The results of removing the Fairness Doctrine?

[thereisnospoon]

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.

If you are old enough to remember radio during the fairness doctrine, there were NO points of view on radio.
Station managements were just too worried about the hassles of entertaining political speech ,so they kept it off the air.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

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.

That is why many on the left hate the U.S. Constitution. They do precisely because the Constitution is there to limit the government and to avoid an all powerful, authoritarian government that is not answerable to the people. That is anathema to what they envision.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

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?

There is nothing balancing about the Fairness Doctrine. Left wing talk radio and television is not profitable. Right wing talk radio and television is. Reimplementing it would only cause media outlets to lose money by having to host left wing programming and as a result they'd have to terminate the right wing programming as well. Those pushing for its reimplementation know this very well.

Furthermore, the government has no Constitutional authority whatsoever to tell anyone in the media what type of political speech is acceptable and what is not and anyone who supports giving them that power is just as Stalinist and authoritarian as they are.

 

[uscitizen]

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

I agree, perhaps we can get Santa to give that to everyone?

 

[uscitizen]

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?

Well that would be a resounding yes from those who unwittingly serve those controlling the media.

 

[uscitizen]

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.

You are a well programmed minion.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You dont like the government our founders left us?

A fairness doctrine is NOT what the founders "left us"....Freedom of speech is just that. Freedom.
Your side's point of view cannot compete in the open marketplace so you want to use the force of government to change the rules of the game for your side's advantage.
Liberal talk has had many opportunities to succeed. For the most part, lib radio stations and networks have failed to produce sustainable numbers. The shows were dropped for other more profitable programming.
Lib talk could not even survive on satellite radio. The failure of Air America demonstrated non-interest in liberal views.
What your side proposes is to have a point of view presented "whether we like it or not".
In the event of this, people would undoubtedly tune out. This would leave radio stations and networks without listeners. No listeners = no ratings. No ratings= no money. No money= no programming. Period...
If a fairness doctrine were to be effective, government would have to essentially wipe out the marketplace for radio and take control of the airwaves.
Is that what you desire?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

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?

The media doesn't have to be "people" for the First Amendment to apply:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

There, you're argument is irrelevant. Glad we've settled that.

 

[uscitizen]

Yep those intrepretationistic justices who call radio "the press"?

 

[shintao]

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.

That is why many on the left hate the U.S. Constitution. They do precisely because the Constitution is there to limit the government and to avoid an all powerful, authoritarian government that is not answerable to the people. That is anathema to what they envision.

Who said the left hates the constitution? Notice how the con pulls the "hate" slogan from his hat.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Why does the left need help from the government to balance out anything?..

For three good reasons:

>because left and right are not only not the only pov, they are not the most important pov

>because the media is generally owned by and sponsored by the right via huge corporate megopolies

>because the media is solely in business to make money, content is therefore all about generating audience shares. What makes for great news may not make great entertainment or dinner table conversation

And you think onerous government regulation would take care of this problem. A problem YOU believe exists.
If radio station owners are not in the business for profit, what should their purpose be? How would you then expect the owners to recover operating costs?
With what would you suggest the station owners use to compensate their talent, writers, engineers and behind-the -scenes employees?
The left and right are not the only POV's? What other POV's are there?
The center? Please. The reason why there is a "center" is because those in the center have no point of view. Those in the center simply sit and wait for the direction of the popular and then go with that...There is no "central' point of view.
BTW, once again your "the rich are all conservatives" idea is a FAIL....Because it simply is not true.

 

[Iowa10000]

The truth could be show easily in what is being done on the air.

Just go down the list of reports made and remade by stations and their agents. I am betting that many more lies and distorions or remarks made out of contex are made by right wing news and right wing comentators to the extent of maybe 10 to 100 times those made by the left.

Just make a list of things that were lies that came out on the right and repeated or rebroadcasted as being true and some still are even though they should have known or did know that what they write or say was not the truth.

Obama's not an american
Obama is a Muslim
Obama is spending/costing 200 million a day for his trip overseas

 

[thereisnospoon]

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

Personally i would say no. There are many other factors that have been much bigger contributors to the current level of hate and fear mongering of the Media. One big factor was when they decided to merge Entertainment with real News. It all went downhill after that. Another big factor was when they decided to make News all about Politics. Straight News is something completely different than Politics. I mean is it really News that Republicans & Democrats hate each other? Personally i get sick of seeing endless reports on Democrats & Republicans hating each other. It's just not News in my opinion. So i don't think we need a Fairness Doctrine. I think we just need News Outlets to get back to reporting on real News from all around the World. They need to cut way back on the Politics. The People are starving for real News again. Ditch the Politics.

In a perfect world you'd be spot on. I agree with you on the lack of availability of straight news.
However, straight news is not sexy. It is not all that interesting to the average person.
Take your typical suburban household with kids. The two spouses work. They come home, tend to the kids, eat dinner, put the kids to bed, pick up the newspaper, look at the headlines, put the paper down, flip on the tv and at 10:30 or 11PM, hit the sack.
It is said that suburban middle class people who are the largest and most targeted demographic, are among the least informed demographics in the nation.
Based on that news presenters have to do what they can to keep the attention of viewers. it's sad that people in general look at news programming as entertainment rather than as a source for information and the events of the day

 

[Iowa10000]

The right has two bases, one that deals with money and one that deals with hate.

 

[shintao]

Why does the left need help from the government to balance out anything?..

For three good reasons:

>because left and right are not only not the only pov, they are not the most important pov

>because the media is generally owned by and sponsored by the right via huge corporate megopolies

>because the media is solely in business to make money, content is therefore all about generating audience shares. What makes for great news may not make great entertainment or dinner table conversation

And you think onerous government regulation would take care of this problem. A problem YOU believe exists.
If radio station owners are not in the business for profit, what should their purpose be? How would you then expect the owners to recover operating costs?

And now you know the rest of the capitalist story. Free press works best through government PBS, where all the evils of capitalism canbe set aside.

With what would you suggest the station owners use to compensate their talent, writers, engineers and behind-the -scenes employees?
The left and right are not the only POV's? What other POV's are there?
The center? Please. The reason why there is a "center" is because those in the center have no point of view. Those in the center simply sit and wait for the direction of the popular and then go with that...There is no "central' point of view.
BTW, once again your "the rich are all conservatives" idea is a FAIL....Because it simply is not true.

You are just fooling yourself while looking down the barrel of the Tea Party shotgun. There are plenty of view points besides the corrupted right and truthful Left. Can't see it, then you mind is munched dude.

 

[Defiant1]

The truth could be show easily in what is being done on the air.

Just go down the list of reports made and remade by stations and their agents. I am betting that many more lies and distorions or remarks made out of contex are made by right wing news and right wing comentators to the extent of maybe 10 to 100 times those made by the left.

Just make a list of things that were lies that came out on the right and repeated or rebroadcasted as being true and some still are even though they should have known or did know that what they write or say was not the truth.

Obama's not an american
Obama is a Muslim
Obama is spending/costing 200 million a day for his trip overseas

Do you have proof that any NEWS programs reported these things? Or are you referring to Rush, or Beck, or Hannity? Opinion programs.

 

[thereisnospoon]

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

then how do you explain the fact that liberal talk is the format that gets no ratings?
If what you say is true, conservative views would be the ones struggling with keeping an audience.
Your post makes no sense.
For the first 80 or so years of electronic media, one point of view( liberal or left) was the only one available. In the last 20 years, radio has been transitioned to conservative opinion. Why? because first conservatives found a small niche. The niche grew to mainstream status. Not wanting to be left out, radio station owners saw the ratings and wanted in. So what?
It's the marketplace.
Even with the large audiences of conservative talk radio, electronic and print media is still to this day dominated by a liberal point of view.
So really, if there were a fairness doctrine, liberals would be forced to share something which they have not had to share.....

 

[thereisnospoon]

Because some news only reports one side.

They never allow their ideas to be challenged

"Some"......What percentage?.....
To which ideas are you referring?
is it simply that you are upset that for example FNC gets to present the news in their preferred editorial view and the fact that FNC gets the highest ratings of all cable news services? Is the fact that Americans desire to get their their news from FNC that bothers you?
Please. Just admit that the MSM has competition and you cannot accept that fact.
That is why you support a fairness doctrine.
The reality is that any idea or point of view is open to and can be challenged at any time. That's freedom. You wish to squash freedom.

 

[thereisnospoon]

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.

"Right wing honkies"..."red neck gun toting hypocrites".....And there we have it.....
Hey, FUCK YOU. You racist bastard.
People like you are the very reason why we have conservative talk radio as an outlet...
It is because people like you who belong to PC protected classes that get to spew all kinds of filth and untruths about others while you are protected against all criticism.

Your side's code of political correctness has seen to it that I as a conservative cannot express myself in the same manner( not that I would want to anyway) while you are free to spew all kinds of racial and cultural epithets with impunity.

 

[thereisnospoon]

For three good reasons:

>because left and right are not only not the only pov, they are not the most important pov

>because the media is generally owned by and sponsored by the right via huge corporate megopolies

>because the media is solely in business to make money, content is therefore all about generating audience shares. What makes for great news may not make great entertainment or dinner table conversation

And you think onerous government regulation would take care of this problem. A problem YOU believe exists.
If radio station owners are not in the business for profit, what should their purpose be? How would you then expect the owners to recover operating costs?

And now you know the rest of the capitalist story. Free press works best through government PBS, where all the evils of capitalism canbe set aside.

With what would you suggest the station owners use to compensate their talent, writers, engineers and behind-the -scenes employees?
The left and right are not the only POV's? What other POV's are there?
The center? Please. The reason why there is a "center" is because those in the center have no point of view. Those in the center simply sit and wait for the direction of the popular and then go with that...There is no "central' point of view.
BTW, once again your "the rich are all conservatives" idea is a FAIL....Because it simply is not true.

You are just fooling yourself while looking down the barrel of the Tea Party shotgun. There are plenty of view points besides the corrupted right and truthful Left. Can't see it, then you mind is munched dude.

You have no rebuttal....again...
This has nothing to do with the Tea Party, the GOP or democrats.
This issue deals with freedom of speech, government, and the political left attempting to use government to stop certain media from presenting a popular point of view. A point of view that has those who do not agree in a royal shit fit.
If you want your side to be so represented, why then do you not get a bunch of people with similar views to use their best efforts to listen to/ watch liberal media?...It's that simple.
If the Dallas Cowboys are losing 30-0 to the New York Giants, do the Cowboys get to stop the game and demand the referees change the rules to give them an advantage?

It's the same thing. Your side is losing the battle of ratings. So you want the federal government to step in and change the rules to benefit your side's point of view....