Soon they'll ask us to turn in all of our radios in exchange for the "People's Radio."
Posted on 10/20/2008 5:16:22 AM PDT by Liz
Speaking of which, I hope Jim Robinson has made preparations for moving FR offshore... Just in case...
As long as the checks don't bounce, they won't mind. By the time the checks start bouncing, it will be too late to do anything about it.
Mark
Look around the mainstream media including all the major networks as well as the cable news channels including Fox. Then look at all the newspapers, especially including those of large cities. See any conservative voices? Precious few. Seems to me that the right is already muzzled.
Of course he will----the net is much more powerful than talk radio---the net globally amplifies TR's voices.
Why would the fairness doctrine apply to these fair and balanced reporters?
"Oh yes, we'll look into it" snicker, snicker. Nope, nothing there, nothing to see, just move along.
Mark
Here’s how it works:
Radio stations will be required to provide “opposing viewpoints” whenever a “non-news” segment expresses an opinion. The left will have listeners looking for conservative viewpoints being expressed, then file a complaint and a demand for “equal time”.
The stations will have to provide, FOR FREE, “equal time” to the “opposing viewpoint”. Of course, leftist opinion doesn’t get listened to, and that’s not the point. No advertiser is going to pay for ads during the “equal time” segments,
so the radio stations will just play music or sports - no more conservative dissenting views.
This will only apply to conservative and Christian radio. It specifically excludes “news” (NPR is “news” by definition - those in power get to do the defining).
Now, after you understand that - go look up “net neutrality” to see how they’ll apply this to the internet.
Roughly - The Fairness Doctrine was intended to provide all points of view on "public airways", as a way of promoting free speech, debate, and a well-rounded look at the issues. All broadcast media were required to provide equal time for the airing of viewpoints that differed from each other.
What ended up happening is that liberals took over the media. Their view is of course THE view, and is "non-biased" and "centrist". The "news" is now more editorial than anything, since they control what's shown and how it's presented.
Since they, and their party (Democrats) are "the truth, the light and the way", there is no need for equal time since there really aren't any dissenting views of consequence. They will allow occasional dissent from "extremists" (conservatives) so that the people can see just how dangerous we are. There will be no true enforcement of that doctrine since those who are supposed to enforce it are Democrats.
This will have the net effect of silencing our dissent. It will also create dangerous political pressures, an issue which our Founding Fathers understood. Suppressing speech causes the resulting anger and dissent to appear in other, less constructive ways.
The libs better pray that the next generation of conservatives don't pick up a copy of Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" and use it against them.
You don't? Look who gets to decide what's "fair". We would have a communist President, extremely liberal house and Senate. Where do you think they'd draw the line between "left" and "right"?
Remember, these are the same morons that call Bush a Nazi. They've been trying for years to silence Rush, et. al. They will use this as a hammer to silence opposition, just as they had done in the past. And yes, I DO remember when the fairness doctrine was in effect.
The Chinese don’t have access to FR, or any “unapproved” news source.
The 0bamanation would follow suit.
Exactly so.
As I’ve said before, the large crowds turning out to hear Palin speak, and record ratings for her appearance on SNL do NOT match the across-the-board “reporting” in the MSM about her ‘declining popularity’ etc. etc.
We are being lied to, in order to demoralize us and win the election for the Socialists. And if we’re being lied to about Palin, how can we believe ANYTHING the MSM tells us... literally, ANYTHING? “Obama up by 12!”. Yeah, sure.
As for the “fairness” doctrine... oh, just let ‘em. I look forward to the day when millions of extremely pissed off dittoheads march on Washington (and are completely ignored by all facets of the RAT-run media).
Second, a new Fairness Doctrine would drive political talk radio off the dial. If a station ran a big-audience conservative program like, say, Laura Ingraham's, it would also have to run a left-leaning alternative. But liberals don't do well on talk radio, as the failure of Air America and indeed all other liberal efforts in the medium to date show. Stations would likely trim back conservative shows so as to avoid airing unsuccessful liberal ones.
Then there's all the lawyers you'd have to hire to respond to the regulators measuring how much time you devoted to this topic or that. Too much risk and hassle, many radio executives would conclude. Why not switch formats to something less charged - like entertainment or sports coverage?
“Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals”
Perhaps we could rewrite it, dedicating the book to the sovreignty of God over a Holy Spirit filled people...in stead of Lucifer(the way Alinsky’s book was)
The Fairness Doctrine? Another stolen concept codified by ‘rats/criminals/collectivists/socialists.
Soon they'll ask us to turn in all of our radios in exchange for the "People's Radio."
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.