Is The Fainess Doctrine Constitutional?

Question

“First, [Democrats] failed on the radio airwaves with Air America, no one wanted to listen... Conservative radio is a huge threat and political advantage for Republicans and we have had to find a way to limit it. Second, it looks like the Republicans are going to have someone in the presidential race who has access to media in ways our folks don’t want, so we want to make sure the GOP has no advantages going into 2008.” - Nancy Pelosi

Notice how Pelosi admits that liberal radio has proved to be a failure. Radio stations simply WILL NOT air a show that will turn away more listeners that it attracts because without ratings, sponsors, etc. the station or its parent cannot survive. This illustrates a free market at work.

Is it right that now, liberals want to pass legislation which mandates what radiostations will provide for its listeners, in other words, force them to air shows which would otherwise fail because people traditionally have freely chosen NOT to support them?

Is the agency which will regulate this going to hold CNN, The New York Times, Moveon.org, etc. to the same rules?

Seeing that under the same law which was stricken from the books in 1987, media corporations could be punished for not allowing equal time mean that THIS SUPRESSION OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS NOT EVEN CONSTITUTIONAL?

Above all, isn't it sad that Democrats feel the to legislate "fairness" to be able to compete politically? I mean is that not manipulating our entire law system for the sole purpose of gaining votes?

Answer 1

Liberals have a long history of ramming down the throats of Americans issues that most Americans find repulsive, (homosexual agenda, welfare state, bigger government, tax & spend, etc.etc.) LIberals also have an inferiority complex which compels them to legislate their agenda, rather than admit defeat. Liberals fail to understand that they have failed in congress, failed at talk radio, have a long history of failed politics, and now want to bypass that failure, and be given a voice anyway, even though there is no one listening. This would be better termed, " Give us our way doctrine"

Answer 2

You are mistaken on many levels.
First, the Fairness Doctrine is old legislation which was repelled long ago, in fact the end of the fairness doctrine really started Rush Limbaughs career because it opened the door for companies to own mutiple radio stations in the same geographic area.. There are no Dems who have voiced any desire to bring the fairness doctrine back, there is no new legislation in the works or pending trying to bring the fairness doctrine back.
Secondly, I've seen Ed Schulz on several talk shows recently and he makes a valid point. Progressive or liberal talk shows are being excluded in many major markets NOT because of poor ratings but because the radio conglomerates (Cumulus in my area) are conservatively owned and they do not allow progressive talk into their areas. The licenses these stations were given (they are free since the radio is public airwaves) state that the stations will serve the public interest. Ed Schulz does not feel the public interest is being served since many areas which are predominately liberal are being purposely excluded from receiving any progressive talk on local stations because the conservative ownership of the stations is censoring. I listen to him on XM and he has stated many times that he is willing to show anyone his P&L statement. He is in 100 markets and growing, making money with a growing ad base
Finally, it seems you are listening to FOX Noise way to much concerning the scare tactics they are using about the Dems trying to bring the fairness doctrine back. Like I said earlier, there is no such legislation. The Repubs are just worried because with the changing climate in the US, it took us awhile to fully understand what the neo-cons were trying to do to the US and now we know and we do not like their plans, the neo-con idealogy is dying.

Answer 3

How can the Democrats get any lower down than this
actually "un-fairness legislation? No, it is not constitutional.
They just want to regulate free speech (which they used to love).
They can't stand the fact that Republicans have the talk-
radio shows to themselves as Democrats can't get anything
going. They have all the liberal "news" shows on tv, however,
but I bet they don't want the fairness doctrine to apply to
those shows....that would be disaster for them and that's the
reason they're zeroing in on "radio". When the heck are the
Democrats going to start making their time worthwhile and
do good things for the American people? All they've done
sofar is subpoeny records, make up legislation they know
Bush will veto (as he told them that in advance), try to get rid
of successful Republican radio talk-shows and dumb stuff
like that. Let's throw them all out, what do you say?

Answer 4

They are afraid of the conservative movement, because it is growing and becoming aware of the pathetic politics of liberalism! I'm so sick of having liberalism and their politically correct ideals shoved down my throat on a daily basis from the media, public schools, newspapers, college professors, hollywood, music and all other avenues of entertainment! I never agreed with liberalism before, and know I'm adamantly opposed to it, the more it's crammed down my throat! For too many years conservatives stood by silently because when we opposed liberalism, we were labeled bigots, unprogressive, stuck in the stoneage, racist pigs, nazis etc etc. Liberalism has been bringing this country to it's knees since the 60's. Before that, after WWII, America was more united and more prosperous than anytime before it! That is until the 60's and the hippie liberals had to screw everything up with their smug 'no it all' philosophies on life and government!

Answer 5

The policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission that became known as the "Fairness Doctrine" is an attempt to ensure that all coverage of controversial issues by a broadcast station be balanced and fair. The FCC took the view, in 1949, that station licensees were "public trustees," and as such had an obligation to afford reasonable opportunity for discussion of contrasting points of view on controversial issues of public importance. The Commission later held that stations were also obligated to actively seek out issues of importance to their community and air programming that addressed those issues. With the deregulation sweep of the Reagan Administration during the 1980s, the Commission dissolved the fairness doctrine. It is Constitutional, and as you can see was in place for many years. But why do you worry about it? There is no legislation in the works to bring back the fairness doctrine. It is a diversion to the real issues that is being thrown out there, for your consumption.

Answer 6

I call it the "Flubberiness Doctrine". Stogy conservatives flap their yammers and then invite flatulant liberals onto their talk shows so they can humiliate them.

I consider it the flubberiness doctrine because its silly to expect an intelligent debate when its not moderated and the people making their arguments are taking everything so personal that no possible solution can ever come into view.

In short I don't even waste my time anymore.

Answer 7

No its not, the Democrats hope to rein in conservative talk radio thru these measures. Its interesting to note that Air America the libs answer to talk radio rarely if ever presented a conservative viewpoint.

Answer 8

IMHO no, but I have the same opinion of McCain Feingold.

Answer 9

What's hilarious in all this..is that Democrats are asked to show up on these shows.....they refuse...so it's not the fairness...it's the fear.

Answer 10

No it is censorship and state run media. it's communist.