Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The Right Wing's Fairness Doctrine Fear-Mongering

Posted by Guest Blogger at 5:24 AM on June 22, 2007.


Amanda Terkel: Several right-wing bloggers are now attacking progressives for advocating the reinstitution of the Fairness Doctrine, when they did nothing of the sort.
43
Al

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

This post, written by Amanda Terkel, originally appeared on Think Progress

Yesterday, the Center for American Progress and Free Press released a detailed statistical analysis confirming that talk radio is dominated almost exclusively by conservatives. In addition to the analysis, the report offers remedies for correcting this imbalance.

Several right-wing bloggers are now attacking progressives for advocating the reinstitution of the Fairness Doctrine, which required broadcasters to devote airtime to important and controversial issues and to provide contrasting views on these issues in some form. Michelle Malkin titled her post on our report "Fairness Doctrine Watch" and Sister Toldjah posted information on how fight back "against this attempted resurrection of the Fairness Doctrine." Similarly, the National Review Online's Jonah Goldberg wrote:

Does anyone really believe liberals would even entertain this renewed passion for the fairness doctrine if talk radio were overwhelmingly liberal? It just strikes me as so transparently opportunistic and unprincipled. If a conservative were to argue that the state should get involved in making Hollywood, or the biggest newspapers, or the broadcast news networks, or leading museums, publishing houses, or universities less liberal, liberals would justifiably scream bloody murder about censorship and propaganda.
Actually, the report does not argue that the Fairness Doctrine should be resurrected. It specifically states that the Fairness Doctrine likely would not correct the imbalance in talk radio. Additionally, serious concerns are raised by the FCC explicitly reviewing and regulating radio content or speech. From the report:
[T]he Fairness Doctrine was never, by itself, an effective tool to ensure the fair discussion of important issues. The Fairness Doctrine was most effective as part of a regulatory structure that limited license terms to three years, subjected broadcasters to license challenges through comparative hearings, required notice to the local community that licenses were going to expire, and empowered the local community through a process of interviewing a variety of local leaders. Added to this regulatory structure was the cooperation of the broadcast industry through the National Association of Broadcasters Code of Conduct
Simply reinstating the Fairness Doctrine will do little to address the gap between conservative and progressive talk unless the underlying elements of the public trustee doctrine are enforced, in particular, the requirements of local accountability and the reasonable airing of important matters.

The report argues instead that we should address the more significant problem of concentrated ownership and ineffective regulation in order to push the market structure to better meet local needs. As report co-author John Halpin stated, "If we break up concentrated ownership, and encourage greater local accountability over radio licensing, and still end up with lots of conservative talk, then so be it. We don't think this will happen but at least the playing field would have been made more level."

The CAP/Free Press report argues for more speech, not less. Conservatives should get their facts straight before blindly attacking others.

Digg!

Tagged as: media, radio, conservatives

Amanda Terkel is Associate Editor for The Progress Report and ThinkProgress.org at the Center for American Progress.


House of Representatives Passes Health-Care Reform Bill in Historic Vote
With the vote of a single Republican, Democrats passed the Affordable Health Care Act for America.
Post by Adele Stan. November 7, 2009.
Anti-Woman Amendment to Health Care Passes House
The Stupak amendment -- an anti-choice measure that could virtually eliminate insurance coverage for abortion -- will be attached to the health-care reform bill.
Post by Adele Stan. November 7, 2009.
House Will Take Up-or-Down Vote on Stupak Amendment, Threatening Women's Rights
The House leadership bows to anti-choice congressmen, allowing them a vote on an anti-choice amendment to the health-care bill.
Post by RH Reality Check. November 7, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
LIES...
Posted by: Roverton on Jun 22, 2007 9:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...all look like what they are these days.

Something about not meaning what they say, that's shining through the artifice. There's no way to hide it well. They have to believe in it and they do not.

It's the fatal flaw of all deceivers, everywhere.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Quite frankly, that's a load of of the stuff you spread around the flower bed.
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Jun 22, 2007 9:29 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Refer to pages 3 and 8 for a detailed description of how the authors of the report would achieve a State in which their idea of fairness was what counts. In a nutshell, they'd give an unelected commission expanded powers to regulate expression, and to institute a tax-grab from entities which they deem are "hmm...not so fair" to support "ohhh...that's more fair" pet projects.

The authors are right in two regards. That crusty old quaint myFairness Doctrine is nothing at all like this highly refined socialist proposal, and simply reinstituting myFairness would probably fall far short of achieving the authors' idea of how people should and should not express themselves.

Just because I don't think Rush Limbaugh deserves an audience doesn't mean I want to entertain the idea of living under a government that is willing to use Policing Powers of the State to shut him up. No thanks, I'll take my free expression with the understanding that people get to express turds of ideas, including the Limbaugh's and (at least in this case) the CAP/FP's of the world. Any attempt of the government to regulate expression must be met the utmost of distrustfulness, because it can be used by the government to regulate dissent.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: You're misrepresenting the study Posted by: ABetterFuture
» "The public good" is a moving target. Posted by: ABetterFuture
So would you rather have a business controlled media,
Posted by: Ellie1 on Jun 22, 2007 11:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
under the direction of one or two people who have their platforms because they have money and have used their mega-fortunes to strongly influence election results? That is what we have now, and the Bushit administration gave them the license to do so. The air waves should not belong to anyone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We should eliminate commericialised television and radio stations. The
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Jun 22, 2007 1:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
FCC should stop giving away spectrum and bandwith to commerical entities and all frequencies should be given to public broadcasting stations only. No commerical propaganda, racist brainwashing, and sexist programming. Also no programming that diverts attention from pressing progressive issues. Also, the FCC should ban private telephone carriers and these should be nationalised. Only one mobile phone system run by the government with fees going to maintenence, hightech developement, and to provide cell phones and internet access to the poor and undocumented workers. All programming on tv and radio should serve the public interest in combating elite capitalistic exploiters and programming that does not show public worth (sports, 'entertainment', sexploitation tabloid journalism, right-wing propaganda, etc) should be banned. Only programming showing class consciousness should be shown on the airwaves and prior to being broadcast should be vetted by a panel of government experts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I trust... Posted by: Bbear41
A new approach maybe
Posted by: jmonday on Jun 22, 2007 4:02 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How about an equal amount of band to that owned by corporate interests set aside for public interests, with a locally elected board to decide how each community divvies it up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

FUN-TIME FOR LIARS IS OVER!
Posted by: Roverton on Jun 23, 2007 6:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All those vermin who've turned on their own neighbors and children are in for a little surprise. The rest of us are INFINITELY better human beings and this nation is going to prove it. Despite all the dark planning, good and brave people shine through and do the right thing. We've been told the truth and we listened.

All the attackers of truth, the diffusers of reality and the harvesters of man are about to join the Cirque De Asshole'.

See 'em scramble to appear earnest!

Watch 'em try is vain to sound intelligent!

Marvel at how they betray THEMSELVES now!

Then be witness to em' going away for a long time!!

America actually IS waking up, God bless her!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Goldberg, Ugh
Posted by: lessbread on Jun 25, 2007 9:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It didn't register with me before but...

Jonah Goldberg is quoted saying: "Does anyone really believe liberals would even entertain this renewed passion for the fairness doctrine if talk radio were overwhelmingly liberal?"

If talk radio were overwhelmingly liberal, conservatives would be the ones calling for the reinstatement of the fairness doctrine. They would not likely be pointing to radio monopoly and calling for local control and local accountability. They reserve their calls for accountability and control to the government when the Democrats are in the majority or in the White House.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]