Fairness Doctrine

[EL the Famous]

or, that offering equal airtime will make the opposing pundit any more effective as a broadcaster in getting his point across?

 

agree w/ his viewpoint or not, he's obviously done a great job on articulating asaid viewpoint to the tune of decent enough arbitron ratings. it's not just the message or the avaialble outlets for the message, but (at least an equal amount) the messenger itself.

[jff]

what college professor told you that? or was that something al franken said before the u.s.s air america sank?

 

THIS is your question? Do you have any questions worth answering?

[MrRain422]

Generally this seems unnecessary, but I think that I'm in favor of bringing back the fairness doctrine, unless laws change to restrict the number of media outlets that one company can own in any given market, like they used to. Over the last several years, restrictions on market presence have been relaxed to the point that one company can completely dominate a market's media. In instances like that, opposing viewpoints can be effectively silenced. I'd actually prefer that the restrictions on how much of a market one company can own were tightened again, rather than re-implementing the fairness doctrine, but I'd take the FD over nothing.

[Atticus]

Nobody said life was fair

 

Anyone got an eraser?

[EL the Famous]

I'd actually prefer that the restrictions on how much of a market one company can own were tightened again, rather than re-implementing the fairness doctrine, but I'd take the FD over nothing.

 

Great point. Although, i'm just shy of taking the FD as replacement solution.

[uncle wilco]

THIS is your question? Do you have any questions worth answering?

 

you still didn't answer my question.

 

you did bother to respond. too much effort to come up with something? or did i hit the nail on the head? with the lack of liberal "equal time" out there it's reassuring to know that opposing view points still exist. god bless america.

[uncle wilco]

I'd actually prefer that the restrictions on how much of a market one company can own were tightened again, rather than re-implementing the fairness doctrine, but I'd take the FD over nothing.

 

i agree that market restrictions should be tightened.

 

i don't agree with FD over nothing though.

[Duck-Billed Catechist]

It's a lame question. Where did you get your opinion on the matter?

 

The where is irrelevant. It's the why that matters.

 

Our media is so silly these days, but I don't think that laws can change much of that.

[deepseacatfish]

I'd actually prefer that the restrictions on how much of a market one company can own were tightened again, rather than re-implementing the fairness doctrine

Yep. I also think the FCC could use some serious oversight and reworking in a lot of areas, there are numerous messes related to them.

[uncle wilco]

It's a lame question. Where did you get your opinion on the matter?

 

The where is irrelevant. It's the why that matters.

 

that's a lame response to something i didn't even ask you.

 

the "where" can answer the "why".

[Duck-Billed Catechist]

I could have my opinion influenced by Ann Coulter or Osama Bin Laden--it wouldn't make the opinion right or wrong. You're conducting the kissing cousin of an ad hominem attack.

 

I do agree that, had the FD never been ditched, Limbaugh would not have made as much money. Why? Because stations would have to carry liberal shows which don't do big ratings if they wanted to carry his. That would dilute his effectiveness for the stations. If the MLB made a rule that whatever team had Alex Rodriguez had to start a stiff at second base for every game, Rodriguez wouldn't command as high of a salary.

 

That's not an argument for or against the FD--it is what it is.

[Atticus]

vote or die

[uncle wilco]

The death of the Fairness Doctrine made Rush Limbaugh a multi-millionaire.

[bjorn_skurj]

Journalism is funny. It is both a commercial enterprise and a pillar of democracy.

[anodyne]

the IDEA of the fairness doctrine is good -- public airwaves, variety of viewpoints, free market of ideas, etc. however, as long as the US is cornered with two corporate powers (republican and democrat) and the spectrum is limited to big money, it's six of one and half dozen of another.

[tugmoose]

What I think the Democrats should do is pass a very, very sternly worded non-binding resolution. That'll show 'em.

 

 

I mean, are they trying to look like a bunch of impotent, ineffectual, whining wussies? Because they're doing a pretty good job of it. Do we really want one of these guys or gals to be president?

[WilcoFan]

Journalism is funny. It is both a commercial enterprise and a pillar of democracy.

 

 

Don't pat yourself on the back too much there. I would venture to say that journalism has become so commercialized that the pillars are made of straw these days.

 

By the way, has anybody wondered why the FD has come up again recently? I think it is because senators have been getting calls in DC about this horrible immigration bill and they want conservative talk radio to shut up about it and stop giving out their email addresses, fax and phone numbers.

[bjorn_skurj]

Don't pat yourself on the back too much there. I would venture to say that journalism has become so commercialized that the pillars are made of straw these days.

You have no idea. Good journalism is still done in places, mostly on the local level, but the near-total lack of calling Bush on his obvious absurdities leading up to the invasion of Iraq indicates the pillar is no longer a pillar, and that we have something less than a democracy.

[Guest Jules]

Where does Obama stand on this?

[Atticus]

i'm still having trouble understanding how having a law that requires private businesses to provide a counterpoint to political opinion/commentary can be a good thing in a democracy.

 

liberals have taken several stabs at competing with the conservative talk radio machine and have failed miserably. so the solution is essentially to subsidize them? If the political parties were switched would those of you in support of the doctrine still feel the same?

 

such a law shouldn't be passed simply to correct our failure to enforce other laws (anti-trust, etc.) either.

[anodyne]

the airwaves belong to the public and are licensed CONDITIONALLY to private enterprise.

[Atticus]

the airwaves belong to the public and are licensed CONDITIONALLY to private enterprise.

 

yes I've read that as well. I've also listened to the radio. Hard to reconcile the two.

[uncle wilco]

By the way, has anybody wondered why the FD has come up again recently? I think it is because senators have been getting calls in DC about this horrible immigration bill and they want conservative talk radio to shut up about it and stop giving out their email addresses, fax and phone numbers.

 

i think you may be on to something there.

[tugmoose]

If the Democrats can't deal with a bunch of blowholes on AM radio, how are they going to deal with hostile foreign gov'ts? John Kerry couldn't defend his Nam record while running against the combat-averse W. How was he gonna defend the Constitution as President?

 

To quote Jon Stewart: "When the disembodied voice on C-SPAN calls you pussies, you're probably pussies."

 

The Dems' MO in the face of adversity would appear to be running off and crying "They're not playing nice, Mommy. Make them stop."

[bobbob1313]

what college professor told you that? or was that something al franken said before the u.s.s air america sank?

 

I love that you aren't a republican.