...The Fairness Doctrine went into effect in 1949 as a regulation of the Federal Communications Commission. It essentially said that stations had to provide opportunities for other sides to be heard if someone said something politically controversial on air. The consequence was a quietude strikingly at variance with this democracy of ours...Note that Randi Rhodes and others promoted the scheme at the 2005 congressional media bias panel
...Democratic members of the House have already introduced legislation that would restore the Fairness Doctrine in such a way that radio stations carrying Limbaugh at great financial advantage would have to carry someone like Franken for an equal length of time at what would almost certainly be a great financial disadvantage. Hey, the stations might decide, let’s go with rock music - or whatever - because it’s easier and more profitable. If Democrats take back Congress, this anti-speech legislation could have a good chance of enactment, something to keep in mind when you enter a voting booth.
Posted in Meta at September 18, 2006 08:49 PM
Just curious... What would be so bad about radio stations being required to run shows with opposing viewpoints? As it stands now, we have Limbaugh and the Cons on one side of the dial, and Franken and the Libs on the other. We're getting nowhere fast. If America is supposed to be a "marketplace of ideas," then what's the harm? Personally, I'd like to hear both sides of the issues.
Posted by: just asking at September 23, 2006 12:13 AM
Monitoring Air America Radio [TM] so you don't have to.