The results of removing the Fairness Doctrine?

[uscitizen]

Can all the hate and vitrol in MSM be tracked directly back to the removal of the Fairness Doctrine?

 

[Avatar4321]

Considering the radical left was saying this stuff in the 60s... no.

But if your only solution to fixing problems is restricting speech, then you are part of the problem not the solution.

 

[uscitizen]

Considering the radical left was saying this stuff in the 60s... no.

But if your only solution to fixing problems is restricting speech, then you are part of the problem not the solution.

balancing speech not restricting it.
You do understand how the fairness doctrine worked don't you?

 

[Madeline]

I dunno, uscitizen. Mebbe we should instead consider outlawing hate speech, as Germany has done.

 

[Madeline]

Considering the radical left was saying this stuff in the 60s... no.

But if your only solution to fixing problems is restricting speech, then you are part of the problem not the solution.

balancing speech not restricting it.
You do understand how the fairness doctrine worked don't you?

FAIRNESS DOCTRINE - The Museum of Broadcast Communications

 

[uscitizen]

I dunno, uscitizen. Mebbe we should instead consider outlawing hate speech, as Germany has done.

that sounds a bit more problematic.

I am not saying to bring back the Fairness Doctrine, just asking if it's demise has contributed to our current hate and vitrol filled media?

I know the knee jerk reaction of those on the far right everytime the Fairness Doctrine is mentioned though.

I do believe that our society is currently incapable of debating hate and fearmongering in the media without name calling and knee jerk reactions.

 

[Truthmatters]

yeap it involved giving equal time to someone who disagreed

 

[Yurt]

i can't believe anyone on the left would be whining about the fairness doctrine...the overall media is probably 90% left

there is so many different forms of media today, the fairness doctrine is no longer relevent. if you read the history of the fairness doctrine you would understand that. further, the fairness doctrine was not about stopping speech, so if anyone wanted to rant and rave, they still could.

 

[Avatar4321]

Considering the radical left was saying this stuff in the 60s... no.

But if your only solution to fixing problems is restricting speech, then you are part of the problem not the solution.

balancing speech not restricting it.
You do understand how the fairness doctrine worked don't you?

Yes. It silenced people by making it cost prohibited to say anything of value. It was designed to do that.

 

[Rozman]

Why does the left need help from the government to balance out anything?..You want to start up a radio station slanted towards the left way of thinking go ahead,good luck and God speed.Why do you need to rig the game in your favor.Air America tried it and failed,so now right wing talk radio needs to be curtailed or censored?.....The free market will determine if a station succeeds or not.I hear Beck is losing his radio show.The left boycotted his sponsors I believe so they caved and withdrew their ads...mission accomplished.don't think it's fair but it's done.

Why is it the first thing Libs do is run to government crying like a baby that the world doesn't treat them well so big mommy government needs to smack around the bullies while you libs hide
with a little smug grin on your face because the big bad bullies were punished for being so cruel to you.

Pretty pathetic.

 

[Rozman]

The whole point of this so called Fairness doctrine is to drive right wing talk off the air.Let's be honest.
A radio station owner "forced" to air the left side of the deal doesn't make money from it.He has a few Hannity,Limbaugh shows off set by Ed Shultz and Randi Rhodes.The right leaning shows make money the left do not.What does he do? He shuts it down and changes formats to top 40 music or a Spanish station.
The Left is happy,mission accomplished right wing talk is dead.The station owner is happy he's making money again.

Oh yeh I forgot....

It's as simple as that.

 

[uscitizen]

Hmm as I recall station owners made money when the fairness doctrine was in place.
I worked as a broadcast radio tech for a while then.

 

[Madeline]

I dunno, uscitizen. Mebbe we should instead consider outlawing hate speech, as Germany has done.

that sounds a bit more problematic.

I am not saying to bring back the Fairness Doctrine, just asking if it's demise has contributed to our current hate and vitrol filled media?

I know the knee jerk reaction of those on the far right everytime the Fairness Doctrine is mentioned though.

I do believe that our society is currently incapable of debating hate and fearmongering in the media without name calling and knee jerk reactions.

Oh, I agree. We could not mimic Germany without amending the constitution, and most would find that abhorent.

As for the Fairness Doctrine, it might help if it were in place but I truely do think we need to reclaim our civility as a people as well. We have an appetite for outrageous, including violence. In my view, that's the fundamental problem.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Considering the radical left was saying this stuff in the 60s... no.

But if your only solution to fixing problems is restricting speech, then you are part of the problem not the solution.

balancing speech not restricting it.
You do understand how the fairness doctrine worked don't you?

Oh yeah, great idea. Let's hire a bunch of government bureaucrats at $100,000 per year plus benefits and pension to decide on their own the opinions and points of view permitted on the public airwaves. Let's just chuck the First Amendment.
The main reason why you lefties want such shit as the Fairness Doctrine is because liberal points of view are unpopular with the American people. Lib talk radio cannot compete in an open marketplace, so your side wants conservative points of view silenced. Don't try this nonsense about "balance"...
The bottom line is if there were enough liberals to support liberal talk radio, the format would bring the necessary ratings to attract advertisers which would fund the programming.
The lack of government oversight is not the reason for your whine.
BTW talk radio is but one format. Liberalism still dominates the mains stream media.
Fairness?...Be careful what you wish for. You might get it.

 

[Truthmatters]

they knee jerk attack it.

I wonder why

 

[Intense]

Considering the radical left was saying this stuff in the 60s... no.

But if your only solution to fixing problems is restricting speech, then you are part of the problem not the solution.

balancing speech not restricting it.
You do understand how the fairness doctrine worked don't you?

First off... Who's Balance??? By what measure.

Second... You cannot balance even with the best intentions without restriction and measure. Don't deny the obvious. The Fairness Doctrine was restriction of Free Speech. Censorship should be based on what Principles? There are just Lawful ways to address immediate concerns. What specifically would you change today if you had the power, and how would you justify it. Value for value, what would you do, that if inverted would show the same fairness?

 

[uscitizen]

Training/programming, they cannot help themselves. A result of it's removal perhaps?

 

[goldcatt]

I dunno, uscitizen. Mebbe we should instead consider outlawing hate speech, as Germany has done.

that sounds a bit more problematic.

I am not saying to bring back the Fairness Doctrine, just asking if it's demise has contributed to our current hate and vitrol filled media?

I know the knee jerk reaction of those on the far right everytime the Fairness Doctrine is mentioned though.

I do believe that our society is currently incapable of debating hate and fearmongering in the media without name calling and knee jerk reactions.

I don't support the Fairness Doctrine. Speech is speech, whether I agree with it or not. And the press (or media) is the press. Government shouldn't be telling them what to air.

OTOH, there is a problem with journalistic ethics and integrity in infotainment (I rarely call it news) on both "sides" as well as a general lack of critical thinking among many on both "sides" who watch, read or listen to this stuff. Tackling those two problems is what we need to be focusing on, IMO. Not getting involved in the speech end.

 

[uscitizen]

Considering the radical left was saying this stuff in the 60s... no.

But if your only solution to fixing problems is restricting speech, then you are part of the problem not the solution.

balancing speech not restricting it.
You do understand how the fairness doctrine worked don't you?

First off... Who's Balance??? By what measure.

Second... You cannot balance even with the best intentions without restriction and measure. Don't deny the obvious. The Fairness Doctrine was restriction of Free Speech. Censorship should be based on what Principles? There are just Lawful ways to address immediate concerns. What specifically would you change today if you had the power, and how would you justify it. Value for value, what would you do, that if inverted would show the same fairness?

It is not cendsorship in any way, you must just give equal time to opposing viewpoints.

 

[Truthmatters]

They dont like to have right wing crap challenged in public.

It makes them lose elections