How Fair Is It?

Users who are viewing this thread

  • 61
    Replies
  • 1K
    Views
  • 0
    Participant count
    Participants list

BadBoy@TheWheel

DT3's Twinkie
Messages
20,999
Reaction score
2
Tokenz
0.06z
On the plus side, it would give me an Evan a shot at getting a show on NPR :D


We'll hire Tim as the program director, if anyone calls that we don't like, Tim can find out where they live and we can take road trips and whip peoples asses:D

I call it the "Protection From Idiocy Doctrine"
 

dt3

Back By Unpopular Demand
Messages
24,161
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.21z
We'll hire Tim as the program director, if anyone calls that we don't like, Tim can find out where they live and we can take road trips and whip peoples asses:D

I call it the "Protection From Idiocy Doctrine"
Radio I Gotta Hear Today

:ninja
 

Tim

Having way too much fun
Valued Contributor
Messages
13,518
Reaction score
43
Tokenz
111.11z
Ok, so far there have been 37 posts in this thread and still no one has got it right....

Let your liberal friend help you out.

The possibility of bringing back the fairness doctrine has nothing to do with censorship. It has everything to do with giving the public a choice of views to listen to. Let me explain. First of all this would ONLY effect radio stations (AM & FM) because these airways belong to the PEOPLE and the radio stations are granted FREE licenses to broadcast on them. So in return, they are supposed to serve the public.
Here's the problem. Over the last 20 years or so we have gone from tens of thousands of radio station owners to about 4. They have been bought up by the major media outlets who also own the papers and TV stations. This can lead to market control like we have here in Philadelphia. Now Philadelphia is about as liberal as it gets, I think they ran out the last conservative family in the last election, yet there are ZERO liberal talk radio stations on the air. I can tune into Rush on 5 different AM stations every day. It's the same thing in Washington, Seattle and several other liberal cities. And the argument of progressive radio stations not being able to make money, well that has been debunked years ago and now it's just a talking point.

So to sum it up. The radio waves belong to the people, the radio stations are able to broadcast for free on these public airwaves in return for serving the public. But it doesn't serve the public if you own all the stations in a given market and only broadcast your side not allowing opposing views.
 

Tim

Having way too much fun
Valued Contributor
Messages
13,518
Reaction score
43
Tokenz
111.11z
In fact, the only reason there's not more competition on American airwaves is that the handful of companies that own most radio stations do everything they can to block it. In many markets – witness Philadelphia, Boston, Providence, Atlanta, Houston – they collaborate in providing not one outlet for progressive talk. Now the blackout extends even to Washington, D.C., where Democrats outnumber Republicans 10 to one.
And that must change. Not necessarily by bringing back the Fairness Doctrine, but by requiring owners of broadcast licenses to serve the general public. We need government oversight by the FCC of radio station owners, just like we needed government oversight by the SEC over Wall Street banks. Today, we have neither.
Forget all the right-wing hysteria about liberals trying to "hush Rush." What the whole flap over the Fairness Doctrine boils down to is this: Companies are given a license to operate public airwaves – free! – in order to make a profit, yes, but also, according to the terms of their FCC license, "to operate in the public interest and to afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views of issues of public importance." Stations are not operating in the public interest when they offer only conservative talk.

Making talk radio 'fair and balanced'
 
78,878Threads
2,185,399Messages
4,961Members
Back
Top