Check out some similar questions!

speechlesstx · Jun 27, 2007, 12:14 PM

Since this has been mentioned so much recently, what's fair about the fairness doctrine? :cool:

shygrneyzs · Jun 27, 2007, 01:12 PM

I don't know why this doctrine has to resurrected. Look how radio has changed since
1949. People can tune into how many stations now? There are opposing views on any given topic on any given day on some station. Look how Sirius Radio has taken off. Heck, maybe I could get my own radio talk show and spread my viewpoint around. I would have guest speakers from the Help Desk on, via satellite of course, so no one would have to leave home.

I like the article written about the Fairness Doctrine on the Heritage Foundation's website -
Why The Fairness Doctrine Is Anything But Fair
There is the article from the CommonDreams website also - The Fairness Doctrine: How We Lost it, and Why We Need it Back

Personally, I do not see the need to bring the Fairness Doctrine back. I think it invites more scrutiny from the government and we all know that we do not need that, there is enough already to go around the world many times over.

speechlesstx · Jun 27, 2007, 01:47 PM

Originally Posted by shygrneyzs

Personally, I do not see the need to bring the Fairness Doctrine back. I think it invites more scrutiny from the government and we all know that we do not need that, there is enough already to go around the world many times over.

Thanks, shygrneyzs. Interesting how the two articles present their arguments. From Commondreams' argument:

"right-wing water-carrying"

"where right-wing opinion is the rule"

"right-wing hosts," "right-wingers: Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Oliver North, G. Gordon Liddy, Bill O’Reilly and Michael Reagan, to name just a few"

"one right-wing host after another"

"conservatives and Republican partisans using the publicly owned airwaves as a political megaphone"

"the Reagan Revolution, with its army of anti-regulatory extremists"

"the immense volume of unanswered conservative opinion"

"the most extreme kinds of broadcast abuse"

The only similar mention in the Heritage article is well, there isn't anything similar, just a reasoned argument. Personally, I think if the left didn't sound so bitter and angry they might get more of an audience. Besides what I see as the obvious free speech implications it just terrifies me that anyone would want the feds determining what is "fair."

tomder55 · Jun 28, 2007, 02:21 AM

All I know is that Laura Ingraham tried to contact John Kerry yesterday to offerhim equal time and his office would not respond.

tomder55 · Jun 28, 2007, 05:41 AM

“It’s time to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine,” said Senate Majority Whip Durbin (D-Ill.). “I have this old-fashioned attitude that when Americans hear both sides of the story, they’re in a better position to make a decision.”

What y has is an old-fashioned distrust of the public being easily manipulated by the media. I happen to think the public is quite capable of sifting the wheat from the chaff .

I also have this old fashion notion that goes something like this :

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances..

ETWolverine · Jun 28, 2007, 06:32 AM

The question that I have is why do liberals always name things for the opposite of what they really are?

The fairness doctrine isn't fair.

Right to Choose doesn't give free choice to babies.

Planned Parenthood teaches people how to AVOID parenthood through abortion.

Affirmative action doesn't affirm anyone.

The Immigration Reform Bill isn't reforming illegal immigration, it's just an attempt to legalize it.

Air America was really Air Anti-America.

And liberalism is more concerned with curtailing conservatives' rights than it is in liberating anyone.

Anyone know why this is?

Elliot

excon · Jun 28, 2007, 06:50 AM

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

The question that I have is why do liberals always name things for the opposite of what they really are?

Hello El:

What, like the Patriot Act?? Bwa ha ha ha ha.

excon

PS> As painful as it is, my libertarianisim forces me to agree with you about the fairness doctrine.

But, not about the stupid names that DON'T reflect what an act does.

ETWolverine · Jun 28, 2007, 07:00 AM

One more question about the fairness doctrine.

Will NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, PBS, NPR, and other broadcast media be forced to include conservative commentary in 50% of their broadcasts? Or does the "fairness doctrine" only apply to conservative talk radio?

Elliot

speechlesstx · Jun 28, 2007, 07:11 AM

Originally Posted by tomder55

All I know is that Laura Ingraham tried to contact John Kerry yesterday to offerhim equal time and his office would not respond.

Maybe he was afraid he'd get sandbagged by one of those troops stuck in Iraq calling in to confront him during the interview.

tomder55 · Jun 28, 2007, 07:25 AM

Coulter handled herself fine . When asked if she would stop she said no . Then she said next time she would wish Edwards was killed by a terrorist attack ;like Bill Mahrer had said about Cheney.

speechlesstx · Jun 28, 2007, 07:31 AM

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

Will NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, PBS, NPR, and other broadcast media be forced to include conservative commentary in 50% of their broadcasts? Or does the "fairness doctrine" only apply to conservative talk radio?

Sometimes I don't think they realize what they're asking for - either that or they intend to insert exclusions to protect their television monopoly. I tend to think the latter because they sure don't want to be held to the same standards they expect to hold conservatives to. When Chris Matthews sandbagged Ann Coulter did anyone catch this part of the show?

MATTHEWS: Welcome back to "Hardball." We're back at the "Hardball" plaza with the inimitable Ann Coulter.

(Applause)

MATTHEWS: And what deeply concerns me, more than the very existence of Ann Coulter, is the presence of many like-minded people here.

(Applause)

MATTHEWS: My God, is this "Deliverance"?

Coulter can't joke about political correctness using Edwards and faggot in the same sentence, but Matthews can 'joke' about Coulter supporters in the audience being psychopathic hillbillies.

speechlesstx · Jun 28, 2007, 07:33 AM

Originally Posted by excon

PS> As painful as it is, my libertarianisim forces me to agree with you about the the fairness doctrine.

You sure seem to be a lot more agreeable lately :D

excon · Jun 28, 2007, 07:33 AM

Hello again:

Chris Mathews had Ann Coultergeist on the other day. And Keith Olberman quotes Bill O'Reilly all the time. Looks fair to me - or not. And, I don't care.

Political information is like soap. You can buy the soap that's sold to you, or you can buy the soap you want. Yes, it might take a little time... One just has to search it out. It's ALL out there. Or, next they'll be calling for equal time on soap commercials.

excon

PS> You can't legislate fairness. You can't legislate morals either, but you guy's miss that one.

talaniman · Jun 28, 2007, 07:43 AM

I think I like having the choice of turning to something else, when the conservatives start spouting off about how we should have family values, and any one against the war is anti american. What drivel to me, so the tuning knob is my friend, and I use it liberally. I don't think the fairness doctrine can ever replace my remote, or my own ability to make judgements on what's going on in the world. Who needs equal time when I can just change the channels from Rush Limbaugh to the Disney Network.