Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Proposed FCC Rule a disguised 'Fairness Doctrine'
American Thinker ^ | November 13, 2008 | Rick Moran

Posted on 11/13/2008 10:19:41 AM PST by NCjim

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-113 next last
To: NCjim

Atlas Shrugged.......


21 posted on 11/13/2008 10:49:33 AM PST by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChinaGotTheGoodsOnClinton

No “Bush the Socialist” doesn’t think he has done enough for his socialist comrades.


22 posted on 11/13/2008 10:51:39 AM PST by stockpirate ($300 MDUS in illegal donations to O's campaign. Stolen election, where's the outrage?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
So? Why is Christian radio entitled to access the public airwaves? There is unlimited Internet bandwidth which is privately held. Radio space, on the other hand, is finite.

The First Amendment doesn't guarantee anyone a forum.

23 posted on 11/13/2008 10:52:47 AM PST by jude24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Kackikat
Bush had nothing to do with this

Exactly right. The FCC is an independent agency.

24 posted on 11/13/2008 10:53:58 AM PST by Mojave (http://www.americanbacklash.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: glide625
..........I’d think that least for a while, Limbaugh, Hannity and Ingram could “broadcast” or should I say, “podcast

IMO, this is the real issue. Right now, the FCC doesn't regulate the internet or satellite radio. A new fairness doctrine would have the effect of pushing Rush over to XM and Sirius (Hannity and Laura Ingraham are already on satellite). AM radio would have to re-invent itself or go out of business. The libs would then have to push for FCC regulation of satellite radio.

Howard Stern barely registered a blip on the radar for Sirius' subscriber numbers, but Rush moving to Sirius would be HUGH!

25 posted on 11/13/2008 10:54:31 AM PST by j. earl carter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TV Dinners

On FR there are several democrats posing as conservatives to “divide” the party. Savage isn’t that radio announcers last name and he used be part of SDS people’s lives, and probably was one. He is a divisive person, because a third party would not hurt liberals, but would divide the conservatives thereby rendering them unable to win elections for many, many years.

Bush has gotten criticizm he doesn’t deserve on so many occasions. For example: A bunch on here wanted him to NOT ATTEND THE OPENING CEREMONY TO THE OLYMPICS....that would have been an insult to the Chinese...Why? Because his parents were Ambassaders or something to Chinese government, and lived there for some time. There is protocol to many things in Gov’t, and there are cultural issues that can create terrible misunderstandings and as I read some of this stuff it just amazes me how people think “they know it all” and have all the answers as to what a President should and should not do...or even if he could do it, as the Executive Branch is limited in power and much of what he does needs congress approval.


26 posted on 11/13/2008 10:55:08 AM PST by Kackikat (.It's NOT over until it's over and it's NOT over yet....The Trumpet will sound....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: jude24
Why is Christian radio entitled to access the public airwaves?

Right. Only views you approve of should have access to the channels of information.

27 posted on 11/13/2008 10:55:41 AM PST by Mojave (http://www.americanbacklash.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: NCjim

Air America’s roll out PROVED that access to the airwaves for liberal views is not a problem.

Therefore there is no need for a Fairness Doctrine.


28 posted on 11/13/2008 10:56:07 AM PST by Doctor Raoul (It's no longer the Press Van, it's a "Tanker" Truck!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Thank you. If they are discussing this, it is on Obama’s information of his new appointment who will allow that vote to be in favor of some censorship like the UNFAIR “fairness doctrine”.


29 posted on 11/13/2008 10:56:48 AM PST by Kackikat (.It's NOT over until it's over and it's NOT over yet....The Trumpet will sound....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: j. earl carter

I’ sure HUGH would appreciate that...


30 posted on 11/13/2008 10:58:54 AM PST by Doctor Raoul (It's no longer the Press Van, it's a "Tanker" Truck!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: NCjim

I think this qualifies as “Friendly Fire”!!!

—my FR name is bushwon—now I starting to wish he hadn’t :(

How much more damage can this Administration do before they leave office?


31 posted on 11/13/2008 10:59:09 AM PST by Freedom56v2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
Kiss Christian Radio goodbye.

From what I understand about the original Fairness Doctrine it would only affect talk or opinion oriented formats, not news or groups who are not discussion politics openly.

32 posted on 11/13/2008 10:59:26 AM PST by Camaroguy84
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TV Dinners

Where we get our information is more important than the information itself. If that information is scewed in a certain direction we end up “buying” into the attitude of the presenter, and not able to understand the truth of the matter. In the next few years we are going to be “tested” with propaganda that will be presented by those who are supposedly on our side, and if we are not careful, then they will be able to turn the conservatives against one anotherl. They are counting on it, in order to be able to win another election, for many will come to their senses while others fall under the deceptions of O.


33 posted on 11/13/2008 11:00:34 AM PST by Kackikat (.It's NOT over until it's over and it's NOT over yet....The Trumpet will sound....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Camaroguy84

http://www.keeprushontheair.com/FCCNPRM208_localism.htm


34 posted on 11/13/2008 11:00:56 AM PST by Mojave (http://www.americanbacklash.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Kackikat
On FR there are several democrats posing as conservatives to “divide” the party.

I don't think it's that complicated.

Liberals are embarassed to be liberals. And they are sheep addicted to 'group think' and identify more with the group than their own principles.

Therefore, when they try and sell their BS to conservatives, they claim to be conservatives.

35 posted on 11/13/2008 11:02:22 AM PST by Doctor Raoul (It's no longer the Press Van, it's a "Tanker" Truck!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ridesthemiles

I believe it is Colin Powell’s son who is/was head of FCC.


36 posted on 11/13/2008 11:03:27 AM PST by Freedom56v2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Kackikat

Thank You!


37 posted on 11/13/2008 11:03:41 AM PST by mtnwmn (mtnwmn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

No. No one is entitled to access the public airwaves. Any printing press or internet or cable broadcast that doesn’t depend on using a limited public resource is and should always remain unregulated. To use the radio spectrum, however, is fundamentally different. There is only a limited number of radio stations that can operate in any given market. The need for them to act for the public benefit is therefore higher.


38 posted on 11/13/2008 11:04:49 AM PST by jude24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

Chirstian radio woukd need to give equal time to the other side!!!!!


39 posted on 11/13/2008 11:05:08 AM PST by stockpirate ($300 MDUS in illegal donations to O's campaign. Stolen election, where's the outrage?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: LoneRangerMassachusetts

What “team” are you on?


40 posted on 11/13/2008 11:05:28 AM PST by mtnwmn (mtnwmn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-113 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson