"Fairness Doctrine" - that means you can't win the debate so you try to end it?

Question

Or does it mean there's an obligation on the part of every media outlet to tell "both sides" even when one side is factually correct?

Are we going to apply this to the New York Times? For example when they report that while politicians on the Left say the tax cuts were irresponsible, will they also have to report the fact is that tax REVENUE has gone UP at 4 times the rate of inflation?

Big D, the deficit is about $200BN - it used to be larger. This is because Bush spends too much. No argument there. The issue was tax rates and tax revenue. Tax rates were cut and tax revenue went UP - at 4X the rate of inflation. If your boss gives you a $2K raise and your wife runs down to Foxwoods and blows $3K, you really can't blame your boss.

Answer 1

Funny how the hippies of the sixties have grown up to be the oppressive "man" they complained about and revolted against in their youth. Now their true "you don't agree with me
so shut up" stripes are showing.

Answer 2

I have to comment on the revenue going up 4 times the rate of inflation. Nobody who pays their own way in this world can possibly believe that the reported inflation rate is correct. They just omit the necessities of life from the equation, and these are the items that have been spiraling upward.

The tax cuts made it necessary to cut benefits even for the military and veterans. Maybe you don't see that as irresponsible but many do. There are many facets to statements that are made on both sides of the aisle. That is why people need to listen to both sides. Trouble is, most only hear what they want to hear whether it is factual or not.

I'm not sure I am for the Fairness Doctrine. It was in effect between 1949 and 1986. The news was much more factual during those years, albeit boring. I think they might possibly be ahead to just make programs like Rush Limbaugh state that they do not report facts, they are just for entertainment. He and O'Rielly are the audible version of the gossip rags at the grocery counters and have been caught in many falsehoods.

I get my information from anyplace but the radio. Read and get some information from more reliable sources and you will see what I mean.

Answer 3

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
-First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America

Hmm... I don't see the word "fair" anywhere in there... though I do see the word FREE. People should be FREE to express their views, but life is not FAIR. If nobody wants to hear Liberal talk radio, and the ratings are so low that they cannot justify being on the air, they should be off the air... it's not FAIR, but it is FREE.

Is it FAIR that the New York Times gets to publish what they want? No, but it is FREE! Is it FAIR that Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity get millions of listeners, but Al Fanken gets very few? No but it is FREE.

The founding fathers didn't want to build a country based on fairness... but on freedom, and personal liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (or in other words, property). And that is the way America should be... Free, not Fair.

Answer 4

The fairness doctrine applies to over-the-air broadcast media only. it does not apply to print, it does not apply to cable.

It was conceived in the 1960's based on the still then valid 'scarcity of channels' argument. What that that meant is that there were only three networks and a handful of radio and television outlets in any market using the public airwaves. The fairness doctrine was designed to ensure that the licensees of the airwaves did not use their licenses (and lack of competition) to unfairly influence an election. So it called for more or less 'equal time' in coverage. (This did not apply to paid for advertisements, only what the news and public affairs editors decided to cover).

One of the silly manifestations of the fairness doctrine was in the 1980 presidential campaign. Stations stopped showing old Ronald Reagan movies for fear they would be charged with giving equal time to other candidates. (Fear not, your "Law and Order" Reruns on TNT are safe).

In the end, this has outlived its reason for existence. There is no longer a 'scarcity of channels'. There is plenty of competition in the broadcast marketplace. Be that as it may, these outlets still use the public airwaves. The public has a right to weigh in on how they are used.

Answer 5

A debate requires 2 people... so I'm not sure that's what it means.

I think it means censorship, which is unconstitutional. I don't like Rush at all, and think his message is crap. That doesn't mean I want him yanked off the air..that would be a grave injustice to our freedom.

BTW.. I don't believe all the fuzzy math the Govt. uses to calculate inflation. They say inflation is low..but don't factor in fuel and food to the index. According to the "experts" we are seeing an extra $625 a year due to tax cuts and a strong economy (I heard this number recently).. well.. I'm paying $25 more a week for gasoline.. $25 X 52 weeks is $625. I'm also paying about 40% more for all energy (natural gas and electric) and food has also increased due to the cost of fuel. Hell.. even my cable company raised their rates because they have a fleet of vans and trucks that cost more to maintain...passing the expense to the consumer. Its simple math..not fuzzy math that concerns me.

Answer 6

What is "easy to start but hard to end"? It's anything simple that one can love doing. Like smoking.

Answer 7

Fairness doctrine was the way of the land until fairly recently and the world did not fall apart. Our broadcast media should be more responsible than it is now, simple as that.

Answer 8

If the Fairness Doctrine applied to all media I would agree but it doesn't it is limited to just one.

Answer 9

The NY TIMES and other liberal "news" entities have also refused to print stories on our shrinking US DEFICIT due to those tax cuts.

About the only thing The NY SLIMES is good for is lining a bird cage.

Answer 10

This fairness doctrine is targeting talk radio specifically. What amuses me is that people don't understand that this is nothing more than censorship and a violation of our first amendment rights. This is no better than Tipper Gore burning books. Liberal? my *** they are liberal.