Fairness Doctrine and progressive media

[javert]

Something that I was pondering the other day. Usually the fairness doctrine is discussed in regard to causing trouble for Limbaugh, Hannity and the like, but I wonder doesn't it also mean that progressive media could be forced to allow "equal time" as well? Could you imagine what sort of show would be on after say Democracy Now or KO or Rachel if someone used the rule to demand an opposing viewpoint? Something to think on.

[musette_sf]

1. .

:hi:
:popcorn:

[Selatius]

2. The Doctrine, if brought back, could be modified.

For example, instead of having one hour where both opposing viewpoints are presented, you could have one hour presenting a viewpoint and another hour presenting the opposite viewpoint. This way, air time is divided evenly for opposing viewpoints while still preserving the original intent of the Doctrine, and if your show ends and the show with the opposing viewpoint is on, you can switch away.

[brucefan]

3. Yea

because you can't turn the dial without coming upon a progressive voice.:eyes:

[javert]

4. true there aren't as many progressive voices

I'm just suggesting that there can be another side that can be affected as well.

[NashVegas]

5. It's More Than That

It's about bringing some decency back into national dialog.

[Quantess]

6. I've been chomping at the bit....

...to rate a thread "disruptive". I've finally found the opportunity.
:hi: Welcome to DU!

[KharmaTrain]

7. The Fairness Doctrine Never Dealt with Talk Shows

It only dealt with political advertising and public affairs programming. It assured that a station couldn't freeze out one candidate by not selling advertising time or setting different rates...stations were required to give all candidates access and at the lowest station rate. It didn't cover news coverage or what would be considered "Entertainment" progrmaming. Initially talk shows were considered Public Affairs and why many confuse the doctrine's equal time provisions there...today public service is all but extinct...talk shows are now considered "Entertainment" (why Rushbo claims to be an "Entertainer") and his show was one of the first to deliberately blur the lines that led to the proliferation of hate radio.

Reinstituting the Doctrine would do little to affect the hate spewers...and some right wing repugnicans want to counter with their own bill to prevent hate stations from changing formats...even if the station is sold to a new owner.

The ultimate determination will be the marketplace. AM Radio is dying...as is the entire industry. Just like other industries that consolidated too much, the Cheap Channels and Citadels and CBS's have a lot of bad properties to deal with and a shrinking listener and advertising base. Hate radio is cheap programming that attracted white males...one of the few "marketable" audiences for AM Radio...that or sports talk. It attracts the casinos and car dealers and get-rich-quick scammers or stiffie drug manufacturers. But the squeeze (pardon the pun) is starting to bite an already hurting bottom line. Hate radio's "golden days" are past.