Fairness Doctrine

[rbell]

Well, now that it appears we have a democratic president coming, and (possibly) a democratic, filibuster-proof senate...clamoring has begun for revival of the "fairness doctrine."

What an unimaginably bad law...it tramples the First Amendment like nothing else ever legislated in the US.

How long until it gets enacted? I give it until Feb. '09. By April '09, there will be oldies heard on all AM stations.

 

[Paladin]

Conservatives and Libertarians are going to have to work hard to defeat this upcoming assault on free speech. Will need the same intensity we had when defeating HillaryCare and the Shamnesty Bill.

Unfortunately, with so many battles to fight, how will we keep the strength to win them. Some include Shamnesty (again), Universal HealthCare, Cap and Trade, Freedom of Choice, Card Check and many others.

Once these liberal programs are enacted, almost impossible to undo them.

The 10th Amendment needs to be adhered to and Federalism begin to again take root; but with the leftist judges Barry will nominate and the senate appoint, the Feds will come close to assuming total power. States will finally become the vehicle that carries out the federal government programs. All powerful centralized goverment will rule (the vary things our Constitutution prohibits).

Freedom and Liberty appears to matter less and less to the American people. We are a selfish and jealous country. Too many citizens think they are entitled to other people's property (to be seized through the power of the government).

Gotta think that charitable giving will decrease under the Barry administration.

In 2010 vote the incumbents out and begin the Conservative Revolution.

 

[tinytim]

It won't be until 2013... Obama is not going to rattle to many chains the first few yrs... but watch out for his next 4!

But wait... isn't the end of the world supposed to be 2012? lol!!!

 

[donnA]

Freedom and Liberty appears to matter less and less to the American people. We are a selfish and jealous country. Too many citizens think they are entitled to other people's property (to be seized through the power of the government).

according to exit polls greed seems to the major reason for voting for obama, everything else paled in comparison(exit polls prove obama voters are 1 issue voters). everyone wants a piece of someone elses pie.

 

[Walguy]

This will actually be one of the big early tests of whether Obama truly intends to be a president for all Americans, as he claims he will be. If he does something as blatantly partisan as supporting the return of the fairness doctrine, which is obviously for the sole purpose of silencing some of the big voices on the other side, he will have already forfeited any claim to be a uniter. If he opposes it and stands up for free speech, he can actually gain a bit of credibility among conservatives. It will be interesting to see what he does.

 

[sag38]

Walguy, I agree. But, judging from the way Obama has already treated journalists who did not support him I think we can get a pretty good idea of where he is headed. He will move quickly to cut off the head of talk radio.

 

[Paladin]

It won't be until 2013... Obama is not going to rattle to many chains the first few yrs... but watch out for his next 4!

But wait... isn't the end of the world supposed to be 2012? lol!!!

Mid-Term elections happen in 2010 and that's when the Conservative Revolution begins.

No more letting the media, democrats and independents help select our nominee anymore.

 

[just-want-peace]

It won't be until 2013... Obama is not going to rattle to many chains the first few yrs... but watch out for his next 4!

But wait... isn't the end of the world supposed to be 2012? lol!!!

Hope you're right, BUT with a veto proof congress, what's to stop the steamroller of socialism from rampaging thru any and crushing every citadel of opposition??

Certainly nothing I've seen from his actions so far.

 

[Jack Matthews]

The "clamoring" to bring back the fairness doctrine is coming from the talk radio announcers like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glen Beck, etc. No one in Congress would seriously consider doing that. It would be a waste of time and effort at any rate.

The talk radio announcers need an issue to whip up their followers, and to have a cause. What better way than to feign being threatened by a Congress that wants to impose an old rule that was originally instituted by Republicans. Oh, you'll hear lots of screeching and bellowing about it over the next days and weeks. It helps the ratings and rakes in the bucks. But it isn't going to happen.

The problem is that the radio broadcasting industry, and talk radio with it, is a dinosaur. It's market shares basically boil down to how many people happen to be in their car listening to the radio at any given time, and even at that, satellite radio and music stations hold the lion's share of the ratings market. Even at that, radio markets are tiny compared to television, and they have to compete with the MP3, discs and other means by which the listener controls the content of what is played in the car.

Most conservative talk radio announcers are mouthpieces for the corporate interests who own the radio stations and other businesses, and they advocate for politicians who will help get laws and policies passed to benefit the giant corporations at the expense of the consumer, mainly you and I. They can't do this directly, of course, but they have found that appealing to certain "moral issues" gains them an audience share. The first two or three individuals who got into conservative talk made millions. Now, the field is getting a bit crowded, and the advertising revenues and big money is slowly sliding away. As the radio dial becomes more and more outdated, the number of listeners drops off and the revenue follows.

It would be silly to go to all the trouble of instituting a fairness doctrine in radio broadcasting. Just let the natural course of things, shrinking audiences and advertising revenue, take their natural course.

 

[rbell]

The "clamoring" to bring back the fairness doctrine is coming from the talk radio announcers like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glen Beck, etc. No one in Congress would seriously consider doing that. It would be a waste of time and effort at any rate.

Perhaps you should tell Charles Schumer. He compared talk radio to pornography, and said it needed to be regulated.

In 2007, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) told The Hill, “It’s time to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine. 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.”

Senate Rules Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) last year said, “I believe very strongly that the airwaves are public and people use these airwaves for profit. But there is a responsibility to see that both sides and not just one side of the big public questions of debate of the day are aired and are aired with some modicum of fairness.”

SOURCE

Wow. I'm glad "no one's considering this."

The problem is that the radio broadcasting industry, and talk radio with it, is a dinosaur. It's market shares basically boil down to how many people happen to be in their car listening to the radio at any given time, and even at that, satellite radio and music stations hold the lion's share of the ratings market. Even at that, radio markets are tiny compared to television, and they have to compete with the MP3, discs and other means by which the listener controls the content of what is played in the car.

Translation: Since not that many people would be affected, it's OK to mess with the First Amendment as long as it's just them.

 

[Paladin]

The "clamoring" to bring back the fairness doctrine is coming from the talk radio announcers like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glen Beck, etc. No one in Congress would seriously consider doing that. It would be a waste of time and effort at any rate.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2008/06/25/pelosi-i-want-bring-back-fairness-doctrine

Article with transcript of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi stating she wanted to see its revival. Also, Senators Bingaman and Schumer have stated they support reinstatement of the so-called "Fairness Doctrine." Conservative radio hosts are responding to the state goals of democrats.

 

[Jack Matthews]

That's quite a leap to a conclusion. Killing a bill that would essentially be a fairness doctrine in reverse is not the same thing as actively moving to revive the fairness doctrine. I've checked congressional transcripts and see that nothing has officially been discussed. But of course, expect the talk radio announcers to jump on that as a perceived threat.

The effect of the decline of the radio industry in particular, as it becomes more and more outdated and outpaced by other media, will be the factor that brings about the death knell of conservative talk radio, not Congress.

 

[rbell]

That's quite a leap to a conclusion. Killing a bill that would essentially be a fairness doctrine in reverse is not the same thing as actively moving to revive the fairness doctrine. I've checked congressional transcripts and see that nothing has officially been discussed. But of course, expect the talk radio announcers to jump on that as a perceived threat.

The effect of the decline of the radio industry in particular, as it becomes more and more outdated and outpaced by other media, will be the factor that brings about the death knell of conservative talk radio, not Congress.

I'm sorry...but when several in Congressional leadership says verbatim they'd like to see it re-instituted...that doesn't count?

Pretty plain to me. No leap at all. In fact, no conclusions. I just read what they said.

 

[Paladin]

"Do you personally support revival of the ‘Fairness Doctrine?'" I asked.

"Yes," the speaker replied, without hesitation.

The speaker mentioned is Pelosi. No stretching required, she wants the so-called "Fairness Doctrine."

 

[Revmitchell]

Radio is going no where any time soon. Pelosi and company have already made several comments about restoring the fairness doctrine.