http://www.facsnet.org/issues/specials/telecom/death.php3 http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43863
2006-10-02 05:58:05 · 7 answers · asked by ? 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The "Hush Rush" bill? Absolutely...
The liberals continally fight for "free speech" for everyone that agrees with them.
For the rest of us, a Ser-Charge!
2006-10-02 06:02:53 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
My initial instinct was to say yes. Then, I thought about it further and it is most definitely NOT censorship. And here's why.
Who owns the airwaves? You and I do. Thus, when we lease them to broadcasters, they sign a contract with us that they will meet the public interest and broadcast that which benefits the population that owns the airwaves.
The elimination of the fairness doctrine has brought us to where we are today - where people can hole themselves up and listen only to that with which they agree. Thus, an immediate animosity toward "the other".
This is NOT in the public interest in any way, shape, or form. Those are my airwaves as much as they are yours. We simply allow broadcasters to utilize them when they lease them from our government. Thus, it is within our rights to demand that they are used openly and fairly - not for media moguls to reap profit while pushing their own personal political agenda.
This would not apply to books, the internet, and - maybe not even cable programming (depends on how the FCC looks at it). It would apply to broadcast television and radio.
It is responsible to allow multiple viewpoints. It makes it possible for us to exert our ownership. The FCC is supposed to represent all of America. Just as Bush's PBS guy asserted that PBS had to have conservative shows because it's a public station, we have the right to assert that any station that uses the public airwaves must obey the rules we set forth.
Screaming and shouting may bring about better ratings, but it destroys the public discourse. This is all a result of the elimination of the Fairness doctrine.
2006-10-02 13:13:41 · answer #2 · answered by WBrian_28 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only way it can be considered censorship is if a radio station wishes to only present one side of a political issue. You're not against a radio station being "Fair and Balanced", are you?
2006-10-02 13:24:35 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Fairness my big fat butt! Of course its censorship and they should not be allowed to get away with it. Its funny how democrats don't have any problem trying to stop talk radio by censorship.
2006-10-02 13:02:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Censorship is ONE word,and it is telling at your feeble-minded attempt to gain reactionary leverage.
2006-10-02 13:00:29 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Not exactly objective sources you're providing.
2006-10-02 13:01:00 · answer #6 · answered by brian2412 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
YES!!!!!!!!!
2006-10-02 13:04:29 · answer #7 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋