  Yeah, but I read that and I still do actually see that Casprings has a point. Lead or body of the article is another matter, but at some point you have to let the reader know that this was an integral part of HOURS of radio, that large numbers of sexual references were made; a long-running theme. Again, they varied, they don't fall as easily into categories as you might want and the reference used is problematic, but the lead still doesn't get the scope quite right  