Friday, February 06, 2009
The Fairness Doctrine.
The Fairness Doctrine is seeing renewed interest. The Fairness Doctrine was meant to even the playing field within talk radio if one party affiliated station or talk show becomes, for lack of a better word, too popular. This is one of the lamest legislations that I have ever seen. The Democrats are crying to their mommas saying "the Republicans have more friends on the radio than we do." Whenever the free market does not go their way, they cry about unfairness. Stop crying and just realize that you might need better programing, not laws to force contradictory programing. And what about third parties? Shouldn't they get an equal chance?
In the same respect, why do I always hear about the liberal media bias? People who scream bias is just looking for a cop out. Everybody is biased one way or another, there's no reason to cry about it. If you don't like the "liberal bias," then start your own radio show or television show. Stop expecting the government to do everything for you. If you have to rely on the government for things like this that means you can't take care of yourself.
When it comes to the flow of information, just like religion, the government should simply lay off completely. It should be up to the listener to ultimately decide. In this instance, the Democrats would like to force listeners to hear the other point of view. People do not like to partake in anything that they are forced to do. Actually, can you think of the last thing you were forced to do and you could not wait to do it? Exactly. Keep the airwaves deregulated, along with the internet. It's the role of Fascism to filter the media.
In the same respect, why do I always hear about the liberal media bias? People who scream bias is just looking for a cop out. Everybody is biased one way or another, there's no reason to cry about it. If you don't like the "liberal bias," then start your own radio show or television show. Stop expecting the government to do everything for you. If you have to rely on the government for things like this that means you can't take care of yourself.
When it comes to the flow of information, just like religion, the government should simply lay off completely. It should be up to the listener to ultimately decide. In this instance, the Democrats would like to force listeners to hear the other point of view. People do not like to partake in anything that they are forced to do. Actually, can you think of the last thing you were forced to do and you could not wait to do it? Exactly. Keep the airwaves deregulated, along with the internet. It's the role of Fascism to filter the media.
Labels: democrats, derugulation, fairness doctrine, liberal bias
# posted by deltachichavez @ 9:33 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
This is not a very accurate reading of the Fairness Doctrine, and sounds more like the criticism you find of it on certain far-right talk radio shows and blogs.
Regardless, even though the Democrats have controlled the agenda in Congress for 2 years now, there has been not one piece of legislation even proposed to bring it back or level the playing field on talk radio.
That is simply a fear tactic used by certain broadcasters who know they are presenting extremely biased information, and want to whip up their audience into a frenzy.
Regardless, even though the Democrats have controlled the agenda in Congress for 2 years now, there has been not one piece of legislation even proposed to bring it back or level the playing field on talk radio.
That is simply a fear tactic used by certain broadcasters who know they are presenting extremely biased information, and want to whip up their audience into a frenzy.
If you're interested in learning more about the Fairness Doctrine, here's a link for you:
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/F/htmlF/fairnessdoct/fairnessdoct.htm
Sorry I can't do an active link.
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/F/htmlF/fairnessdoct/fairnessdoct.htm
Sorry I can't do an active link.
I agree with Dan!! I think the posting about the fairness doctrine was a very emotionally loaded post. Even if legislation was giving another look at the Fairness Doctrine, then there are several things that are miss-represented in the post. The thing is there are a few major media conglomerates that own the better part of media outlets. If it just so happened to be that these few people with the money decided they only wanted to push one side of the arguments.. where would we be??
# posted by 
: 11:06 PM
: 11:06 PM
I think the fairness doctrine is a bad idea, personally. I mean, how can you decide exactly what sides are supposed to be permitted. I think we have the freedom of the press in this country for a reason. Plus, there are various media outlets to find out information from. It's not like we have 3 networks any more and that's all people can watch. I do understand that people can feel that the media can be unfair or biased, however. Because of the whole gatekeeper thing, people who own these stations or are in particular positions control the agenda, and hence can control what the public deems to be important. As far as talk radio goes, it's pretty accurate to say that you can't be a liberal on talk radio. You are pretty much banned. That can be seen as sort of a monopoly. So should we look at this in terms of monopolies or in terms of access to information? I just don't think it's the government's job to tell the media what it should say (in fact I think it's unconstitutional). But what if certain sectors of the market exclude competition. Should the government intervene then?
So we should let the government control what we listen to? This is another attempt at controlling free market, in my opinion. If you don't like the radio station and what they are saying, change the station. If listenership is reduced, so will advertising. Granted, I'm a staunch supporter of the first amendment so the slightest bit of news of possible oppressive measures will always raise a red flag with me.
Post a Comment
<< Home
