The results of removing the Fairness Doctrine?

[Soggy in NOLA]

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?

Balancing speech? Seriously? What if in a room of ten people, 6 espouse one point of view and 4 another... do we tell 1 of the six they must adopt the other point of view in order to balance it out?

Absurd.

 

[Intense]

So more News and less Politics is what i recommend for Media Outlets.

Yepper.

but as we have seen the people are to stupid to decide for themselves and must be spoon fed by the media. Sensationalism, fear and hate sell.

That's the problem. Almost all of what we think of as media is for-profit. If it didn't sell, they wouldn't churn it out.

The more I think about it, the more I doubt the Fairness Doctrine has much to do with it. Remember Crossfire on CNN? Both sides were represented, it would have passed FD muster, but in reality it was nothing but a hack screamfest.

Some things are orchestrated yes, that is an easy barrier to break with the resources available today.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

The only 'fairness doctrine' we need is for people to fairly take fucking responsibility for their own actions.

The media isn't "people", it is industry. Should industry essential to our republic and national security be unregulated?

We're not talking about regulating an industry, we're talking about controlling the discussion.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

The N. Koreans have fairness doctrine... maybe we should model it after theirs?

 

[Rozman]

Again my question is did the removal of the fairness doctrine contribute to the current level of hate and fearmongering of the media?

Nope.....!

And that's my final answer Reeege!

 

[Truthmatters]

No were talking about opening up the discussion to both sides.

The right hates it because their views dont hold up to the logic of a full discussion

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

No were talking about opening up the discussion to both sides.

The right hates it because their views dont hold up to the logic of a full discussion

And USMB's resident retard chimes in right on queue. Have you ever had a cogent thought.. EVER?

 

[Defiant1]

Maybe it's time for the Fairness Doctrine.

I say "Bring it on". As things currently stand it wouldn't apply to satellite radio or cable tv.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Fairness Doctrines don't solve the real problems with today's News Media. I see both sides getting equal time on many Media Outlets all the time. All they do is bicker and call each other names. But both sides get equal time so the debate is already fair for the most part. Less Politics,less Entertainment,and more Straight News is the logical way forward for News Media. Seriously,is Democrats hating Republicans or vice versa really News?

 

[Intense]

No were talking about opening up the discussion to both sides.

The right hates it because their views dont hold up to the logic of a full discussion

How are both sides not being represented? You can't use those that put you on ignore because of your presentation as a part of your answer. Where here are people not speaking freely? Why do you lump everything up as the same ignoring Individuality and free will?

 

[Truthmatters]

Because some news only reports one side.

They never allow their ideas to be challenged

 

[goldcatt]

No were talking about opening up the discussion to both sides.

The right hates it because their views dont hold up to the logic of a full discussion

It's not just the right that has reservations about it, in principle as well as its effectiveness.

You can present both sides as far as content all you want but if the tone is shrill and combative and the "facts" are questionable, it's not going to do a bit of good toward any kind of rational discussion. And how are you going to regulate that? Will there be a government decibel monitor? A mandatory civility code? Speech and press issues aside, IMO it just wouldn't make much difference whether we had one or not. And getting rid of it probably didn't have much to do with where we are now.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

I see both sides being represented fairly all the time on most Media Outlets. So fairness really isn't the issue in the end. They just need to start separating real News from Entertainment & Politics. When you merge all three,you end up not getting any real News. I really do hope the MSM gets back to straight News reporting. I'm not optimistic about this happening but i am a Dreamer.

 

[Iowa10000]

Its not right wing news radio, it's right wing lies and distortions that idiots want to believe because it makes them feel the way they want to believe.

The middle 60 percent of Americans are in the same boat where they have little different that they could do to better themselves because they isn't a path that they can just go down. So here comes the agitators who make millions off of trying to get a following, saying anything they can to turn any group against another in order to get a following.

Well I hate to tell you red neck gun toting hypocrites, if you got everything you wanted it would still be the same for you, you would be looking to blame someone for your own inability to get where most of you think you belong, at the top, because the top isn’t/ain't accepting you and they don't want you.

So keep fighting the battle for the ultra rich, and when you finally get to where your heading you will find out two things, your pathetic self will still be there and the people you been fighting against will still be neighbors, and the only difference is the rich in the country will have gone from owing 50% of everything to 68% of everything to day and on to probably 80% by 2020. And they will have done it on the backs of right wing honkies that they used by attracting them with the hate and bitterness they know makes up most of their life’s.

 

[Rozman]

All the major newspapers are arguably liberal,the major alphabet networks,ABC,CBS,NBC are known leftie outlets.Their offshoot little sisters MSNBC,CNBC are left leaning.CNN is so far left they are out in another galaxy.I am finding it hard to understand what the argument is here......

Oh yeh the rightwingers have FOX and a few radio stations and it bugs the living shit out of them that we even have these few...they see that as a threat that we get to decide for ourselves on the crap that comes from the WH.

 

[Intense]

Because some news only reports one side.

They never allow their ideas to be challenged

That is an obstacle easily overcome. You do that right here.

 

[Truthmatters]

you dont understand what the fairness doctrine did do you

 

[thereisnospoon]

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

It makes them lose elections

Who is "they"?
You people have no clue what you are supporting.
Government is limited by the US Constitution for many good reasons. You support an all powerful government. One that is involved in every aspect of your being.

 

[Iowa10000]

Reporting truth can not be overcome by using lies and distortions and only reporting one side of an argument as sources like Fox and it's followers only want to hear.

90% of things sent to me from e-mail accounts of people I know on the right are easily debunked by looking up fact check sites, and even after you do this and show them to be lies and distortions you very well might recieve them again from the same people, even though they have been proven to be a lie.

People on the right want to believe what they think is true and anyone who puts out anything that enhances that view is believed and nothing that anyone can do or say will convince them otherwise.

I had a guy tell me the other day that what he was saying was true because he saw it on Drudge. OMG I said have a nice day, I'm done.

 

[Defiant1]

you dont understand what the fairness doctrine did do you

Yes. It inhibited all debate.