The fairness doctrine would bring anything but fairness to the airwaves. The original intent of the regulation was to give conflicting points of views equal air time. It was done away with, thanks to President Reagan and the FCC in 1987. The FCC realized that it failed to encourage discussions of issues of importance. I am sure there must have been some 1st Amendment issues too.
Supporters of the doctrine say that the vast majority of talk radio shows only provide one side of most issues and thus the need for federal regulation. Wrong, while it is true that conservative talk radio dominates the airwaves, there is nothing stopping liberal talk shows from being aired, other than the fact there is not a market for them because of the lack of an intelligent message and quality host. There are also many other choices now available to the liberal ears and eyes: The Internet, newspapers, magazines and t.v. There are many more sources now than ever before.
The doctrine puts a ton of power into the FCC's hands. Who will determine what is "Fair"? How will "Fair" be defined? It would give a president or a politician the ability to influence what is being said about them and their job performance. And there is no guarantee that more programs will be broadcast. Most station owners will be in fear of violating the doctrine thus receiving fines that could drive them out of business. So sounds like more cheesy 70's music and Paul Harvey. And Christian radio will become extinct. How is that fair?
The fairness doctrine will bring on government run radio. It, in my opinion, will lead to air wave, print and Internet fairness doctrines. The only views will be that of "The Man" and the end result will be The Belief Doctrine; punishable by incarceration in a thought reprogramming detention center.
No comments:
Post a Comment