Jump to content

Yea or Nay?  

31 members have voted

  1. 1. Are you for or against re-instituting the Fairness Doctrine?

    • For
      7
    • Against
      20
    • Fat.Boy(s)
      4


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Having grown up in a radio family, I must say that the Fairness Doctrine is an anathema. Censorship in sheeps clothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, I think this fairness doctrine seems pretty ridiculous. Maybe there are more conservative radio programs out there, but in this case I think market forces should be let be, there are plenty of media outlets and it doesn't seem to me like liberals are getting totally cut out of the public forum for discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Democratic efforts to regulate talk radio...

 

that's all i had to read. since when do democrats do anything that wouldn't benefit themselves? (or republican's for that matter). it's a free market, freedom of speech issue. we as consumers of information have the choice to go wherever we chose to to get our news and listen to opinions. would a liberal really trust a fox news affiliate to give balance to the conservative opinion? as a conservative, i don't put much stock in nbc to give a fair shake. just my opinion. and for anybody that doesn't already know, i'm not a republican.

 

if the message isn't getting the reception you expect...maybe it's the message that's the problem. this "fairness doctrine" assumes that we are all morons. typical politicians...regardless of party.

Link to post
Share on other sites

this is both insane and more fuel for the fire for the same conservative radio hosts they are trying to 'balance out'. seriously, why do they involve themselves in shit like this that make the democratic party look like such pussies.

 

i've got a better idea...get rid of them all, both conservative and liberal. that would also create a truly fair and balanced airwaves. these 'pundits' on either side do nothing to help create a fact-based, politically educated public. as he's supposedly my guy, i'll get dick durbin on the line and spitball that equally idiotic and unrealistic idea w/ him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My two real questions are:

 

1. If the fairness doctrine goes into place, what about groups like neo-Nazis, Libertarians, Anarchists, Communists, Trekkies, etc. If they have a political group do they get a "fair share" of airtime to or does it just split between dems/republicans...and who gets to judge what "fair" is?

 

2. Will VC have to comply with the fairness doctrine? If so, does this mean we'll have to put Ikol on payroll to post more frequently to balance out the liberals, or do we just delete half the liberal posts in a given thread and double post the conservative ones?

 

 

Thanks, friends.

 

Another fair and balanced post from me.

 

:usa :canada

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are either with the

Fat.Boy(s)
or you are with the terrorists.
Link to post
Share on other sites
If the F.D. had not been trashed, his network would have had to give equal time to opposing viewpoints. Pretty simple concept.

And for some reason, that means that he would not have been able to get a job in radio, and been well-compensated for it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
And for some reason, that means that he would not have been able to get a job in radio, and been well-compensated for it?

 

Zip it, Newt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If the F.D. had not been trashed, his network would have had to give equal time to opposing viewpoints. Pretty simple concept.
radio's would have been turned off everywhere after rush's entertaining ego would have been shut off in favor of the left's feeble attempt at rebuttal. the left has had nearly twenty years to come up with an answer to rush and still nothing? so failure should be rewarded by giving equal time? what company is going to buy air time for that? certainly not the taxpayer's.

 

Very Limbaugh-esque response.
you didn't answer my question.
Link to post
Share on other sites
And for some reason, that means that he would not have been able to get a job in radio, and been well-compensated for it?
He was already in radio. But under the F.D. his statements/political philosophy would have been challenged on a level playing field. Must do work now. I will take my support of the F.D. to my grave.
radio's would have been turned off everywhere after rush's entertaining ego would have been shut off in favor of the left's feeble attempt at rebuttal. the left has had nearly twenty years to come up with an answer to rush and still nothing? so failure should be rewarded by giving equal time? what company is going to buy air time for that? certainly not the taxpayer's. you didn't answer my question.
I can't even make sense of this drivel.What was your question?
Link to post
Share on other sites
He was already in radio. But under the F.D. his statements/political philosophy would have been challenged on a level playing field. Must do work now. I will take my support of the F.D. to my grave.

Again, how would the fact that there is someone else on the station offering a differing viewpoint going to materially affect his income?

Link to post
Share on other sites
until the fairness doctrine goes back into effect...they have no voice.

 

well hell's bells then.

 

The anti-FD posters are going to have to wait a few minutes until the pro-FD posters get caught up. You fat.boy(s) posters just keep on with the funny however.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...