Why are the liberals wanting a fairness doctrine?

Question

The "vast right wing" conspiracy of talk radio is all in a dither (sp) about this proposed "Fairness Doctrine" encouraged by Pelosi and supposedly Hillary now. Do liberals really believe in curtailing free speech? I thought they were the epitome of freedom and all that? Are conservaties worked up over nothing?

Answer 1

It is pretty obvious that the quickest path to power is to first control the distribution and content of information to the people - this is why Chavez recently commandeered the broadcast stations in Venezuela.
The liberals pretty much have the printed media and most of the television news stations - if they can get the same bias on the radio also, they'll pretty much have it rapped up.
Free enterprise isn't doing it for them - their foray into radio with Air America was a disaster - and, despite the liberal ownership of numerous radio affiliates, the conservative talk radio stations consistently get the best ratings - and that's the bottom line.
To answer your question, yes, it certainly appears that liberals really believe in curtailing free speech.

Answer 2

Why might we ought to stress a company to function in a fashion that stops them from being helpful? i think of the government needs to stay out of inner maximum company as much as attainable. The equipment is honest now whether the media is biased. If a liberal needs to make a factor on the radio or television then the can initiate their own station/ software to do exactly that. the undertaking with the fairness doctrine is that it could stress a station to placed on cloth that the universal public isn't attracted to buying and by utilising doing so the station might have decreased sponsorship/ earnings. i know earnings are meant to be the evil at the back of each element yet they are additionally what made a unfastened u . s . attainable.

Answer 3

What neither get about Talk Radio is why it is really so popular. It's not directly because it is largely Conservative at all.

I'm not even a Conservative, and I listen to talk radio. I'm a Libertarian, and I've listened to Liberal talk radio some as well (Alan Coombs particularly).

The real reason people like talk radio is because the "talk" part applies to the audience as well as the host. More often than not, the really popular hosts LISTEN to the callers. They don't always agree, but Liberals get their say on most shows (okay, maybe not on Savage or Levin, but they do on Rush and Hannity).

That's what people want, is to be able to make their own concerns and opinions heard. Talk radio is interactive. Television isn't. Newspapers aren't. Party sponsored blogs aren't.

One thing I've learned in half a century of Life, most of it as a Libertarian, is the Conservatives do tend to listen to other points of view, and Liberals do not.

That's why Air America failed. There is no Liberal truly capable of listening to anyone that doesn't already agree with them.

That's also why the Fairness Doctrine would never "balance" talk radio, it will destroy it entirely.

I heard someone tonight make the claim that "people who read the NY Times are READERS" as if that made them superior to the talk radio audience. My thought was "yes, but they are not THINKERS" because they simply believe whatever the Times says, which is why the Times is losing readers, as fewer and fewer people are falling for their nonsense.

Are Conservatives worked up over nothing? No, they are not. Republicans are starting to warm to the Fairness Doctrine, too, and when Republicans start agreeing with Liberals, your Freedom is in jeopardy.

Answer 4

Funny, the research was done by Clinton's former aids too. They are just like Chavez's government wanting to pull the license of people who disagree with them.

Pathetic... but they would scream about free speech if they could not call our President a Dumb A## anymore.

Open is smoking something if he really believes that Republicans are warming up to this,,,, they definitely see it as an encroachment on their free speech.

Answer 5

Is there such a thing as free speech anymore? As a so-called "liberal", I would think that as soon as I post this I will be chastised for having a viewpoint differing from the masses. Therefore I must be ridiculed for what I think - because it's wrong!

So am I really entitled to my opinion?

Answer 6

There are a number of examples of liberals being opposed to free speech.

There are the speech codes on universities, which are basically forcing politically correct nonsense on the students at universities.

They are also in favor of "hate crime" legislation, to include quoting the Bible in opposition to sodomite "rights", "marriage", etc.

In fact, the only time liberals are in favor of free speech is when they agree with the speech.

Answer 7

Republicans don't ever follow the laws. Like Cheney for example, he thinks he is above the laws..
Cheney's office provided the information in 2001 and 2002, then stopped. Henry Waxman, chairman of the committee, said Cheney's office claims it need not comply with the executive order because it is not an "entity within the executive branch."
"Your decision to except your office from the president's order is problematic because it could place national security secrets at risk," Waxman wrote in a letter to Cheney on Thursday.
The Information Security Oversight Office has asked Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to resolve the legal dispute over whether the order applies to Cheney's office. So far, the Justice Department has not ruled on the issue.
Waxman said J. William Leonard, director of the Information Security Oversight Office, told the panel that after he sought advice from the Justice Department, Cheney's office recommended that the executive order be amended to abolish the ISOO. "I question both the legality and wisdom of your actions," Waxman said.
Waxman said Leonard also told the panel that in 2004, Cheney's office blocked the archives from doing an onsite inspection of his office to make sure classified information was being properly protected.
"To my knowledge, this was the first time in the nearly 30-year history of the Information Security Oversight Office that a request for access to conduct a security inspection was denied by a White House office," Waxman wrote.
The eight-page letter asks Cheney to respond to a series of questions about why he believes his office is exempt, and what steps his office has taken to ensure that national security information is protected.

Answer 8

I still don't get what this "fairness doctrine" is all about.

Answer 9

No it is not curtailing free speech. Instead it is adding to it.