Some democrats are threatening to resucitate the fairness doctrine. For those who don't know, used to in this country if you went on the radio and expressed a political opinion you had to give equal time to the opposing viewpoint. This sounds "fair" enough but the reality is that it sqelches speech because if the other side won't appear you can't speak and a lot of shows are not set up like Crossfire where you have a lib and conservative arguing debate style.

I beleive it was Ronald Maximus Reagan who ended the fairness doctrine and talk radio blossomed as a result. The DIRECT result of talk radio's ascendancy is that we have more opinions than ever in the public marketplace of ideas. You can listen to conservatives (Limbaugh etc). On some stations and satellite you can listen liberals. You can listen to shock jocks, libertarians, stoners, and hell pretty much anyone you want.

Now the truth is that liberals have not been very successful on most talk radio stations. God knows enough have tried. There are probably many reasons but for this discussion the only relevant fact is that liberals had exactly the same chance as conservatives and still do. George Soros, for example, could buy a radio station and put all the Move-on types he wanted on the air. Hell Air America was just that!!!

Usually I like to see what you guys think but I'll start the ball rolling on this one.

The fairness doctrine should be relegated to the trash heap of history. When it was in effect the only talk radio we had was NPR which even the liberals couldn't force themselves to listen to and consequently we had to subsidize it with tax dollars. From what I can see the liberals (specifically democrats in congress) can't stand the fact that they aren't as successful as Limbaugh etc and are willing to shut down free speech to rectify the situation.

Furthermore, if we were to resucitate the fairness doctrine it would only be FAIR to apply it to the drive-by media in which case they'd report even LESS than the 22 minutes of soundbites we get out of them bewcause each soundbite would have to be "balanced" by an opposing soundbite.

Well do you guys like free speech or what???

OK I guess I'll have to argue this one myself

WilNOTthrill

Wilthrill you're so vain you probably think this post is about you, don't you?

Well, first of all, talk radio is not fair. Now of course most people support democrats (look at the 2006 election results smart-ass) but we democrats have incredibly short attention spans and so talk radio is slanted toward conservatives. Anybody can see that talk radio is about as "fair" as a butterfly ballot in Dade county, Florida!!! What is wrong with letting any democrat who bitches loudly enough to decide what Rush Limpdick and Sean Crappity etc can talk about?

As for your comment on the "drive-by" media, of course THEY are already fair. They don't need balance. Just ignore the fact that over 90% of them vote democratic. Ignore the fact that they have an OBVIOUS template and will not publish anything contrary to it. And ignore the fact that often they will resort to CRIMINAL conduct (Dan Rather are you listening?) to make their point. They are "fair" because they have no allegiance to the USA and are willing to be "open-minded" enough to publish national secrets and show video of terrorist snipers shooting our troops. How much more "fair" can you get???

So conservatives need to be silenced and the "drive-by" media needs to be free to continue spinning things for the democrats. What could be more "fair" than that????

im not sure which will im talking to, but have you taken youre medication today?

__________________
jesus had a great publicist

I don't support the fairness doctrine. How fair is it to tell people what to broadcast?

__________________
I just saved a ton of money on car insurance by switching to no car insurance!!!

www.myspace.com/13468360

Well Mikael, WilNOTthrill doesn't appreciate the crack about medication and like all other supporters of the "fairness" doctrine disagrees strenenously with your "unfairness". Of course it is "fair" to tell one what to broadcast especially when it is ME doing the telling.

Good point. Who would decide what was fair? I thought everyone knew that Fox News provides the 'conservative' viewpoint, while MSNBC were pretty liberal. CNN is just fluff. Seems like one could find the truth somewhere in the middle by watching all three.
How would they police the blogsites?
And another question. Just how far are they willing to go to police this "fairness"? Would satire shows like "the Daily Show", "the Colbert Report", and the "Half Hour News Hour" have to change their content to fit the "fairness" mold?
Sounds like a form of censorship to me.

__________________
I just saved a ton of money on car insurance by switching to no car insurance!!!

www.myspace.com/13468360

I agree...it's censorship. Seems like the libs would be totally against it....but you never know about liberals.

that's some funny shit lol

__________________
"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It's just a goddamned piece of paper!"-Dubya Gump

“Verschärfte Vernehmung, enhanced or intensified interrogation, was the exact term innovated by the Gestapo to describe what became known as the ‘third degree.’ It left no marks. It included hypothermia, stress positions and long-time sleep deprivation.”

Well the democrats specifically Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer and Hillary Clinton are still talking about it and here is the interesting part.

It will require NO NEW LAWS to revive the "fairness doctrine" for RADIO only (apparently the dems think the networks are already "fair" despite a newe study which shows network news people donated to democrats 9 times as much as to republicans).

Apparently a five person panel decides FCC issues like the fairness doctrine. Two are reps and two are dems. The President appoints the fifth member. So if Hillary becomes president she can (AND WILL) appoint the tie-breaker who will reinstate the "fairness doctrine". No vote. No debate. No 1st Amendment!!

You know back in the day the liberals (reformed hippies who cut their hair and joined the society they had scorned) always said, "I may disagree with what you say but will fight to the death for your right to say it."

I should have known THEY were lying their asses off. A hippie won't fight to the death for anything even granola.

I heard the same report. 17 media types donated to the Dems, 2 donated to the Repulicans. Of the 2 who donated to the Reps, one also donated to the Dems. Of course the names weren't published.

__________________
I just saved a ton of money on car insurance by switching to no car insurance!!!

www.myspace.com/13468360