Posted on 04/15/2007 5:28:23 AM PDT by Nextrush
"Freedom is everybody's business, your business, my business, the church's business and a man who will not use his freedom to defend his freedom, does not deserve his freedom."
(Dr. Carl McIntire-preacher who lost radio station to "Fairness Doctrine" in 1973)
Back in the 1970's this controversial radio preacher's right to free speech was championed by the National Association of Broadcasters and the Radio TV News Directors Association.
The attack on Don Imus and his firing, along with Al Sharpton's moves to define what is "acceptable" on the airwaves brings back memories of the "Fairness Doctrine" Days" when "right-wing" radio preachers were attacked by liberals who used government power to bring down their enemies and destroy the First Amendment in the process.
Ironically, Don Imus used a parody (Rev. Billy Sol Hargas) of the real preacher whose broadcast began the chilling of broadcast (Radio-TV) speech in the 1960's and 70's.
Bill James Hargis criticized a liberal man in a 1964 radio broadcast that was monitored by a Democrat Party political operation. Kennedy political advisors dreamed it up as a way to hit radio stations with equal time requests that would tone down the radio preachers pro-Goldwater broadcasting during the election campaign. Radio station owners would be forced to quiet the preachers down under pressure of having to give free "equal time" they couldn't make money on. The Kennedy program became the Lyndon Johnson program after the assassination.
One station owner said no to the equal time demand (Rev. John Norris of WGCB Radio-Red Lion, PA) and it led to a battle with the Federal Communications Commission and the famous-infamous Red Lion decision by the Supreme Court in 1969.
This set the stage for the Fairness Doctrine fight of Rev. Carl McIntire. McIntire believed in a strong brand of fundamentalism that saw evangelicals (Billy Graham) as compromisers.
In fact, McIntire saw himself as the leader of a 20th Century Reformation of Protestant Christianity from the liberal theology and politics of the mainline churches.
Dr. McIntire was a strong critic of the anti-war and civil rights movements embraced by 1960's liberals.
His ego was big and he wanted to dominate things, plus be the center of attention. His followers, many of them women, make him in my mind a Clintonesque figure.
In 1965 McIntire purchased radio station WXUR in Media, PA (a Philadelphia suburb) so his radio show could be broadcast in the area of his church.
The liberals in the community led by the Council of Churches (liberal churches) and ADL (Jewish liberals) went for an advertising boycott first. (Shades of Imus) They got local businesses to stop buying time in the semi-classical music format of the station.
McIntire then filled the broadcast schedule with paid radio preachers so he could keep the station in business.
The liberals went for the Fairness Dcotrine issue next and complained to the Federal Communications Commission that WXUR was one-sided.
They took particular offense with the "Freedom of Speech" talk show hosted by Tom Livezey. On this show a poem was read talking about a dog that urinated on the grave of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Eventually the FCC ordered a shutdown of WXUR over the Fairness Doctrine and court appeals failed. The station was shut down in July of 1973.
In his dissenting opinion on the case Federal Appeals judge David Bazleton put it this way:
"In subjecting WXUR....to the supreme penalty, the FCC...has also dealt a death blow to the licensee's freedom of speech and press. Furthermore, it has denied the listening public's access to the expression of many controversial views. Yet, the Commission would have us approve this action-in the name of the Fairness Doctrine!"
In another irony, the Richard Nixon FCC chaired by Barry Golwater's RNC Chairman from the 1960's, Dean Burch, ordered WXUR off the air. It was a station owned by a Goldwater supporter from 1964.
Carl McIntire's "sin" was in leading hundreds of thousands of people in six (First in April 1970) marches to demand victory in the Vietnam War. Nixon administration policy was to negotiate "peace" with the Communists and get American troops out. (Follow public opinion and win politically, too)
McIntire could point to evidence of that including his being placed on what the liberal anti-Nixon media dubbed the "enemies list" along with anti-war hippies and liberal news reporters.
In addition, ex-White House counsel Charles Colson wrote McIntire a letter of apology from prison after Colson decided to follow Jesus Christ. Colson was known as the "hatchet man" of the Nixon Administration.
The net effect of the Red Lion and WXUR cases was to chill speech on the airwaves and it took a Supreme Court reversal-Ronald Reagan FCC combination in the 1980's to get the Fairness Doctrine on the back burner.
Now we have advertiser imtimidation of broadcasting led by the likes of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Sharpton saying something needs to be done about what is "acceptable" in broadcasting.
Its bad enough that the big advertisers and media companies are intimidated. I sense that liberalism in the form of "diversity" appointments to leadership (leftists under the label of women and minorities) is changing the scheme of things.
Would the National Association of Broadcasters and the Radio Television News Directors Association of today be willing to defend the First Amendment from this attack like they did in the 1970's?
If the Sharpton-Jackson mentality ever becomes official government policy, look out. Then the First Amendment is their toilet paper.
Would satellite subscription radio be subject to any Fairness Doctrine laws?
Rush will NOT be more careful (or less careful) than he’s always been. He is in the power chair. I DO look for oblique attacks on the Glenn Becks and Michael Savages, while Olbermann will be given a free pass to spew on and on.
btt
Currently it is not subject to FCC regulation.
However, there is a movement underway to implement decency standards on satellite (subscription) radio as well.
The liberals will not rest until they are the only ones left controlling speech.
Manufactured by Imus.
There’s a website whose members do the same sort of thing. When they come across outrageous comments, they seek out the advertisers and hosts of said persons or shows and lets forth an outcry in hopes it would be taken off the air.
It’s just that Soros doesn’t fund us when we do it.
That bit about the preacher broadcasting a poem in which a dog urinates on Dr. King's grave is illuminating. It provides a stark contrast of the racist speech controversies of today versus those in the latter half of the 20th century, and puts the lie to the notion that things haven't changed.
What has changed? Well, nobody can get away with calling black women whores on the air unless they are black themselves. Not really progress, but at least now it's not a dog pissing on King's grave, it's a Dogg (as in Snoop).
In the case of Dan Rather, CBS chose to take him off the air in part due to pressure from us. In the case of Don Imus, they did it because of pressure from the other side. If Al Sharpton had demanded Dan Rather's resignation for biased reportage of George Bush, no one here would have complained. The principle is the same.
Or have we all forgotten this?
Quote: “What he said in this case was over the line, and I’m not surprised there are consequences, not legal ones, but business ones, you can’t stay in business if your listeners don’t listen and your advertisers don’t want to be associated with you. Thats not censorship, though. Its the reason producers have to think twice before using Sean Penn in one of their movies, since there are any number of people who won’t buy the ticket if he’s in it.”
That Imus is getting what the market dictates or what he deserves is not the issue anymore. I will go as far to say that Imus ceased being the issue almost from the start. What is the issue is that the Left is using the Imus flap as justification and an opportunity to silence ALL who they disagree with. It is a simple morphing using liberal logic that goes something like this: Imus said something racist, Imus lost his radio show, All conservatives are racist, therefore all conservatives should lose their radio shows.
I watched last week as Olberman, Fraken, MSNBC and CNN tried their best (and continue to try their best) to morph Imus with Rush et. al. Of course, they provide allegedly racist quotes by Rush et. al. as evidence of their racism. Ah, but under scrutiny it becomse evident that most of those quotes have little to do with race and more to do with positions that the left doesn’t like. The left just labels it all as “racism.” To wit, expressing an opinion against rampant illegal immigration is “racist.” Thus, if you are against illegal immigration you are a racist and should be silenced.
Thus, the simple question is this, do you think that Imus’ statements justify the institution of a “fairness” (read Stalinist) doctrine effecting all who dare to speak on the public airwaves?
You are most Welcome, and No I haven’t forgot the times Freepers have boycotted products, because of their displeasure with certain action of an individual or a country ( I still do not drink French Wine).
This is the real issue.
Not many in the print/TV media, including Fox have pointed this out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.