Dumbass from the start. What dictates a side, what dictates a lean, what dictates a moderate, what dictates anything. Moonbats will always be moonbats, that’s all I know that is constant.
The problem there is that the leftists think that the NY Times, Wash Post and CNN ars fair and balanced. The FCC is never going to force THEM to have balance and we all know it.
This is a bad idea, so bad its suicidal.
My idea for expansion of the Fairness Doctrine consists of the balloon scene in “The Right Stuff” (y’know, in the clinic in New Mexico), such that all libs are running around with the expanded FD balloons up their holes.
We’ll duct tape their hospital gowns shut, because no one wants to see that.
And the elevator will be kept out of order.
And the FD balloons will have “FR” printed on them by “mistake”.
How bout telling the truth for a change? Maybe that would help.
As with most legislation, the only people that stand to benefit are lawyers.
you must remember who the ‘progressives’ are. Once they have what they want there will be new rules.
Just like the call for civility. They are never held accountable because they make up the rules as they go along.
Except that Federal Beauracrats are left leaning statists, by design. Once you institute rationing of speech, conservatives will get screwed , ultimately.
The real purpose of the fairness doctrine is not to increase the amount of news and opinion, but to reduce it and restrict it to fewer topics. A more regulated radio station won't have Rush plus a liberal and be worried about counting the minutes each is on the air and talking about any topic. Instead they'll just switch to sports talk and avoid the mess. And that is what the MSM wants.
I'm remided of the description of Newspeak in 1984:
’Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.... Every year fewer and fewer words, and the range of consciousness always a little smaller.Reduce political speech and reduce the people's consciousness. After the Tea Parties and the 2010 election that is more important to the political elite than ever. And that is the reason behind the recent push for the fairness doctrine.
To be honest, the crackdown on guns and talk radio is taking longer than I had thought.
Just glad the House sets went GOP this fall, or we would be in a gulag by now.
I don’t think it has as much to do with the First Amendment as it does the Fith, unreasonable search and seizure, because they have to seize a broadcasters property, albet temporarily, but on a regular basis, to allow liberals to spew over the airwaves, something they otherwise wouldn’t be able to do.
If liberals want to spew, they should do it with their own property on their own dime.
This is an interesting, well-written, and logical argument against re-imposition of the fairness doctrine.
Thanks for posting.
If, for some reason, the Fairness Doctrine is re-imposed it would be prudent for those on the Right to demand (and sue if necessary) to have their voice heard where ever Leftists sprout their ideas. Make them hate the Fairness Doctrine so much they repeal it no questions asked.
Not just no, but hell f**king NO!!! What retard would even entertain such an abjectly stupid idea -- "oh, I have a great idea...let's outright give up our most effective weapons against the Leftist tyranny of the last two decades (talk radio and the Internet), in favor of some harebrained scheme to play gotcha with the lamestream media, which will be of dubious effectiveness at best." Yeah, great idea...NOT!
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
What we need is the Fairness in Broadcasting Act of 2011: Henceforth, National Public Radio, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and all similar organizations shall be privately funded, exclusively.