Some government policies should stay dead


Aspiring Presidential candidate tries to score cheap points by threatening broadcasters with a resurrected Fairness Doctrine
I'm a couple of days behind, so let's get right to this.

All you really need to know about this story is in the first line of the second paragraph, but the third paragraph is the one that threatens freedom. Emphasis in original.

Over the weekend, the National Conference for Media Reform was held in Memphis, TN, with a number of notable speakers on hand for the event. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) made an surprise appearance at the convention to announce that he would be heading up a new House subcommittee which will focus on issues surrounding the Federal Communications Commission.

The Presidential candidate said that the committee would be holding "hearings to push media reform right at the center of Washington.” The Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the House Government Reform Committee was to be officially announced this week in Washington, D.C., but Kucinich opted to make the news public early.

In addition to media ownership, the committee is expected to focus its attention on issues such as net neutrality and major telecommunications mergers. Also in consideration is the "Fairness Doctrine," which required broadcasters to present controversial topics in a fair and honest manner. It was enforced until it was eliminated in 1987.

The Fairness Doctrine meant that if a broadcaster gave time to one side of a debate, they were required to offer the same amount of time to other sides. While it sounds like a great idea, in reality it meant that radio stations and television stations avoided political discussion like the plague.

It was only after the Fairness Doctrine was revoked that talk radio began it's rise in popularity. Whether you agree with the views on talk radio or not (and I usually don't, I have SERIOUS problems with Michael Savage to use just one example), there is no doubt that talk radio has helped spark more political discourse and not less.

But please, don't take my word for it. Let's apply the handy dandy parity test. Imagine for the moment if the New York Times were required to turn over part of it's editorial page to Michelle Malkin or Hugh Hewitt every time that a "liberal" editorial was published. Imagine if Air America was required to carry The Rush Limbaugh Show. Imagine if the Advocate was required to share it's website and magazine with Fred Phelps.

Do you think for a moment that modern American liberals would stand for that?

The only solution is to have NO government imposed solution and let people make their own choices.

— NeoWayland

Posted: Tue - January 16, 2007 at 02:40 PM  Tag


 ◊  ◊   ◊  ◊ 

Random selections from NeoWayland's library


Pagan Vigil "Because LIBERTY demands more than just black or white"
© 2005 - 2009 All Rights Reserved