Does that mean you can change the channel on the radio? Is that what that dial is for? I doubt attendees and viewers of the Obama-Operah shows knew that. Maybe a government PSA would help them.
What we really need is more diversity on the TV channels, they all say the same thing, the same way.
Localism is the stealth fairness doctrine.
“If markets cannot produce what society really cares about, like a media that reflects the true diversity and spirit of our country, then government has a legitimate role to play, he said.”
What a !@(*# moron. If society really CARED about something on the radio, people would listen and markets would produce it endlessly because they’d be making money.
It’s called capitalism - a concept this pimple on the butt of my Government seems to have forgotten.
fixed it.
In other words, if the people don't agree with what the government sees as "diversity in media", the government reserves the right to bend the people to their will.
My frank opinion of this man would get me banned from FR.
Note to the ‘Rats and TV advertisers: You can lead a viewer to the boob tube, but you can’t make him watch...
Does this mean we’ll get a gay nuns on dope station?
The incredible audacity of claiming that the financial markets were free to begin with is ridiculous. The financial crisis exists precisely because Government interfered with normal market forces... can you say CRA?
And Dianne Rheeme, or however she spells it ~ the old bat appears on 5 stations simultaneously in the WarshDC area ~ THAT'S ENTIRELY TOO MUCH!!!
I shall write Mr. Copps immediately and thank him for fixing it all up.
Whereas, the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution clearly states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances";
Whereas, members of Congress are recently on record saying they want to re-impose the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" on U.S. broadcasters, or else accomplish the same goal of censoring talk radio by other means, and thereby establish government and quasi-government watchdogs as the arbiters of "fairness" rather than the free and open marketplace of ideas;
Whereas, the U.S. experimented with the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" for 38 years - from 1949 through 1987 - during which time it was repeatedly used by presidents and other political leaders to muzzle dissent and criticism;
Whereas, the abandonment of the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" in 1987, thanks to President Ronald Reagan, resulted in an unprecedented explosion of new and diverse voices and political speech - starting with Rush Limbaugh - that revitalized the AM radio band and provided Americans with a multitude of alternative viewpoints;
Whereas, talk radio is one of the most crucial components of the free press in America, and is single-handedly responsible for informing tens of millions of Americans about what their government leaders are doing;
Whereas, it is a wholly un-American idea that government should be the watchdog of the press and a policeman of speech, as opposed to the uniquely American ideal of a free people and a free press being the vigilant watchdogs of government;
Whereas, the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" - either under that name, or using a new name and even more devious methods - represents a frontal assault on the First Amendment, and its re-imposition would constitute nothing more nor less than the crippling of America's robust, unfettered, free press:
SIGN THE PETITION at http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=87882
Dear FCC Chair,
The fact that liberal ideas can not survive the light of day is not the fault of the free market or conservatives, and as such, requires no federal remedy.
And on Lincon’s birthday, it is worth noting that, “...you can not build up little men by tearing down big men.”
If this guy weren’t so reflective of the fascist mentality of the Obama administration, he might understand that the EASIEST WAY to ensure “diversity” of opinion is to make it easier to start new radio stations. Someone locally wanted to start a station, and it took almost a year to get all the regulatory approval, while paying rent and other expenses waiting and waiting.
The liberals had their shot at talk radio — it just fails every time they try it. I’d love to see them try to take on Rush, Savage, Levin, Hannity, etc. and stifle free speech. Not to mention lost revenue to the station owners.
People still think of radio in 1970s terms. Any Censorship doctrine will create an endless network of floating, unlicensed radion stations that will flood the airwaves with conservative talk. All you need is a van, a transmitter, and WiFi access. Alternately, a memory stick or CD and 42 cents postage. What Obama needs to worry about are floating jammers. Same van, less trouble, jamming Marxist Radio as they roll through every town in the country. Technology makes a Fairness Doctrine obsolete.
What makes this clown think that society is unhappy with the radio?
Translation: The name, “Fairness Doctrine” has negative connotations, so when we reinstate it, we will call it something else.
I am especially wary of FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstien who got his appointment through Tom Daschle. Adelstien is a staunch advocate of taxing Internet access to give it way free to the "under served" as well as re-imposing the "Fairness Doctrine".
Fairness Docterine bump for later.........