Conservatives must fight to bring back the fairness doctrine

[BOSSHOG]

With liberals controlling everything in our country now the only recourse conservatives have is to insist that the fairness doctrine be reinstated immediately. Its either that or their voices will be silenced forever. As a patriotic American, and a defender of the first amendment I will assist them in their endeavor. Let us all help our fellow americans who happen to be conservative in resurrecting the only thing that can save their movement.

[Champion Jack]

1. You are correct Brother Bosshog!

It is the only way

[bunnies]

2. I dont get why everyone loves the fairness doctrine so much...

Last thing I want is someone like Olbermann being forced to spew the RW "viewpoint". Obviously, I must be missing the *great* parts about it, but I really dont get it.

and on edit: People will still only tune-in to the shows they want to hear. So whats the point anyway?

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

3. Every farmer down in Hill Billy Junction is listening to the radio

In his tractor cab, in his truck on the way to town, whatever.

Every little town has Rush, O'Reilly, etc on the AM band. There are no liberal voices to contradict the steady diet of RW lies. You have to be in a major metro area to find Air America.

Enter the fairness doctrine, which forces all programs to allow some air time every hour or so with the other viewpoint.

If Reagan hadn't done away with the fairness doctrine, hate radio would not be possible. Rush's fantasies can't take hold without constant repetition. Also, remember, in Hill Billy Junction, Rush is the news.

[bunnies]

5. ahhh. I see.

Makes sense, but I'm still weary of it for some reason. I dont know...

[baldguy]

4. You don't understand the fairness doctrine, obviously.

It doesn't MUZZLE opinions - it FOSTERS them.

[bunnies]

6. umm. In my post I said I "obviously" didnt get it.

But now that you've repeated what I already said, I'm much clearer on the subject. :eyes:

[sweetpotato]

7. I remember

When the Fairness Doctrine was still in place.

They were not allowed to air Ronald Reagan's movies during the time of his campaign, because then they would have to allow equal air time to the opposition candidate.

I think that IS fair.

[bunnies]

9. They did that with Fred Thompson this year.

They pulled all the tv shows he was in due to a fair air-time requirement. Must be something separate of the Fairness Doctrine. :shrug:

[Oak2004]

13. Two points

A) Cable is exempt.

B) The fairness can be achieved by having a separate show with opposing views, and/or guest editorials. It never requires that people spout ideas they don't believe in.

The effect of the fairness doctrine would be, likely, a wider audience for liberal talk radio. Each station would need to balance the right wing talkers, and would probably opt to do so by buying syndicated liberal radio shows in equal measure.

[rusty fender]

8. The Fairness Doctrine means that there won't be ANY POLITICAL talk radio

at all! Just ask Thom Hartmann what the FD will do to Air America. All current talk radio stations will find it too cumbersome and expensive to allow political talk. They'll just go to bland talk, or no talk at all.

[Critters2]

10. Ooh! Catapult this propaganda! nt

[trudyco]

11. I thought the Fairness doctrine requires equal time for both viewpoints.

Which I thought didn't mean in the same program but equal time (so one liberal program, equal time of conservative program) and probably be cognizant of prime time slots being equal, too.

I can't remember if facts had to be checked, too. Maybe that was just news organizations who actually acted like one instead of a money generator.

[Hippo_Tron]

12. I would settle for a new fairness doctrine that applies mostly to television

I'm not particularly concerned about conservative domination of talk radio. It is a way that the right wing has galvanized their masses over the years but their masses reach a certain limit and talk radio at this point just helps them preach to the choir and keep people like Limbaugh employed. While that's unfortunate, it's not worth the political ramifications of trying to re-instate the fairness doctrine.

What I want to see is a return to the model where the TV networks provide the news as a public service and not as another source of profit. They should also be forced to cover both political party conventions gavel to gavel. The public gives them the airwaves for 365 days a year, they can live without 8 of those days once every four years.