We must push hard to restore the Fairness Doctrine

[edhopper]

Listen, I don't give two sh#ts about the Fairness Doctrine. But the right wing seems to be in a tizzy about it. So let's push hard to have it restored.
This will:
1. Piss the wingnuts off and make them apoplectic, always fun to watch.
and
2. Occupy them with a unimportant issue while Obama and Congress can get the important things done.

[machI]

1. We do need something to even it up

I don't advocate shutting Rush up, I just want a choice in what I listen to. Where I live there are three, count them 3, right wing talk radio stations. The only thing close to a progressive station is the local collage that plays NPR for 10 - 12 hours a day, and music the rest of the time.

Even the blinking guy doing the Saturday auto mechanic question and answer show plugs his right wing philosophy at every opportunity. I like cars, but I don't like political commentary with my advice on motor oil.

[Oregone]

8. "I don't advocate shutting Rush up" -- The Fairness Doctrine doesn't shut anyone up.

It doesn't censor speech. It prevents the censorship of views by media ownership. The FD asks for different views of an issue to be presented, but it doesn't not require equal time or call for suppression.

[backscatter712]

2. The righttards have pushed a false meme as to what the Fairness Doctrine actually is.

Contrary to popular belief, it does not mandate equal time. It only mandates that broadcasters devote some airtime to discussing controversial issues of public interest, and required them to air contrasting views. It didn't mandate absolute equal time, and gave broadcasters a lot of leeway. A radio station that aired Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and Randi Rhodes would be in compliance with the Fairness Doctrine, even though Randi Rhodes is clearly outnumbered.

There is also the Equal Time rule, which is separate from the Fairness Doctrine, which would apply to coverage of election candidates - if you give airtime to one candidate or his/her surrogates, you had to give equal time to the opposing candidate. We definitely could have used that during the election.

[BlueJazz]

3. Republican Logic: "Why are you against the Fairness Doctrine??"

Repug: 'Cause it's not Fair.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[navarth]

4. I'm really interested in hearing some discussion about this, and I must point out

people like Thom Hartmann have expressed anti-fairness doctrine views. And I listen to Thom every day, I couldn't live without his show. He's someone I trust to give honest, informed opinions. Do I always agree with him, without exception? Hell no. BUT he's a guy I trust. And he's spoken out against re-instating the fairness doctrine.

I only bring this up because I was somewhat surprised to hear him say it, and it gave me pause. When somebody like him has reservations about it, I think that there's probably more than one side to the story.

I'd really be interested in hearing some rational discussion about it.

Oh and BTW: I can find no fault with your two reasons for wanting to see it restored. It would be amusing to see that.

[Gregorian]

5. Corporate media consolidation is probably the bigger problem to solve.

When McDonald's owns every restaurant, everything is a Big Mac. Same with news.

What we need is diversity from which to choose. There has been nothing but a place for so-called journalism graduates to express their hairdo's.

We need the truth. That's really what we're trying to achieve. Maybe part Fairness Doctrine, and part diversification.

I see the same problem with the auto industry. For many years our only choice was big, huge, and monster. And don't even think about a bike. Taboo.

How do we make the truth profitable enough to broadcast?

[Oregone]

9. Your analogy isn't quite right...

Because even if McDonald's didn't own everything, and instead it was McDonalds, Burger King, and In-and-Out Burger, everything is a hamburger....

In such an analogy, the Fairness Doctrine would make sure that those burger joints also serve at least one type of Mexican food (taco, burrito, etc).

You see, breaking up the consolidation only works if the new owners (asshole elite) disagree. Most of the time, the asshole elite agree. The FD protects against a society where the news message is controlled by the few, whether that few is one, six, or one hundred. Mandating a quick addition of a single contrasting item is NEVER a bad idea.

[Gregorian]

10. Good point.

I still think media consolidation is one contributing factor to the situation in which we find ourselves today. I mean, they are driving the news, not uncovering it. What if instead of burgers, their Mexican food is just more hype? And not the truth.

I think my point of trying to broadcast truth is a good one, even if it is off topic. But that is unrelated to consolidation. So once again I see your point.

Hmm. What the hell do we do to make the truth seem valuable. After all, it is more valuable than oil. Aha, which is why they're manufacturing the "truth". Now I'm catching on.

I wish we could outlaw lying.

Well, that's me thinking out loud. I guess a Fairness Doctrine type thing might be all we've got.

[dreamnightwind]

11. Agree re consolidation

I actually think your point regarding media consolidation was right on. It's a large part of the equation. Sure, different elitist media owners might have similar viewpoints, but fewer ones necessarily will.

I don't know the right package of solutions to remedy this, but we're barking up the right tree here. The fairness doctrine might help. My own hope is for active consumption of information, so sitting in front of the tube would be more like surfing the net, with many many options of what to watch/read, and an interactive component where the citizen can participate in the message.

I often wonder if there's any hope for this country given the propaganda that is driven (as you correctly said, driven, not uncovered) by the MSM. This has to be fixed, it's immensely important.

[tavalon]

6. Very good points both

As well, it would be nice to see so many of the right wing pundits lose their jobs. The lefties are happy to give equal time.

[Festivito]

7. Actually it's very important. AND, this is a great way to do it.

With wild abandon. As though we don't care.

I like it.