Your thoughts on the Fairness Doctrine?

Answer 1

It is a bad idea. The word "fairness" does not appear in the US constitution as a right. We have the First Amendment to the Constitution. It guarantees the right to free speech. It does not guarantee the right to have your speech heard by people who don't want to listen.

Answer 2

The call is Orwellian. This doctrine efficiently stifled all political content fabric in media announces as a results of probability of complaints, fines, or removing of license. on account that each and each guy or woman can herald positive condition, the value of litigation could tension media to drop political classes. Forcing inner maximum businesses to air perspectives they won't help is a gross violation of loose speech and private assets rights. the project is that the consequence of the "fairness" Doctrine isn't honest in any respect. Silencing political speech is what tyrannies do.

Answer 3

All you have to do is attend one sporting event that uses referees, whether it's a Little League game or the Super Bowl, and you will see for yourself that "fairness" is totally subjective.

What would happen if we applied the concept of the Fairness Doctrine to other forms of private enterprise? Can't you just see the commercials:

"Toyota was voted number one in a user survey! But Fords are good, too."

"Subway: 9 sandwiches under 9 grams of fat. But Big Macs are good, too."

"Gucci shoes, for those with taste and money. But K-Mart has shoes, too."

It's so stupid, it's hard to have an intelligent conversation with anyone that buys the concept.

Answer 4

It is not necessary. In today's society we have access to information tailored to almost any political slant you choose to embrace. The resurgence of the fairness doctrine is not about balance. It is an attempt to censor. The FCC should be concerned with ethics and decent practices in media as the industry is woefully lacking in these areas as a whole. They should not waste time on whether all political content is equal because it never will be.

Answer 5

It is an idea that Hugo Chavez would be proud of. It is nothing more than an attempt to silence the political opposition.

I would deride it as a tool used by Banana Republics but; minus Venezuela, that sort of tyranny would no longer fly in South America.

Answer 6

It's the height of stupidity.

Answer 7

Here you will find a somewhat long but very good article.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Regulation/EM368.cfm

Answer 8

Unconstitutional and stupid.