The attack on talk radio begins in earnest TODAY!?

Question

So, folks. How many more rights are going to be stripped from the American people? Can anyone, either side of the fence, truly justify what's happening here?

Excerpts:

This will be a big day for the left in its campaign to rid this country of their nemisis ... those pesky right-wing talk show hosts. Today we'll be hearing about a new study by the Center For American Progress, a Washington left-wing think tank. The man running this outfit is none other than John Podesta, the former Chief of Staff for Bill Clinton. This report will condemn what it calls a "massive imbalance" between conservative and "progressive" My guess is that the report will blame the preponderance of liberal talk radio shows on anything but the absolute failure of these shows to sustain themselves with good ratings. We'll also undoubtedly see the typical statements about the asinine concept of "the public's airwaves."

http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html

Those those of you who support this, are not against taking away the freedom of speech? Do you support the Patriot Act too? Or is THAT different?

Answer 1

THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT REGULATE THE POLITICAL CONTENT OF BROADCASTS!!!

Seems like people here agree:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AmX25.oQ.PrBxpG1XDNNVm3ty6IX?qid=20070620102620AAAG1QW

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Aja_O7gMUB3GRG5H7xxlhnjty6IX?qid=20070620071244AAkSEab

PS The "Fairness Doctrine" will NOT result in "both sides being aired." If a broadcaster has to program an hour of low-rated programming for each hour of high-rated programming (say, an hour of Al Franken for an hour of Rush), or some similar formula is imposed, the broadcaster will simply stop airing political shows. They will try to find something else that can do as well in two hours as Rush does in one, ratings and adverising-wise. The Franken hour will be considered "dead air" and more or less written off.

Even "simple rules" designed to let people respond will make EVERY broadcast into a potential litigation nightmare. The legal and compliance fees will break stations. Programmers and advertisers won't want the hassle, and will be scared off.

This is designed to GET CONSERVATIVES OFF THE AIR, not to "provide balance." And Podesta knows it.

Some on the left are so sheltered that they believe that the only reason people have conservative thoughts are that they are "brainwashed" or "sheep." They think that if they get more liberal voices on the air, people will blindly follow that too. Or that if conservative voices are silenced, people will not have conservative thoughts anymore. This has it exactly backwards. People CREATED the demand for conservative talk radio; it's not that they were led by the nose by wily conservative hosts and their corporate backers.

I have not seen anyone seeking to apply the same standard to the network news. Nor should they.

I repeat my prior statement:

THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT REGULATE THE POLITICAL CONTENT OF BROADCASTS!!!

I would think that people would agree.

Why can't the people decide what they want to hear? Believe me, if something doesn't get ratings the station will pull it. EXCEPT for Air America, of course.

Whatever happened to being "pro-choice?" Why not let the people choose? WHO DOESN'T TRUST THE PEOPLE? What's next? Giving unpopular politicians "equal votes," so more liberals get into office?

And you are right to mention the Patriot Act. See my questions from earlier today.

PPS I am very passionate about this:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=As6wUDQm6O2kxrfr3JwehNHsy6IX?qid=20070621093344AAdZQYE&show=7#profile-info-208b193483dd7d7b272bebb9a7fe1deaaa

PPPS How about a "fairness doctrine" for this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113485

:)

WHEN THEY CAN'T COUNTER YOUR ARGUMENTS, THEY TRY TO SHUT YOU UP. ASK CASTRO.

Answer 2

It's the only thing left for the shut-up Rush Limbaugh open minded free speech crowd. Liberals can't compete in an open arena of free ideas. Typically, they just get mad and call you names, but this bunch of gutless politicians, who by the way have all the publicity they want, including unfettered use of the post office, want to pass legislation aimed at shutting down free speech. Why? Because they're looniness is being exposed. Not by people on the Left, but by talk radio from the Right. Liberals should be dead set against this.

Talk radio is as informative as any news shows on T.V. or in newspapers. At the top of the hour you get 5 minutes of national news. In my area, it's put out by CBS. You do have options like: Newpapers and news journal which have had serious plagerism going ons. (Associated Press could have an entire team devoted to publishing retractions. You know the ones that show up on page B27.) T.V. News: CBS could always rehire the maples/Rather liars. (BTW, right before an election. How conveniant.) Michael Moore: propaganda. Where are Liberals challenged? Outside of talk radio, no where.

So everything on the radio and on T.V. is not real. Interesting. I guess I'll have to stop listening and watching baseball, news, cooking shows. It's all fake. And all talk show hosts are morons, and anyone who listens to talk radio is a dumb idiot. Those answers had something to do with your question?

If this passes, will all of us conservatives have to get back alley radio doses!

Answer 3

The Patriot Act is a violation of the Bill of Rights. It is quite different than the REAL issue at hand with the broadcast media.

In 1969, the Supreme Court upheld the fairness doctrine. It was always law in the United States since the advent of radio. Later, 1987, the FCC overturned the doctrine, under, a Republican administration. Congress sought to enforce the fairness doctrine but Republican administrations stated that such legislation would receive a veto from the President. Now, a new democratic Congress is bringing up the issue. Two corollary rules of the doctrine, the "personal attack" rule and the "political editorial" rule, are as follows. The "personal attack" rule was pertinent whenever a person or small group was subject to a character attack during a broadcast. Stations had to notify such persons or groups within a week of the attack, send them transcripts of what was said and offer the opportunity to respond on the air. The "political editorial" rule applied when a station broadcast editorials endorsing or opposing candidates for public office, and stipulated that the candidates not endorsed be notified and allowed a reasonable opportunity to respond.

The fairness doctrine is not about limiting free speech, rather, it is an attempt to bring some balance to political rhetoric that is charged a bias.

I find the radio broadcasters, in an era of political shock jocks, to be irresponsible to the listener, and, to democracy.

Answer 4

McCain was just on Sean Hannity 2 weeks ago. Savage is way to far out of the mainstream loop and does not carry the credibility of a Hannity or a O'Reiley.

Answer 5

Thats just the kind of tactic that keeps me from considering myself a Democrat. **Sigh**

People should have the right to express their opinion.

Maybe Rush Limbaugh will have to contact the ACLU!!!!

I disagree though with the post above. The liberal shows dont do as well because they are just too boring. Show like Rush's where he yells at people and call them names do much better because they seek to entertain more than inform. Even if there are kernels of truth scattered here and there.

Answer 6

Anything that is done to hush Americans' thoughts in America is WRONG!

I don't think we can all even agree on this. I recall many people defending Hugo's right to pull the plug . . .

Those who support these decidedly communistic ideals, will find yourselves equally stripped!

Answer 7

Amazing time we're in when you can shut down anyone who doesn't say what you want. All you have to do is put the Fair in the sentence and now you can legislate it. Sprinkle in enough words that evoke sympathy and you can pass any legislation you want.

Answer 8

Democrats and Liberals (the Move on.org crowd funded by the criminal Socialist George Sores) can't compete in the arena of ideas so they have to shut the arena down. That's the bottom line!

Check out Josh's answer - typical Liberal, he's probably never listened to AM radio, but he believes everything his Socialist college professors told him. Now he's got his "hipster" photograph posted in Answers trolling for Liberal chicksters.

Answer 9

I like how you condemn "stripping rights from the American people" - then say that talk show hosts (who are not breaking any rules) should have their right to free speech regulated. It doesnt make sense.

Answer 10

according to Rush Limpbaugh GOP Senator Trent Lott is leading the charge AGAINST talk radio