Posted on 11/16/2008 11:57:23 PM PST by ebiskit
Barack Obama sought to silence his critics during his 2008 campaign. Now, with the ink barely dry on this November's ballots, Obama has begun a war against conservative talk radio. Obama is on record as saying he does not plan an exhumation of the now-dead "Fairness Doctrine". Instead, Obama's attack on free speech will be far less understood by the general public and accordingly, far more dangerous. The late community organizer Saul Alinsky taught his followers to strike hard from an unexpected direction, an approach known asAlinsky jujitsu. Obama himself not only worked as an organizer for an Alinsky offshoot organization, Chicago's Developing Communities Project, but would go on to teach classes in Alinsky's beliefs and methods.
"Alinsky jujitsu" as applied to conservative talk radio means using vague rules already on the books to threaten any station which dares to air conservative programs with the loss of its valuable broadcast license.
Team Obama and the "localism" weapon
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rule in question is called "localism." Radio and television stations are required to serve the interests of their local community as a condition of keeping their broadcast licenses.
Obama needs only three votes from the five-member FCC to define localism in such a way that no radio station would dare air any syndicated conservative programming.
Localism is one of the rare issues on which Obama himself has been outspoken.
On September 20, 2007, Obama submitted a pro-localism written statement to an FCC hearing held at the Chicago headquarters of Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr.'s Operation Push.
Furthermore, the Obama transition team knows all about the potential of localism as a means of silencing conservative dissent. The head of the Obama transition team is John Podesta, President and CEO of the Center for American Progress.
In 2007, the Center for American Progress issued a report, The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio. This report complained that there was too much conservative talk on the radio because of "the absence of localism in American radio markets" and urged the FCC to "[e]nsure greater local accountability over radio licensing.
Podesta's choice as head of the Federal Communications Commission's transition team is Henry Rivera.
Since 1994, Rivera has been chairman of the Minority Media Telecommunications Council. This organization has specific ideas about localism:
In other words, it would not do for broadcasters to meet with the business leaders whose companies advertise on their station. Broadcasters must reach beyond the business sector and look for leaders in the civic, religious, and non-profit sectors that regularly serve the needs of the community, particularly the needs of minority groups that are typically poorly served by the broadcasting industry as a whole.
Rivera's law firm is also the former home of Kevin Martin, the current FCC chairman. Martin is himself an advocate of more stringent localism requirements.
It was on Martin's watch that on January 24, 2008, the FCC released its proposed localism regulations. According to TVNewsday: "At the NAB radio show two weeks ago, Martin said that he wanted to take action on localism this year and invited broadcasters to negotiate requirements with him."
FCC complaints as politics by other means
Remember that an FCC license is required for any radio or television station to legally operate in the United States. A single complaint from anyone can significantly hinder a station's license renewal process or even cost the station its FCC license entirely.
There have been some attempts to utilize the FCC complaint process for partisan political ends, most memorably in 2004, when Sinclair Broadcasting agreed to air a documentary questioning Senator John Kerry's war record:
Poised to pre-empt programming on its 62 television stations to run a negative documentary about Sen. John Kerry, Sinclair Broadcast Group has come under fire from critics calling it partisan and questioning whether it is failing federal broadcast requirements to reflect local interests.
Members of Congress and independent media groups have questioned the company's willingness to respect "localism," a section of federal law that requires media companies to cover local issues and provide an outlet for local voices.
One group, The Leftcoaster, went further:
But what isn't done a lot which requires the broadcaster to rack up expensive legal fees, is to challenge every one of their affiliates' FCC license renewals as they come up this year and next. ... [T]here still is time to organize and file Petitions or objections by November 1, 2004 for Sinclair stations in North Carolina and South Carolina, and for Florida by January 1, 2005.
More recently, the National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium issued a "fill in the blanks" official FCC complaint form which begins "Anything that you feel is offensive is worth reporting."
Community advisory boards as permanent complaint departments
These random efforts could be far more effective at silencing conservatives if they could only be systematized and institutionalized. That is exactly what the FCC proposed on January 24th. Every radio and television station would be required to create:
[P]ermanent advisory boards comprised of local officials and other community leaders, to periodically advise them of local needs and issues, and seek comment on the matter. ...
To ensure that these discussions include representatives of all community elements, these boards would be made up of leaders of various segments of the community, including underserved groups.
The "community advisory board as permanent complaint department" model may well be based upon the 1995 revisions of the Community Reinvestment Act, as described by Howard Husock in City Journal:
[T]the new CRA regulations also instructed bank examiners to take into account how well banks responded to complaints. ... [F]or advocacy groups that were in the complaint business, the Clinton administration regulations offered a formal invitation. ...
By intervening-even just threatening to intervene-in the CRA review process, left-wing nonprofit groups have been able to gain control over eye-popping pools of bank capital, which they in turn parcel out to individual low-income mortgage seekers. A radical group called ACORN Housing has a $760 million commitment from the Bank of New York...[emphasis in original].
Understand that even allowing conservatives to be radio talk show guests may provoke a FCC licensing complaint. Just ask "right wing hatchet man" Stanley Kurtz.
For Obama, when it comes to radio talk, silence is golden, at least when it comes to conservatives.
Can localism be stopped?
FCC observers agree that the outpouring of complaints from groups like the National Religious Broadcasters during the original comment period helped delay matters.
However, Kevin Martin's determination to enact a localism regulation has led him to ask the broadcast industry to accept a voluntary standard that the FCC would then enact. If industry failed to agree now, Martin warned, "a future FCC may be less willing to compromise than the current one."
This scare tactic -- agree to our demands today or suffer dire consequences tomorrow -- is having an impact.
What broadcasters need to do: speak up now
Radio and television station owners need to become engaged in the localism issue and then take the time to educate their own Congressman and Senators about the dangers of the FCC's proposals.
If broadcasters get involved, it just may be possible to block implementation of any localism rules during the few months remaining of the Bush Administration.
This delay is critical, since once it is the Obama Administration leading the fight for rules which would shut down conservative talk radio, Republican Congressmen and Senators will find it easier to fight back.
The Senate needs to draw a line in the sand: free speech, not localism
While President Obama will have the authority to name Commissioners as their terms end, these nominations must be confirmed by the Senate.
A few pointed questions on localism to FCC nominees during their confirmation hearings would be useful. A filibuster of any and all pro-localism FCC nominees would be even better.
Any Senator leading such a filibuster would earn the gratitude of millions of fans of talk radio as well as everyone who believes in free speech..
Jim Boulet, Jr. is the founder of the anti-localism web site, KeepRushontheAir.com. Research assistance for this article was provided by Richard Falknor of Blue Ridge Forum.
ACORN on AM
Be careful of what you wish for. Bohica may want the court to rule him invalid. He then would rule the court invalid and pack it with his stooges, thus ending the only opposition remaining in the federal government.
If, if, if...
When, when when...
BTTT
State run and sponsored radio is on the way . The Soviets of the 60s had nothing on us now.
I am a citizen, NOT a subject.
I WILL NOT BE RULED.
Obama needs only three votes from the five-member FCC to define localism in such a way that no radio station would dare air any syndicated conservative programming.
The the time is NOW for us to approach the FCC and let them know that WE THE PEOPLE are against this. AGAIN , we have to aggressively fight Obama at every turn. This assclown will move like wildfire against us and if we sit here on chat about it our rights will be pulled away.
Cruise liners are about to be a bargain, someone like Rush could set up off shore and blast away. Then, there’s also satellite radio which could be useful.
He says that HE picked YOU out. What’s his name? He looks like a good dog.
No, you are only emotionally ready. We have no strategy, no tactics ready, no leadership or funding structure. We have to find a way to get the head of the snake to eat its own tail.
Work for state legislatures; 2010 is a census year, and redistricting comes soon after.
Don’t let the Republicans run any closet socialists in your area.
“This report complained that there was too much conservative talk on the radio because of “the absence of localism in American radio markets” “
So some conservative jujitsu is in order. The task will be to demonstrate that Obama and the Democratic Party are disingenuous in this “localism” concept, since they actually are fighting very hard for the NATIONALIZATION” of every program and covering every issue.
Obama wants the NATIONALIZATION of education, our young people, health-care, energy, and everything else. Therefore their “localization” argument doesn't wash at all.
The Democratic Party wants nothing at all monitored, directed or controlled by local citizens. Imagine if local citizens were allowed the prerogative to determine if local residence are worthy of welfare benefits, just for example. !! Well, it might go their way in inner cities, but almost nowhere else.
The conservative talk show hosts on both local and national level should band together NOW to fight this. And I for one will support and fight with them.
RADIO FREE AMERICA?
I predict a run on ipods and sat radio receivers.
Podcasts and satellite radio will be the medium.
Yes, more planning must be going on to establish clear channel, high watt radio networks, broadcasting in to the USA from outside of our borders.
What will prevent the FCC from controlling satelite radio?
Since you're so anxious to issue orders to people, I believe I'll issue a couple to you.
Learn how to approach people respectfully so that they will work with you. That is a very important leadership skill.
Don't come out of the gate acting argumentative or try to be aggressive. People will dismiss you as insecure and inept and you won't be able to contribute anything of value. First impressions are very important.
Learn not to issue orders to people. You have not earned that right and all you do is turn people off. It is not intimidating. You just think it is and it diminishes you.
Work for state legislatures; 2010 is a census year, and redistricting comes soon after.
I come from a very red state and I will work for the cause of my choosing.
Don’t let the Republicans run any closet socialists in your area.
LOL - you clearly don't know what my "area" is.
I have always cc’d my letters to Congress to members of our state's legislature, and to many county officials as well.
I do believe that we need to pay more attention to our state legislators, and insist that they communicate the will of the states more directly to our federal senators.
We damaged “republicanism” and federalism seriously by amending the federal constitution to allow for the direct popular election of federal senators. This allows the US Senate to be en elitist “House of Lords.” Letters I receive from my federal senators are always, I mean ALWAYS elitist responses.
This is why I always send copies to my state legislators and remind them that the US Senate no longer represents the States’ peoples. Their agenda, even under Republican Party influence is pro-nationalism and anti-federalism. The Tenth Amendment is toilet paper to the US Senate.
This must have been one of the only things he ever "initiated".
bump
We’ve seen this before. If you’ll remember, Militias were in every state and had been around since the birth of our country, but after eight years of the Clinton Administration not a one survived.
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.