I don't believe the Fairness Doctrine would cover pod-casts.
If the “Fairness” Doctrine were imposed AND the SCOTUS didn’t strike it down, expect to see opinion-oriented radio shows migrate to web- and satellite-based models.
Sure, it’ll do some damage in the short term, but in the long run that’s where things probably are headed anyway. Obama simply would have pushed the technology, in the sense that some (not all, but many) listeners will then say, “OK, now I’m going to get my car rigged for satellite/ internet ‘radio,’” many years sooner than they otherwise would have.
Thanks, Obama!
They have every intent of shutting down free exchange of info on the net as well as the airwaves.
These creatures are NOT nice.
Only if they bother with even pretending to observe the Constitution. Radio and TV are regulated by the federal government under the Interstate Commerce clause. But the regulation is *supposed* to be to insure noninterference. It's been stretched further to "ensure the proper use of the supposedly public airways". The fairness doctrine already stretches even that. Why not stretch it a bit more and regulate all interstate media under the IC clause. That would of course include cable and the Internet.
People who don't respect the Constitution..don't respect the Constitution.
IOW, any new rules could cover whatever they wanted. At least until the Supreme Court got around to ruling against them, if they did.