When Kerry wins, should he/can he re-institute the fairness act for media?

[captainjack]

How would it be enforced? Should the penalty for not following the act be extreme, like taking away broadcasting licenses? That'd sure as hell put Fox, CNN out of business, which is a boon to us all! But it'd also create budding "NOW w/bill moyer's" across the frequency spectrum, I'd hope.

[ClassWarrior]

1. Yes, yes, and YESSS!!

But we're gonna need a Dem Congress to make it happen. Get out and get Dems elected Nov. 2!!

24.

[Q]

22. Not really...many, many Republicans were FOR the Fairness Doctrine...

...before Reagan cronies axed it.

[wtmusic]

2. Yes, and that should be *the* prime focus after the election

along with rolling back media ownership rules

[Tyler Durden]

3. How about an "Executive Order"?

Seems to me that was how Reagan got rid of it in the first place if memory serves me.

[todwest]

9. Here' s a link . . .

. . . which explains what happened to the Fairness Doctrine:

http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/F/htmlF/fairnessdoct/fairnessdoct.htm

I'm not sure if the President can reimpose this rule by executive fiat. I'm all for Kerry giving it the college try, however.

[sister moon]

4. Absolutely!

Eliminating that requirement--thank a bunch, St. Ronnie--along with allowing consolidation were the two main causes of our current media mess. We need a more diverse media and one that is not permitted to be the propaganda branch of ANY party.

[Warpy]

5. I think the Fairness Doctrine only applied to broadcast media

and would not apply to paid subscriptions like cable or satellite. As much as we'd all like to see Pox News off cable, that's not likely to happen. However, the moveon.org's lawsuit to strip them of the false advertising "Fair and Balanced" might just knock them down a little.

Broadcast media are different, though, because they use OUR airwaves and have to agree to use them for our benefit. Telling only one side of the story is NOT informing the electorate, especailly when news is so frequently being infected by editorializing on all 3 major networks. Networks that are using the airwaves to push only one point of view are vulnerable to having their licenses yanked, and we need to start petitioning the FCC to do that to stations we see as consistent violators.

[rinsd]

11. You are correct....

Only broadcast TV and radio would be affected.

As I mentioned in my post below while this would stop all Rush all day stations, it would also likely spell trouble for Air America.

The personalities would likely do fine but as a radio netowrk I don't think it could exist under the Fairness doctrine.

[ClassWarrior]

15. Yes, it would only apply to broadcast stations...

...but it would re-create a political frame which would go a long way in redefining Faux and the rest by eliminating Rush and the AM loudmouths, hobbling the freaks' ability to get their talking points on network news, etc.

24.

[madrchsod]

6. ya right

what would the am stations due then? they have made their living off of guys and gals who demonize the democrats in this country..if there were a fairness doc.am radio would be really in trouble,with no rush, sean and the other ass kissers, am radio would have to come up with something else or whither away..the right wing hate talkers saved am radio these powerful stations won`t let their cash cows die off....

[ClassWarrior]

16. It'll be Rush and Randi, back-to-back once again!

I'll take it - in return for a responsible press.

24.

[ochazuke]

7. Yes, I think it might fight polarization

Reagan got rid of it, didn't he. Shortly after that, there was the Invasion of the Limbots, and the media went to hell.

[rinsd]

8. Broadcast licenses are for Networks

CNN, FoxNews, MSNBC etc etc are cable stations which the FCC has no control over. The Fairness Doctrine dealt with radio & broadcast TV.

That would be a blow to All Rush all day stations. But it could also affect an all Air America station.

I don't think the Fairness doctrine is the answer as the mediums have grown beyond its purview.

[TahitiNut]

13. I believe it's the local stations that're licensed.

I don't believe the networks themselves are licensed, per se, other than the usual business license. :shrug:

[rinsd]

14. Whoops...

Got my who's affected by the Fairness Doctrine mixed in with who would lose licenses...thanks.

[ClassWarrior]

17. No, the networks aren't licensed, but...

...all of them own oodles of stations themselves, and must tailor programming to the ever-powerful "affiliates" who carry their broadcast schedule - the local licensees.

24.

[RedEagle]

25. It applies to stations

For example, a station could air parts of Air America and then alternative programming. It's making both available that matters.

[elehhhhna]

10. yes and extend it to cable news as well.

[rinsd]

12. Screw that....

You want the FCC is charge of cable? I sure as hell don't.

What's next the internet?

Think further than wounding your enemy.

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

18. Can't do it...

The Fairness Doctrine based on the premise that the airwaves belong to the American People and broadcasters have a responsibility to act in the public interest. Cable belongs to the cable company.

[ClassWarrior]

20. Yup. But a broadcast doctrine would certainly have an influence.

The much-vaunted market to which the corporatists keep giving lip service.

24.

[TahitiNut]

19. Not only the Fairness Doctrine ...

... but the limit on commercials should be reestablished. Once upon a time, TV was limited in the amount of commercial time. I think it was about 6-7 minutes out of every 30. I'd like to see the hammer come down. They can raise the prices (supply/demand, right?).

Both the Fairness Doctrine and the commercial time can be done through the FCC. Beyond that, I'd like to see ownership of broadcast media companies limited to broadcast-only corporations - and ownership by military contractors or any other kind of corporation outlawed.

[ClassWarrior]

21. I think the commercial limit was a self-imposed guideline...

...by the broadcasters. Tho I may be wrong.

I agree on the ownership limits - number of stations, broadcast-only corporations, no military contractors, and so on - and that could be accomplished through the FTC.

24.

[onenote]

23. clearing up the confusion, here are the facts

The fairness doctrine was created by the FCC, not Congress. In fact, the reason the FCC was able to repeal the rule was because the courts found that it wasn't required by Congress

It was repealed by the FCC, not an executive order from the President

Congress tried to re-institute, but Reagan vetoed.

Either the FCC or Congress could re-institute if they had the political will to do so. The trick is going to be to overcome first amendment challenges. An executive order by the President attempting to reimpose the FD would be far more susceptible to first amendment challenge since it wouldn't have a "record" backing up the need for the rule.

Finally: the FD DID apply to cable. In fact, the rule is still on the books with respect to cable. (DOn't believe me: look up 47 Code of Fed Reg. sec 76.209). The FCC takes the position that the rule actually is repealed and that the presence of the rule on the books is just vestigal -- they haven't gotten around (in 17 years) to deleting it.

onenote

[Cleita]

24. Besides the fairness doctrine, I think networks

need to return to the Edward R. Murrow model of news as a public service, not another program that competes for advertising dollars and ratings. Perhaps, the news departments could get their funding from foundations or single sponsors like PBS does to pay expenses but be basically non-profit in make-up.

I'm sure multi-billionaires like George Soros would gladly sponsor a news program or two through a foundation that he might set up for that purpose in exchange for a news department made up of real journalists and reporters that must, not only practice the fairness doctrine, but also adhere to the basic precepts of real journalism.

On the part of the Networks, they may ask for basic rent for that time slot, but otherwise not interfere with the operation of the newsroom in any way.