Talk Radio * Fairness Doctrine
By Concerned Mother on November 21, 2008 at 1:55 AM in Current Affairs
I thought you might want to know about this collection of stories on the fairness doctrine debate from a variety of sources on all sides:
And what about that local requirement?
I’m kind of tired and I can’t quite remember the phrase. But I heard that Obama wants to make radio more local.
Now, I would love that because it’s distressing to be in a rural area and have the sole nearby AM station be owned by a corporation with offices and staff and HOSTS who are thousands of miles away. I want LOCAL news. I want more LOCAL traffic and weather reports! We need those reports! It’s distressing that I have to try to find and listen to a radio station at the nearest big city — which is like 200 miles away — and rarely mentions the area I inhabit.
So what’s wrong with that idea?
What else is at stake for radio, television, and print media?
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
Why stop with radio?
If we make all news media local, including television, Barack Obama will never win another election.
Yes, there is an explanation but it’s late and I don’t feel up to it.
But, think about it.
The Fairness Doctrine has ZERO reason to exist, other than Pelosi, Schumer, Kerry, Feinstein, and all of the other FD supporters censoring conservative and christian talk radio. Period. Nothing good would ever come of it, but it appears no one wants people to speak badly of Obama. If liberal talk radio would have worked, like Air America, then I bet Pelosi would find some other right of ours to take away and leave speech alone.
We can already see what Obama thinks of our free speech by how many blogs get hacked, blocked, etc. that are anti-Obama. And we of course have the dispatch of 5,000 trolls into cyber-space so that they can F**k with those who dissent against the message of Our Lord And Savior Obama. It’s ALREADY ridiculous. It can only get worse if Pelosi pulls off the Fairness Doctrine nonsense. When would it stop?
You are referring to the slippery slope. Everyone (this is not just for OIAF), please remember next time someone wants to trade “just a little” liberty for safety, to speak just as loudly then as you do now over the FD. I think both the left and right need to stop the selective outrage when our liberty is threatened. The right let Bush do many things that qualify for the slippery slope. The left now wants to follow in-kind apparently. Both sides are horribly wrong and hypocritical.
“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Benjamin Franklin
Obama is a fraud but there is good reason to have a Fairness Doctrine– lies. If Rush lies about Hillary, then Hillary would have equal time to rebut the RushLie. That is the point. Equal time. Fair play. If Obama lies about Rush, then Rush would have equal time to rebut Obama– and if he did it on say ABC, ABC would have to provide the airtime. Would that put the pressure on the MSM to have fairer, more objective journalism? Damn right.
So what is the problem with the truth?
If I have to explain to people here WHY forcing the issue of free speech is a bad idea, and violates our rights, then Larry needs to post the Constitution up there and have an entire thread about our rights. Also, Pelosi et al intend to STRETCH this Fairness Doctrine BS to include blogging – i.e.., not anti-OVomit talk like we do here. If you really think that’s “Fairness” then I don’t know what to tell you. This makes me sick. How can people just sit by and have their rights taken away and bend over and take it?
I agree we need to remain vigilant on this issue. But we also need to cite reasonable credible sources on factual allegations such as:
I would welcome seeing some evidence this is what is being discussed by the pols. And as I pointed out to you in the past I can’t see how you could enforce the FD onto blogs. They will just get set-up overseas and not even the Oborgbots will tolerate overseas Internet traffic being censored or blocked. Even an Oborgbot drunk on koolaid would see this as sliding way down the slippery slope. And this would be deemed unconstitutional by the SCOTUS, just as the law that was passed under the guise of “protecting children” (I think it was called the Internet Decency Act?) by the Bush admin was slapped down real hard as being unconstitutional. Things have gone to hell for sure, but not knee deep in it.
Correction, it is the Children’s Internet Protection Act of 2000.
I have faith in the unwashed masses coming to our rescue when they discover they are not wanted either.
Tomorrow is another day, as Scarlett O’Hara was wont to say…
I wonder how long that will take Annie…three months, max?
Well said Annie. What Scarlett actually said, more or less, was “Fiddle-ee-dee, I’ll worry about it tomorrow.”
I suggest we all worry about it today. And, hope for tomorrow.
Stand up!!!
My understanding of the localism policy [already on the FCC books] is to use it to limit national coverage/exposure of the right-wing/opposing mouthpieces. The weight of a Rush Limbaugh is to broadcast all over the country. But if stations start getting complaints from “local” progs, this could force the hand of the large broadcasting companies [that often bypass local talent and air the big national shows] to backpedal. This is all mixed with the cry for “fairness” to local communities, but in actuality drives a wedge to force the national, conservative talk shows off the air.
Do the dirty deed with nobility! It’s all done with the pretense of high ideals–look out for the local communities, foster local talent and appeal to local interests. But the underlying strategy is to shutdown the voices of the undeniably popular conservative opposition.
Doesn’t sound too awful. I’m not a Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity fan. But where do you draw the line? And who gets to draw that line?
That’s the slippery slope. And the liberal side of things finds ample cheerleading on NPR and the national TV networks. But they want it all, everything. Liberal saturation [otherwise known as propaganda].
Either the airways are free and inclusive. Or they’re not. There’s also a program out there for “liberal diversity,” which means handing over properties [of a media nature] to liberal minorities. Think Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson.
Interesting times we’re living in!
Okay, I’m back, but now it’s REALLY late.
Look at the Electoral College map, by COUNTY.
It’s awfully red.
Now, I’m not rooting for one party or the other because, essentially, I think both parties have their heads at least partially up the expulsion canal, but, there is a point.
Without national media, there is only local media (duh, right, that’s obvious). If that were to happen (which it NEVER will — this is only for fun), people would hear about and talk about things that concern them, as a local community.
Trust me.
Pelosi, Dean, Reid, Axelrod, Obama, Wright, Pfleger, Farrakhan, Rezko, Daschle, Biden, Matthews, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC (a/k/a the “Four Blind Mice”) do not speak for the mass of humans living in this country.
If The Obama has to get in a truck (or a Hummer, Escalade or Stretch Beetle Limo) and go to each community in America, get out, walk to the center of the town square and meet the people who live there, shake their hand and look them in the eye — rather than look down on them from a stage washed in kleig lights in an American Idol media event — he’s done.
Think about it. In all the public appearances this man has made, as much as he’s been fawned over and shown, time after time, on the TV screen, do you feel like you’re ever made direct eye contact with him.
Sarah Palin winked at the American people. Okay, bad or good idea, who knows. A lot of people liked it, and a lot of people (the one’s who didn’t vote for her, generally speaking) didn’t. But, whatever your persuasion, you knew she was looking you straight in the eye.
Whatever you think of a person, if they won’t do that, your alarm goes off.
It’s HIGH time it went off within the American public where this man is concerned.
So, sure. Cut off ALL the news media.
Make him walk the walk.
My guess is, he won’t show up.
Some people know when the politician doesn’t really like people — and Obama does NOT like us.
He could not do as you suggested — get out in the middle of a small town and really meet and listen to the people. He’s an illusion.
Keep writing — I like what you have to say.
Here’s a piece about the FCC reg
A lie is the line. If you say Clinton murdered Foster, you would be required to provide time to people who say Clinton did not murder Foster, since you are alleging an opinion. I remember the media when the Fairness Doctrine was in force– you would have never seen the Swiftboat movie forced on TV audiences during that time period.
I am a fan of many talk radio shows.
We have, maybe, 30 – 40 stations within the listening area of my home. There is much diversity and several local hosts. They have shows in the morning and afternoon drive time.
I can’t think of any one in my area that wants to go back to listening to the sick call every morning. Then, anyone that is in the hospital or being discharged from the hospital is announced. Next, we had the birthday call for anyone within a fifty mile radius and the drawing for the lucky birthday cake winner. The return of this will kill am radio.
I will march in Washington to retain some of the best entertainment in this world, am talk radio.
Entertainment.
There’s that word again. The national guys talk as if what they say is FACT, not entertainment. Like Fox NEWS having “commentary” shows.
It’s when you put something out there as FACT, without backing it up with real facts that fairness goes down the drain.
My folks, for years!, would not admit Rush was entertainment, that he would lie and just talk out his Oxycontin arse. FINALLY, they admitted that he’s just “entertainment.”
And guess what Randy Rhodes, even before her bizarre leap off Reason, would spew crap that wasn’t accurate or at least misleading.
But it everybody realized there would be penalties for spreading falsehoods and lies, like the swiftboating nonsense, they’d be MORE LIKELY to back up their claims.
Or guess what, you want to have a program that’s all fluff and conjecture, pay a higher fee and lead in the program with a statement that this is entertainment. Like the TV ratings.
There’s a lot of garbage on AM talk just as there is on corp TV. So if you listen to talk AM, but still bitch about MSCNBC or Olbermann (sp), ya might need to rethink things.
Obama has been clear on the fairness doctrine; he has no interest in reinstating it.
The real issue is media consolidation. Is Omaha, Nebraska better served by a syndicated show coming in from New York or is it better served by local content? Look if Clear Channel can run El Rushbo on each of its 1200 stations today it can easily flip those stations to Randi Rhodes tomorrow. The public interest is not being served nor is the public necessity.
A radio station run from a remote location can not report on important local events. The local citizens become less informed, they become less involved in their local communities. In a emergency the radio station becomes a liability to the community. It can not deliver life-saving targeted local information. Real people die because, time sensitive information is not relayed to them. That used to be the bread-and-butter of locally owned radio stations.
The danger of loosing your daily anti-Obama radio fix are remote. Riech-Wing radio rakes in big money for Clear Channel and Sinclair. Just a reminder it was Riech-Wing Radio that helped sell Bush’s excellent misadventure in Mesopotamia.
No one wins with media monopoly or media oligopoly. Democracy depends on a wide open market of ideas. That is exactly what we don’t have right now. Five media conglomerates dominate the air-waves.
Even when the fairness doctrine was in effect it was a rather limp noodle of regulatory legerdemain. Most fairness doctrine opinion got dumped in the hours where only insomniacs were listening or watching. If you really want a change in the MSM / Corporate Media then the real target is anti-trust regulations. Both Fox and (MS)NBC need to be cut way down to size. Local ownership of local stations which cover local issues that is what we disparately need.
Obama was clear how he felt about FISA too…Ooops, he changed his mind. He was clear about how he felt about the Surge too. Ooops, he changed his mind. He sort of has this tendency to
liechange his mind. I don’t believe for a moment he will veto the Fairness Doctrine when it comes his way. Which it will.Bingo — thus his name — Backtrack 0
I’d like to see Randi Rhodes head explode when she has to share her air time.
ROFLMAO…I would actually LIKE to see her head explode….
I agree
What do you be that blogs will somehow fall under the veil of silence too? I mean, certain blogs.
I want LOCAL news. I want more LOCAL traffic and weather reports! We need those reports!
I think that is more FCC rules. In my area clear channel was allowed to buy more than half the radio stations and half the TV stations. All the local radio people were fired, all news reporters are shared among stations. We have four main local TV stations. Two stations show the same news. Same anchors, same stories, same everything. One of the other two TV stations share reporters with the local newspaper. Even then almost half of the local news is just clips of national stories that get sent to all the stations owned by the mega- media group that owns the local stations.
Weather is important here. But it’s usually a day old which means meaningless. We get limbaugh, oreilly and hannity replayed all day. Local talk was replaced by hosts a thousand miles away that pretend they are local. The same ‘local’ host does shows in cities all over the country. Most people in my area have no idea the hosts are NOT local.
Disgusting.
What is wrong with it, concerned mother, is that we have freedom of the press. In short, Obama doesn’t get to dictate media change.
That would be a big ole *yikes!* Not only is it interfering in the freedom of the press, it’s also interfering in commerce. Radio stations are free to figure out what sells in their market.
I have a question. I have NEVER heard of a radio station that doesn’t have ANY local news coverage.
What the heck?
I have NEVER heard of a radio station that doesn’t have ANY local news coverage.
When more than one station shares reporters that is not local news.
And it more than local news. It’s not just local also local community affairs programing. The local talk show that talks about things happening right at home. That’s gone in my area. Any political strip could call and talk about the new building going up downtown and why they like it not. Not any more. Not in my area. The ‘local’ guys are thousands of miles away and pretty much just echo limbaugh. Locals in my area have no clue, none.
The stupidity where I am is just amazing.
Example: Large local employer was about layoff 25,000. The company called the dem mayor two days before to let him know. ‘Local’ news would not let the mayor on the day the layoffs were announced. The mayor of the city was shut out of the local news. ‘Local’ hosts did run a campaign to have the SEC check if the mayor used the layoff info for insider trading. The really big deal was the mega-company had just recived hundreds of millions in tax breaks because they said they would not layoff people. The company’s promise not to layoff and then almost immediate announcement of layoffs was forgotten because the ‘local’ hosts kept screaming insider trading at the dem mayor. Just about the dumbest thing I have ever seen. And it was thanks to the ‘local’ hosts.
Ah, got it. Well, local radio may not have the resources to follow everything. I presume there’s some source…..newspaper, whatever.
In my area the one major local paper parteners with local TV and radio. It’s just an echo chamber.
We saw how his “truth squad” and “fight the smears” army of liars treated truth and freedom of speech and how they overwhelmed the media with propaganda.
We saw it happen for Bush as well.
All things in moderation. Some local, some national, some leftwing and some rightwing. This year American’s witnessed undeniably a national media campaign for one candidate. If the perpetrators of that debacle want to say who gets to speak we should all be highly concerned. They have a master plan and they are not to be trusted to mess with our rights by determining what laws govern our so-called Fairness.
I don’t trust them. They will sell us all out for power of the air waves. We may not like what some people say on their bully pulpits but we must defend their rights to continue to say what they want.
We have freedom of the press, that’s it, period. The stations have the right to play what they believe people want to hear.
The government has no right to tell you or me what we can and can not listen to.
The fairness doctrine once applied, will get out of control fast. They will try to use it to silence every voice of opposition from the radio to the internet.
Oh and the thing is, if it were the other way around, and the right wing was using a republican controlled congress to muzzle the likes of Olbermann and Matthews, the left would be crying outrage.
I’m a liberal and I want those two lying pricks called out. Truth knows no boundaries.
Amen to that!
The “government” does a have right– it is OUR fucking air waves not WKRP’s! We own it. And this part owner of the air waves wants truth and fair play, not bullshit from Limbought and AxelRove.
A democracy debates opposition, it does not surpress it. Sounds like democracy is on the line.
Remember radio free Europe?
Can’t even get that here!
Exactly!! Well said.
In a true democracy ALL sides should be allowed to express their views, and allowed to debate each other.
Largest AM station in Chicago. Runs at 50K watts.
Line-up:
12:00AM 4:00AM Coast to Coast AM with George Noory
4:00AM 5:00AM Wall Street Journal This Morning
5:00AM 9:00AM Don Wade & Roma (Local – Right Wing)
9:00AM 11:00AM Erich “Mancow” Muller (Local – Assclown – WLS Station Pres Fowler describes him as “younger version of Rush.”)
11:00AM 2:00PM Rush Limbaugh
2:00PM 7:00PM The Roe Conn Show (Local – But oddly independent)
7:00PM 10:00PM Sean Hannity
10:00PM 12:00AM Mark Levin
With the exception of Conn, and the very bizarre, but fun, Coast to Coast AM, these guys are all so far to the right, I’m surprised their chairs don’t tip over on a regular basis.
Then again, this is Chicago – home of the most distressingly corrupt Democrat rule in the country. And the people, they seem to love their Democrats here – despite the largest station running RW vomit most of the day.
I don’t know what my point is. But I do know that when the electorate’s leadership choices are driven in large part by the opinions of these major news media celebrities (the Olbermanns, Maddows, Caffertys, the Limbaughs, Hannitys and Levins) there’s a problem.
The most blatant evidence of that problem is currently sitting in his self-proclaimed Office of the President Elect.
What to do, what to do.
If you silence talk radio, the right wing has no where left on the MSM (besides internet, until they muzzle that too) to express their voices.
I think EVERYONE should have a right to their political voice. The fairness doctrine does not allow that freedom.
(OK – third times a charm, noquarter. Trying to post a response has been quite distressing this morning.)
Sure, I agree. Everyone should have a voice, and have a forum for their views. The difference is, you and I aren’t framing issues or spinning “news” items, or going so far as to make virtual mountains out of molehills (and vice versa) to hundreds of thousands of listeners/watchers on a daily basis.
What concerns me are the mega-mouthpieces, set in their chairs before microphones and cameras by the corporate monarchy.
Like I said, I don’t know quite where I stand on this slippery slope. I know for certain that one must not abide censorship. I also know for certain that this last silly season was by far the slickest and most unhealthy tribute I’ve seen to the lack of critical thinking by the American Electorate – many of them all too ready to be spoon-fed whatever their mouthpiece of choice was shrieking into his megaphone.
When I turned on my DishTV guide one day in October, and noticed the new channel 73 Obama Channel – which was a two and a half minute loop of teh awesome and his so-called platform, played over and over all day, every day – I had to wonder: On what side of the fence was this undercurrent of fascist media going to come down?
The divisiveness is driven in a huge part, by these mouthpieces, and corporate money and influence. It has ever, at least in my lifetime, been thus. The danger lies in a refusal to recognize that this intent needs to be opposed. If not, we are going to have more than just Freedom of Speech. What we will have is idiocracy, and freedom from the intellectual exercise of critical thought.
I don’t believe the Fairness Doctrine, as it once stood, is necessarily the answer. The government needs to stay the hell away from our right to freedom of speech and communication of ideas.
But, what path do we take? A culture can be led to the forum of independent thought, but you can’t make them think. People want to be told what to think; they will listen to those who validate their own suspicions; who speak and postulate inside their comfort zone.
Like I said, I don’t know where we go from here. It appears that ever since Bill Clinton took up his saxophone on Letterman, that our bed has been made, and now we’re to lie back in it, and think of England.
You and I own the airwaves that these broadcasters use. We get to determine if they have to entertain those with an opposing viewpoint. It has nothing to do with free speech.
We get to determine it by choice – if we listen to the station or not. It’s not the government’s job to tell the stations what they can and can not play. THAT is squashing free speech.
If that is the case that the government shouldn’t tell broadcasters what they can and cannot say or show then the FCC had better return all those fines they levied against Howard Stearn.
We the people grant broadcasters a license to use our airwaves, we got a say in their message. If they don’t like it they can buy a dead tree media outlet to vent their spew.
There is a difference between Howard Stern and right wing radio.
We have a freedom of political speech, that should not be censored, on EITHER side of the isle. That is different that imposing decency laws.
I do not want talk radio censored, and I don’t want liberals censored either. This is America! No one can tell us what opinion we can and can not express. That is what our brothers and sisters before us laid down their lives for!
One reason conservative radio is hugely popular is that it is profitable. If progressive/liberal radio could find the right formula to be profitable, Al Franken would still be living in NY. Like it or not, Rush revived the AM band of radio in over 600 markets which have started many more conservative stations in all these markets. The fairness doctrine will kill these markets. Can we really afford to lose 600+ stations and all the employees due to this act?
Employees? You mean they college student that get to watch the board as the syndicated rightspew program is broadcast?
Yes you are right. And had LIBERAL Talk Radio, like Air America, been a success (no one listened) then Pelosi would also have less reason to stomp on our rights. I can’t believe I am reading a few people here, I suspect trolls, advocating this nonsense. These are the same people who I guess voted for Fraudbama and are still high on the Bambi Crack.
Franken moved to Minnesota to run for the Senate and was doing his Air America show from Minnesota until he ran for the Senate. His leaving NY had nothing to do with the Air America’s profitability. Air America did very well UNTIL they turned into the Barack Obama worship radio station. That’s when I canceled my satellite radio. I really don’t know how they’re doing now. I couldn’t take the BO love fest anymore. It made me sick and don’t listen anymore.
The Fairness Doctrine is a terribly lousy idea no matter how “good” its intention might be.
It is also impractical and impossible to apply it in an even handed manner.
How is going to determine what “balanced” means?
Who is going to police this? The pol that’s in charge at any given time??
Makes NO sense.
NPR proclaims to live by this and most of them were still were just as bad (I used to like them expect in
middle east reporting).
They do stupid things: eg. when there was the Kansas push to change the curriculum to actually teach “creationism theory” while debunbking evolution in schools (ugh). You have what 90% of the population that believe in evolution and 10% not? (for example). Then what they do is they invite ONE person from each side and they give them equal air time to push their
agenda. Same in many foreign reporting (in South America for example; horrible) The impresion this creates is that you have an equal support for both sides. That is that both sides have the same strength
which is absurd.
It just doesn’t work. Imagine that for every Customer review of a product that is positive you HAVE to publish a negative one. What’s the value then of any of this?
Besides as I said before: I am against anything that has the word ” Doctrine” attached to it by default.
Enough already !!
The Fairness Doctrine worked from 1949-1987 UNTIL Reagan and the RWers decided they didn’t like it. It worked for 38 YEARS….It will work again….just not to the liking of Republicans. They hate it when Liberals have a voice.
Reagan killed the Fairness Doctrine for a REASON. To silence LIBERALS on the radio. Clear Channel (RWers) now owns 9% of the 13,000 radio stations in the country and they air Hannity, Limbaugh, O’LIElly and their ilk ONLY. There are ZERO Liberal radio talk show hosts now (at least in MY surrounding listening area) except for Satellite radio. WLS in Chicago use to be THE BEST radio station and is now a bunch of RW nut jobs. It SUCKS. The Fairness Doctrine will change that…THANK G-D!
I’m tired of the one-sided RW ONLY radio. They’ve had the radio airwaves since Reagan killed the Fairness Doctrine. Their reign is OVER. The Fairness Doctrine didn’t and doesn’t kill free speech. It just makes free speech more BALANCED. If you have a Conservative blathering on for an hour, you have to let a Liberal blather on for an hour. WHY do you think the RWers are foaming at the mouth over this???? It’s because they know the Liberals will now have equal time no matter what and they can’t stand the thought of the Liberal message getting out.
Yes. I’m an unapologetic Liberal. I supported Hillary, John Kerry, Bill Clinton (twice) and all other Dems who ever ran for office and I won’t apologize for it. I voted for Cynthia McKinney this year. It’s about damn time we get our voice back on the radio. How do you think BUSH won twice? It was because Liberals were silenced EVERYWHERE….on TeeVee AND radio….just ask Phil Donahue.
But, the reason that these “talk show hosts” are on the radio waves is because people are choosing to listen to them, so, they can get sponsors.
It is simply free enterprise.
On the other hand, when you look at the big networks, there news can be clearly agenda driven, though more covertly. This is far more disconcerting. And on the networks, entertainment programs bring in the revenue, so they continue despite ratings.
And then we have NPR, government funded. Again, a bit more liberal take on things, able to exist despite no reliance on the free market.
And, I think we are smart enough to listen to the radio and know when someone is expressing their opinion. These right wing shows are outrageous, sometimes humorous, and clearly presented as opinion programs.
When we watch the MSM, we get the semblence of straight news reporting, but, as we saw in the last election, they pick and choose what is reported and what is not to fit their goals.
So, what to do? Let every one talk! Let my people think! Don’t regulate free speech!!