The Fairness Doctrine, Again!

Well, it hasn’t taken Liberal activists long to start the talk about the “Fairness Doctrine, " again. Congresswoman Anna Eshoo(D-CAL), is trying to whip the tribe up and bring it back. In addition to radio and television, Achoo wants to extend its greasy reach into the world of cable and satellite television also.

From the San Francisco Peninsula Press Club,

“I’ll work on bringing it back. I still believe in it,” Eshoo told the Daily Post in Palo Alto."
The Fairness Doctrine was implemented to provide “honest and equitable” reporting on matters of interest to the public. It was handled on a case by case basis after its establishment in 1949, then in 1967 when certain provisions were integrated into FCC regulations. In 1987, under the Reagan administration, the FCC abolished the Fairness Doctrine, stating it inhibited the freedom of speech and was deemed un-constitutional.

Liberal motivation behind the re-implementation of the FD is simply to target any market dominated by the Right Wing establishment. This is in order to curb voices that might provide opposition to their causes or effect legislative outcomes.

Attempts have been made in the past to label conservative talk “hate speech” and “biased” in order to draw criticism to its platforms.

From the Traditional Values Coalition,
I’m looking at it [reinstituting the Fairness Doctrine], as a matter of fact, … because I think there ought to be an opportunity to present the other side. And, unfortunately, talk radio is overwhelmingly one way. – Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA)

…talk radio, or in some cases hate radio, where they [conservative talk show hosts] go on and on and on in a xenophobic, anti-immigrant [manner]…. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, speaking about the amnesty immigration bill with PBS’s Charlie Rose.

Even if the station doesn’t balance the hate-jock, or allow an on-air discussion of hate speech, just publicizing bigoted statements changes the terms of the debate. Hate flourishes when other views are not heard. By challenging it as often as possible, you diminish the ignorance that is necessary to racism, sexism, and homophobia. – Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting “Challenging Hate Radio: A Guide for Activists.”

Enough Hate-speak. Hate destroys. Hate kills. Hate corrodes. Hate Radio has got to go. Do you hear us, Rush? You will soon. – web site.
The accusation of being hate filled is utterly ridiculous and as far as being biased, that would only be an issue if it was not advertised as Right leaning. At least they are being more up front than the NY Times or Wapo.

The FD, in simplest terms, is a violation of Free Speech, as well as free markets. If the American population, as a whole, wanted to listen to Progressive and Liberal talk shows, their formats would have been more successful, however, that is not the case.

This controversy is easily solved by one of three actions; if you don’t want to listen turn off the radio or switch to a station that reflects your views. If none are available, start one and use some good old fashion entrepreneurship to make it successful. The government has no business regulating the thoughts and ideas of ANY American with regards to the political landscape, especially if it's privately funded. Is it Rush’s fault that Air-America is an abysmal failure?

Note: While President-elect Obama says he is not in favor for a revival of the Fairness Doctrine, he is a proponent of "localism" and how it applies to talk radio and other media formats. For more information of how either, the Fairness Doctrine or localism, can be implemented please read, Fairness Doctrine rev 3.0

Please, feel free to leave some commentary at the bottom of the page. We appreciate your thoughts.



Copyright © Politics and Critical Thinking Design by BTDesigner | Blogger Theme by BTDesigner | Powered by Blogger