Congress Reconsiders the Fairness Doctrine (And why they shouldn't reinsate it)

Associated Content ^ | Feb 22, 2009 | Pricilla King

[Syncro]

Congress Reconsiders the Fairness Doctrine

February 22, 2009

by Priscilla King

Should TV and Radio Be Free to Broadcast Political Content?

In 1949, the FCC adopted a rule called the Fairness Doctrine, which required broadcasters to give "equal time" to all sides of a political dispute. Like many efforts to create fairness by imposing "equality," this policy never worked in the way that was intended. Even when the Communist Party,... didn't demand time to broadcast their views, in practice it turned out that the mainstream parties could not always present equally successful broadcasts. If a successful Democrat's show couldn't be "balanced" by an equally successful Republican's show, the most commercially viable decision for the broadcaster was to replace both shows with yet another hour of popular songs.

The effect of the Fairness Doctrine was that most radio and TV stations simply banned shows with overtly political content. While conservatives complained that left-wing media personalities had become far too skilled at injecting political bias into what passed for music, drama, comedy, and even news shows, liberals complained that sponsors were censoring any full or fair presentation of left-wing views, and intellectuals complained that, rather than encouraging fair discussion, the commercial media were broadcasting nothing with substantial political or factual content of any kind.

In 1987, the Fairness Doctrine was repealed, and even daytime radio and TV shows were free to present detailed discussions of news events. The most obvious result was the rise of "talk show" superstars who did not merely moderate call-in "straw votes" or recite news headlines, but actually tried to discuss and analyze news events on the air. Rush Limbaugh and Oprah...

[Syncro]

More at the link. The website is screwy but it is an interesting read.

[xcamel]

Much more here too...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/search?m=all;o=time;q=quick;s=Fairness%20Doctrine

[Syncro]

Great thanks for the link, I've read some of those.

Here's part of another one with Jim DeMint's take on it:

NEWS WATCH: US ‘Fairness Doctrine’ Threatens Christian Radio

Sunday, February 22, 2009 (3:45 pm)

By Joseph DeCaro, BosNewsLife International Correspondent

WASHINGTON, D.C., USA (BosNewsLife) -- A high ranking American senator will force a vote next week to prevent the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from reinstating the 'Fairness Doctrine', amid fears it could jeopardize Christian radio and conservative talk shows.

Republican Jim DeMint, who chairs the Senate Steering Committee, said his anti-Doctrine bill would halt attempts by the FCC to "censor" opinionated programs, and suggested the White House supported his proposal, BosNewsLife learned Sunday, February 22.

"I’m glad President Barack Obama finally confirmed his opposition to the Fairness Doctrine, which attacks the right of free speech on talk radio,” explained DeMint. "But many Democrats in Congress are still pushing [the Doctrine]. With the support of the new administration, now is the time for Congress to take a stand against this kind of censorship."

He added he wanted to push for an amendment within the next few days "so every senator is on record: Do you support free speech or do you want to silence voices you disagree with?"

"CONTRASTING VIEWS"

The 'Fairness Doctrine' mandated from 1949 to 1987 that broadcasters presented contrasting views on controversial issues.

Yet, instead of bringing political diversity to the airways, the Fairness Doctrine had a "chilling effect" on broadcasting debate as many networks  ceased airing controversial opinions to avoid giving opponents free airtime, critics said.

Amid mounting pressure, the FCC determined in 1985 that the Fairness Doctrine may have violated the First Amendment of the Constitution.  Two years later courts ruled that the FCC was no longer obligated to enforce it as it wasn’t mandated by Congress.  Soon after, Congress attempted to pass legislation restoring the Doctrine, but Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush vetoed the bills.

More at the hotlink in the title.

[silverleaf]

freepers unite

Do not call this the “Fairness Doctrine”

It is the Censorship Doctrine. Orwellians must NOT be permitted to practice doublethink on us.

[bigbob]

NOTHING will draw more people to hear the conservative message than by trying to censor or supress it. Think about it...

[Syncro]

Good point, the liberals brains are leaking out of the gunshot holes in their feet.

[Syncro]

They cannot be stopped from “practicing” doublethink on us.

Don't fall for it.

Using the term that it has been named is the way to fight against it.

Of course we know it is all about censorship.

[EdReform]

BTTT

[fishergirl]

Sounds like the “Unfairness Doctrine” to me.

[silverleaf]

“Using the term that it has been named is the way to fight against it.”

Do you understand the term doublethink? It is a propaganda technique that inures sheeple people to the reality. It is the sheeple people who need tot be hit upside the head with reality.

We shall have to agree to disagree.

BTW, Hannity is already using the term Censorship Doctrine.

[tbpiper]

Should TV and Radio Be Free to Broadcast Political Content?

Phrasing the argument like this bumps the whole issue up against the 1st Ammendment, where it should be.

[Syncro]

You are absolutely correct.

DeMint Quote:

"I intend to seek a vote on this amendment next week so every senator is on the record," ... "Do you support Free Speech or do you want to silence voices you disagree with?"

[Syncro]

We can disagree if you want to, but there is no reason to.

You make a valid point.

But when Senator DeMint drafts an amendment to keep the "fairness doctrine" from being reinstated if he calls it the "censorship doctrine" in the amendment it will go nowhere.

[Jim Scott]

Most of the conservatives I know predict that a Democrat attempt to re-impose the 'Fairness Doctrine', no matter what benign name they call it this time, will be a loser for Obama and the Democrats.

Collectively, conservative talk radio has tens of millions of listeners. From the syndicated Big Names (Limbaugh, Hannity, etc) to your local guy on the 1,000 watt station, the conservative talk show hosts will scream bloody murder and rally millions of listeners to the cause of exposing the 'Fairness Doctrine' as a blatant, unconstitutional suppression of political speech, aimed at silencing conservative opinion on the radio airwaves by an over-reaching, Democrat political machine in Washington, now drunk with power and acting like Fascists while posing as 'protectors' of 'fairness'.

Not to mention the fact that syndication companies and AM radio station owners will band together to stop the suppression of conservative talk radio, for pure financial survival if not for political ideology. These entities have money and would keep this in court for years.

While I'm concerned about a resurrection of the hated 'Fairness Doctrine", I believe that, ultimately, it would be 'a bridge too far' for Democrats and would fail, while exposing the Obama administration and more importantly, the Democrat party and it's congressional partisans (Pelosi, specifically) as anti-free speech.

I hope the left realizes this and abandons ideas of trying to re-instate the Fairness Doctrine but I fear that they are so besotted with their power (and Obama's lofty poll numbers) that they'll foolishly try - and ultimately, fail.

[Syncro]

Good points, thanks.

[Syncro]

Yes it does!

[zwerni]

“reinsating” it would be series and hugh!

[Kackikat]

It should be referred to as “censorship in the form of the UNFAIR “Fairness Doctrine”.

[Sudetenland]

"While I'm concerned about a resurrection of the hated 'Fairness Doctrine", I believe that, ultimately, it would be 'a bridge too far' for Democrats"[Emphasis added]

You mean the institution of socialism on a massive and pervasive scale isn't? America is well and truly "F"ed.

Oh well, it was a great run while it lasted.

[Montfort]

Does anyone ever consider National Public Radio and other liberal talk radio when they look at the talk radio situation? Heck, the governments subsidize that.