came before. If his references to Ed Sullivan and the Beatles and the Ramones date him, they also deepen him. Howard is sooooo Jewish. He makes Larry David, with his golf clubs and Brentwood manor house, look Unitarian. Whether he likes it or not, Stern is a very visible, voluble, valuable representative of his People. The values he promulgates—tolerance, questioning, innovation, humor, irreverence—are the best of Jewish values. Yeah, again, there’s Jon Stewart, but Stewart speaks mostly to the converted, Howard preaches to a much more diverse audience. People get caught up in the lesbian strippers and fart contests. Sure, there’s that. But the whole circus Howard brings to town embodies certain bedrock values. I’m going to reel off values I’ve heard Howard espouse, or demonstrate, time and again over the years. He seems to have lived up to them in his personal life, or at least the part that’s been made public. That’s quite an achievement for someone who has been in the public eye as long as he has. Social acceptance (Eric the Midget), gay rights (George Takei), hard work, civic involvement (Pataki, Whitman). When The Simpsons came out people attacked it for undermining values. Now churches use it to teach values. Years from now they’ll use Stern the same way. 9. There will be no one else to save satellite radio. Unless they find the Moshiach and give him a channel, shalom Sirius. And I say that as someone who like a friggin’ genius bought stock at—I don’t want to say what I bought it at. I hope Mel Karmazin will figure out a way to transform the company, but under the current model, it really needs a big personality. No one has an audience as loyal as Howard’s. Done. Period. 10. There will be no more surprises. A classic line in Private Parts has one NBC executive explaining why even people who hate Howard still tune in—to see what he’ll say next. There are very few shows that have the ability to surprise us. Some can shock us. Reality shows are full of scripted shocks and edited emotions. Howard Stern manages to supply daily, raw, entertaining surprises. They can come in the complex interactions of the people on the show, or in the bits or guests, but they inevitably come. It is very rare to find mainstream entertainment that dependably surprises and sometimes even shocks you—and in so doing challenges and provokes and makes you laugh and think. The Howard Stern Show is a circus, full of comedy and stunts and weirdos and logic-defying moments. But it is an important, undervalued circus, whose tent is as big as all society. When it leaves town, we’ll all miss it.
August 3, 2010 | 3:14 pm Anthony Bourdain: The “Howard Stern” of ChefsPosted by Rob Eshman ![]() Anthony Bourdain, The Howard Stern of Food Last night the only good food show on TV, “No Reservations,” featured a documentary on the host, Anthony Bourdain. In the midst of it, Chef Beth Aretsky referred to Bourdain as, “The Howard Stern of chefs.” It was an off-handed comment, just slipped into an hour-long documentary, but of course it leapt out for me—and not just because in that instant two of my passions—Howard Stern and great food—joined as one. What Aretsky meant was that that Bourdain’s career as a chef and writer embodied the same qualities as Stern’s career in radio: a fearless, iconoclastic, anti-establishment, outrageous, original. What stood out for me is that Aretsky, who has actually served as Bourdain’s executive assistant—she was the “Grill Bitch” in his book “Kitchen Confidential”—was using Stern’s name as a kind of adjective, but not, as is so often the case, pejoratively. (She might also have been struck by the personal similarities: both are tall, skinny, driven men whose wild public personas conceal a highly disciplined work ethic). I know she’s on to something. One day, hopefully while Stern is still alive, it will be a badge of honor for anyone to be referred to as “the Howard Stern” of his or her profession. It means you blazed a trail, outraged, upset and ultimately entertained a wide audience, took huge risks in telling the truth, pursued your craft with excellence and originality, and in so doing shook up the larger culture. All of this begs the question: Who else is the Howard Stern of his or her world? Who’s the Howard Stern of TV, of journalism, of fiction, of movies, of business? And most importantly, how Howard Stern is each of us capable of being in our own work? July 9, 2010 | 2:28 pm Is Howard Stern the Son Joan Rivers Never Had? [VIDEO]Posted by Rob Eshman ![]() Joan Rivers in Stern's Studio The new film on Joan Rivers, “A Piece of Work,” is, as Howard said on his radio show, not just a fine documentary on Rivers, but one of the the finest documentaries on any topic you’ll see this year. It drives along at a rock ‘n roll pace, delivering laughs, pathos, and shock. I don’t know who writer/director Ricki Stern is—no relation, I’m sure—but I know I’d now watch a documentary on pencil holders if her name was on it. One thing that shocked me was the doc’s initial depiction of Rivers as a washed up has-been to whom nobody pays attention. If you live in the Howard Stern universe, you’d never know that. She is a frequent, even revered guest, someone who comes in regularly and always kills. One of my favorite exchanges on the Stern show is when Howard spoke to Joan about a date she had where the man had a heart attack at the dinner table. The two of them get more laughs out of what had to have been some horror show tragedy—I love Joan’s crack about how terrified she was because the guy dropped dead before the check came. The world may have passed Joan Rovers by—at least that’s the conceit of the first part of the doc—but Howard never has. He must see in her what he has strived to be himself: a hard-working, tireless, driven and original entertainer, whose humor is based on telling the truth, on being more honest with the audience than anyone else could or even should be. They have the children of immigrant upbringing, the compulsive work ethic, the self-loathing AND self-aggrandizing posture, and utter fearlessness. In that the two are very much alike, so its no wonder that in Stern’s world, Joan River never gets old. Here’s a bit of them together:
May 18, 2010 | 3:01 pm Rima Fakih Miss USA 2010…and HowardPosted by Rob Eshman ![]() Howard Stern brought stripping out of the shadows and into the main stream, featuring strippers of all types, shapes and sizes on his radio show from the earliest days. In the beginning mainstream media dismissed this as crass and inappropriate. Now there are stripper aerobics in your neighborhood mall, and my daughter listens to Top Ten songs on AM radio about strippers. Next I predict the Coca Cola Stripping Finals in Daytona Beach. Howard’s great good sense was to pull our American appetites out of the shadows and shine the light of humor and satire on them. Howard was also poking fun at these beauty pageants and the essential hypocrisy of them long before they started self-destructing. On his show he had lesbian beauty contests, retarded beauty contests, tranny beauty contests (that one was just last week—so weird I couldn’t even listen). For years Miss Howard Stern has been a pill-addled booze-addicted unemployed blond who couldn’t string four words together. And don’t forget the title of Howard’ second book, on whose cover he posed as a beauty queen: “MIss America.” Howard long sensed that the beauty contests embodies so much that is hypocritical and ripe for satire in our culture: the myth of purity and chastity, the pressure of ideal beauty, the implicit cruelty of somebody sitting in judgment on someone else. Finally, Howard long understood the insatiable, secretive, repressed level of horniness lurking like a locked-up dog in the American closet. He was getting “average” girls naked on his show long before reality TV made fortunes doing the same. He knew that the hunger was so great, that a woman could get headlines just for peeling off her shirt. Now all these two trends collide: with pictures of Rima Fakih on the pole, the stripper beauty pageant is now entirely mainstream—the world has caught up to Howard Stern. And if Howard would draw a lesson from the Rima Fakih scandal, it’s likely this: it’s a better world for us all when half-naked Arab-Americans are on stripper poles in Michigan rather than in jail cells in Guantanamo. May 14, 2010 | 10:14 am Mario Almonte Gets Howard Stern So RightPosted by Rob Eshman First of all, welcome to LA Howard. This blog started a year ago to examine Howard Stern’s contribution to society. At the time, everyone from my wife to my more intellectual friends to many readers thought the very idea was a joke. Howard Stern? The guy who does fart jokes and midget shtick? Mr. Lesbian Stripper? How could someone so lowbrow be so highbrow? Well, it’s nice to know I’m not alone. Last week, on HuffingtonPost.com, a PR strategist named Mario Almonte wrote a brilliant essay that makes the argument I’ve been trying to make all along. He does it succinctly, cogently, and all those other SAT words. Here’s an excerpt:
May 11, 2010 | 8:14 am Howard and HefPosted by Rob Eshman In yesterday’s Los Angeles Times, columnist Steve Lopez profiled Hugh Hefner. And it made me think of Howard. On the surface, the two couldn’t be more different. Hefner is 30 years older than Stern. He’s the child of deeply Christian Nebraska farmers. He made his reputation cultivating an aura of suave sophistication, worldliness and sex appeal—just about 180 degrees off the image Howard presents as an uncool, uncomfortable, anti-social dork. And yet… Lopez gets under the surface of Hef, and under the surface, the parallels between the two men become much more obvious. Both men created a media empire by breaking cultural taboos. Both men have an intense work ethic. They are hard-working, obsessed perfectionists. And they are both highly intelligent (Hef’s IQ is said to be 150. Howard plays the dope but his is clearly way up there). Both men have a sense of their historic role. They are meticulous archivers of their lives and careers. While they sell fun, they take their careers quite seriously. “Hefner held a stack of notes detailing his millions in donations to film preservation and the study of cinema at UCLA and USC,” wrote Lopez, ” as well as a list of 22 documentaries he has helped finance, including movies on Mary Pickford, Lon Chaney and Rita Hayworth.” Or consider this passage about Hef’s archives:
Of course. the easy parallel is that both men created careers for themselves that were, despite the trials and tribulations, really fun. That’s very very smart.
May 5, 2010 | 2:37 pm Howard Stern Goes to ShulPosted by Rob Eshman Howard waited until late in the show today to announce that for the first time in his adult life, he was going to a synagogue to pray. I missed the segment (I heard him talking about a staffer named Shuli, not shul), but I read about it at the excellent howardstern.com site.
As I’ve written elsewhere on this blog, Howard has the same tortured relationship with organized Jewish religion that many of his peers have. Think Woody Allen, Phillip Roth, Larry David, Neil Simon—Howard is their radio equivalent—and all of them have skewered the faith they had shoved down their throats as children. Howard has taken that to hysterical extremes—playing his squeaky-viced bar mitzvah tapes for comic effect, inviting the comedian Gilbert Gottfried in to do shtick as a rabbi, deriding—often with good reason— the emptiness of the bar mitzvahs he’s forced to attend. But… But it is not surprising that as he’s matured, he has come to a deeper, spiritual understanding of what Judaism has to offer. If you look at Roth’s writings, even Woody Allen’s later movies, you see the same evolution. These men accumulate success, fame, money, but inevitably they look for more. In their art, they are often asking big questions in funny ways. In their lives, they are prone to asking the same big questions. Their obsession with mocking Judaism belies an obsession with Judaism, a sense that there’s more there there, that the religion that disappointed them so as adolescents could perhaps sustain them as adults. I don’t know what crisis Howard is undergoing— His children? Beth’s need for a child? His parent’s aging? Artie? His career choice? How dumb am I to even speculate?—but I do know that religion done right—Judaism done right— can be a powerful tool for guiding one through turmoil, indecision, darkness.
“Imperfection holds the sparks of holiness,” wrote Rabbi Irwin Kula in his book Yearnings, “we must understand the wisdom of our yearnings.” Hang in there Howard…. April 5, 2010 | 2:51 pm Howard Stern v. Jamie FoxxPosted by Rob Eshman One thing Howard Stern understands about radio is that it is a macho medium. It’s a man’s world. My friend Teresa Strasser, who used to co-host the Adam Carolla Show on 97.1, pointed out to me that a woman DJ doesn’t stand a chance in drive time. It’s cultural, but it’s also aural—the timbre of a woman’s voice is difficult for people to listen to for four or five hours at a time. A quick glance of who’s who in radio bears that out—Rush, Howard, Sean Hannity. With one exception—Laura Ingraham, the Top Fifteen radio talk show hosts are men. Stern understands that in a man’s world, macho rules. That’s why he has perfected the art of the radio battle—he knows how high the stakes are in the schoolyard brawl of radio. His current comer is the actor and singer Jamie Foxx. Some crew on Foxx’s Sirius show attacked Howard for comments he made about ‘Precious’ actress, Gabourey Sidibe. Stern said Hollywood didn’t have many opportunities for grossly obese women, and that the press and others would do her a favor by pointing out to her and those who look up to her that Sidibe’s weight problem will cripple and kill her. That set Stern off—he had to fight back—and it was on. What’s fascinating is how quickly it gets ugly on radio. Foxx called Robin Quivers a “house nigger”—about as low a name as one could use to describe a woman who has pioneered a path in prime time radio. (Seriously, Robin Quivers is the Hattie McDaniels of radio, period. It’s an achievement she gets no credit for, because in a race-obsessed society people—like Foxx—can only see her in relation to Stern). “The crew started in with me and I’m not some pussy who’s gonna sit here and take it and listen to some bullshit.” He said. “And quite frankly, I’m mad now because, you know, I got a shitload of stuff on Jamie Foxx, which isn’t a lot of fun and if he wants to start in with me….I don’t really care about Jamie Foxx. He says we’re friends but we’re not friends. He’s been on my show a couple of times. I don’t consider him a friend anymore.” That opened up the floodgates—Stern kept pushing further and further. He knows fights are a way to establish radio pecking order, and he has 30 years more experience with it than Foxx. Stern knows how to go for the jugular and hang on until the floor is bloody. He started by hinting that Foxx himself is in the closet. ( In Stern’s universe the greatest crime is inauthenticity. He’s a champion of gay rights, but quick to attack those who pretend to be something they’re not, like straight.). And that’s likely just the beginning…. Meanwhile, reading the comments on the sites covering the fight, it’s pretty shocking how many people go to the Jew thing. Take a peek at some of the comments: y: MrsJones on 3/31/2010 7:24AM
Howard is an extremely powerful Jewish man…He hasn’t done what he has done all these years without some serious protection from the hierarchy…You will all know how powerful Howard is by how Jamie response to him…Howard basically blew Jamie’s cover about being gay… jandrus AND THIS IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE RIGHT HERE!
jandrus howard stern is in the illuminate and hes a jew that is why he is a cry baby DIZ CRACKAZ HOWARDZ DA JEWZ STERNZ IZ SMELLZ LIKEZ WETZ DOGGZ
Guest
Three thoughts: Howard seems to represent “Jew” in the popular conscience more than any other celebrity, maybe save Steven Spielberg. Some people out there have some pretty conflicted feelings about Jews. Advice to Jaime: Go into the Stern studio and make nice. You don’t need this. Ask Les Moonves.
February 2, 2010 | 4:55 pm Superbowl HowardPosted by Rob Eshman It’s Wednesday, and all America is looking forward to Superbowl Sunday.
Except for me. And Howard.
I always liked Howard, but when did like turn to love? When did I go from fan t acolyte, from someone who realizes how good he is to how important he is? When I first heard him talk about the Superbowl.
“I don’t give a Shit about the Superbowl,” he said. “It’s a pigf——.”
That’s right—football, baseball, hockey, basketball—Howard has made it clear it’s not his thing. Each day he speaks to a valuable demographic of men between the ages of 18-55, prime football-lovin’, Sports Center watching, game betting fans, and he’s just completely honest with them: he couldn’t care less.
I related. I followed baseball and football as a kid—my favorite book was Jerry Kramer’s autobiography—but I eventually lost interest. When my friends talk about scores and quarterbacks and Sunday game lineups, I zone out. I used to ask a friend who follows college basketball to brief me during March Madness so I’d be able to exchange a few knowing comments with my other male friends. Yeah, North Carolina put up a great D. Then I stopped: Really, who the fuck cares? It’s a pigf——.
Listening to Howard, I realized I wasn’t alone. Here he was, talking to guys, admitting he couldn’t care less about pro sports.
Which demonstrates the number one, be all, end all, bottom line Stern-Rule-for-Life: Be Yourself. In a word: Authenticity. Macho is not having to act macho. Maybe only pussies hate sports, but it takes a real man to admit it.
Talk radio is a man’s world. It’s guys listening on their way to work. It’s guys calling in to vent and rant and rail because no one else cares about their opinions and frustrations and the guy at the other end of the phone gets money to listen— not to care, mind you, just to listen and figure out how to turn the Id and angst of the American male into good radio.
My friend Teresa Strasser, who used to co-host the Adam Carolla Show on KLSX, said the chances of landing a lead drive time radio gig for a woman are close to zero. Lots of reasons: men won’t bare their souls in public to a woman; men can’t ultimately relate to a woman—if she’s too macho, she’s a freak, if she’s not macho enough, she’s a wife. And it’s even more basic, Teresa told me: people get tired of the higher pitch of a woman’s voice.
I for one could listen to Teresa day in day out— but I get what she’s saying: most men can’t. What I love about Howard is despite the fact that he rules FM talk, he’s not like most men.
It may be the most subversive aspect of Howard Stern: not the way he’s brought lesbians and hookers and reality programming into the mainstream, but how he has modeled a different kind of American Macho.
Take the whole gay thing. Long before it was popular to support gay marriage or gays in the military, Howard did it. With humor, yes, but also with passion. If someone wants to die for his country, he’d say over and over, go ahead and let him, who cares what he does in bed. The way Howard put it was much more clever. Hey, I don’t have the balls to go fight. I don’t want to die for my country. If some gay guy wants to take my place, why would I want to stop him. When the history of gay liberation in this country is written, it will have to include a few paragraphs on Howard Stern.
By playing the coward, Howard made gay equal macho. And he did it over and over, years ago, before the head of the Joint Chiefs finally had the balls himself to reverse Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. WIth Howard it was always, Don’t Ask, Don’t Care.
Same with gay marriage. If a couple of gays want to give a kid a good home, what do I care? Was the way Howard put it. I don’t want to raise these kids without homes. I don’t want to commit. If they want to, I say let them. Howard made gay look tough and professional sports look silly. He reversed the stereotypes, and subverted the American Macho ideal.
But he didn’t just destroy the ideal, he replaced it with one a lot of men, like me, can relate to. It’s not the Budweiser commercial, Army recruitment trailer man- that’s the one we’ve been sold our whole lives. In Howard’s world, real men love straight sex but don’t fear gay men. They like to work out and play chess. They listen to Rob Zombie and Katy Perry. They love Terminator and American Idol. They talk about doing shots and about turkey chili. They want to see Osama Bin Laden and his cronies bombed until their DNA evaporates, but they don’t want to, as Howard said today, “send young men to die in winless wars.” They can love Dancing With the Stars and hate the Superbowl. They can be their authentic selves, no apologies. ( I didn’t. Let’s face it: That’s just gay.)
January 28, 2010 | 6:54 pm Howard’s Healthy EgoPosted by Rob Eshman One of the criticisms you hear about Stern is that he has an out of control ego. I think a better term is healthy. Howard’s healthy ego is a lesson in itself. And the lesson is this: ego is good. People say we live in a narcissistic society, that we are the twisted children of a Me generation of unbridled entitlement and desire, but often I find just the opposite: people shrink from their true power and their true potential. Every rabbi at some point drags out the story of a sage named Zusia who had a vision of what the angels would ask him in heaven. They wouldn’t ask him why he wasn’t as great as Moses, or Joshua. They would ask him why he wasn’t as great as Zusia. “They will say to me, ‘Zusia, there was only one thing that no power of heaven or earth could have prevented you from becoming.’ They will say, ‘Zusia, why weren’t you Zusia?’” Howard doesn’t shirk from being fully himself. He has used his talents to their fullest, and asserted his personality into a sedate media landscape. He’s been fully Howard. The apotheosis of this is of course the Howard 100 News—an entire professional news team devoted to gathering and presenting news about Howard Stern and his universe. Is there a better spoof of our celebrity-crazed society? Is there a more brilliant parody of celebs who feed on creating TMZ- worthy moments? The Howard 100 News is celebrity culture taken to its goofy extreme, where every star hires his or her own team of journalists to report on their every thought. (The difference between TMZ and Howard 100 News is that Howard uses truly seasoned journalists. I’ve been interviewed by Steve Langford a few times and there is zero difference in professionalism and approach between him and someone reporting on health care or nuclear terrorism). I’m trying to think of any comedian who’s done something similar to the Howard 100 News, and I can’t. It’s not like having a straight man, it’s like having a division of straight men. That comic idea—that a star deserves his own news channel—can only come from someone who isn’t afraid of asserting his ego, of taking total control of his world and his image. Howard’s got an out of control ego? Like that’s a bad thing…...
|