SavageStupidity.com - Fairness Doctrine
I read this and thought that there are some good points. One question that I do have is, "Why do the left winged talk shows not make it? Why do the left fear current broadcast shows?"
I think the issue is ownership. Since many broadcast companies are owned by the "public" through common stock that these companies will only air shows that make money. We are a capitalistic society. Why do these stations make money on these shows? People listen to them. The ratings for a liberal talk show host seem to always trail a conservative talk show host. Why is that? People do not want to listen to these people. Don't ask me why they don't, just accept that they don't.
Now there is a push to reel in broadcasters and have more government regulation, a theme that liberals are quite familiar with. If people will not conform to our wishes, then we will make laws and make the government force people to our will. Sounds like socialism and fascism to me. I found this article talking about the new push to revive "fairness": Fairness Doctrine Revisited.
So do you think this is a good thing or a bad thing? I'm curious. My feelings are if you do not like what is on the air, turn it off or change the channel. That is called freedom of choice.
Cheers!
Thursday, May 03, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
amen brother preach it.... but we have been trained that we are too stupid to take care of ourselves. Thanks big brother for looking out for us!
I love you stuff. you are invited to blog at www.whocares2008.com anytime you like.
Questions for the Idiot Webmaster:
Question 1: Who owns the airwaves?
Question 2: Does the public benefit from a diversity of opinions?
Question 3: Would the fairness doctrine encourage diversity of opinion?
After reading about the Fairness Doctrine and the demise of it, I began to wonder about some of my concerns and frustrations with the news industry today. What I find in the news and especially the news found on television is an inability to report all the facts in a news story or to complete the news story with the facts that occur later the next day. We hear or see a lot of sensationalized and emotionalized reporting to get the first story, but these stories tend to get buried later if the facts don't pan out in a way that captivates the public's attention or draws good ratings.
I am concerned about news and a country that jumps to conclusions based upon weak evidence. This happens too frequently in our society, and this lack of patience for the facts is causing problems in every day society as well as larger global issues. I hate when the news acts in the same manner for ratings. Therefore, I would like to see a reinstallation or an amending of a regulation like the Fairness Act so that we are less quick to judge poorly and that we teach to our citizens the importance of reaching a good conclusion. Thanks for pointing out this bit of history. I need to review it more, but it does seem to explain why the news today is not as informative as it was when I was a child.
Let's answer the questions:
1. The public (supposedly) own the airwaves; thus, there are government regulations. See the FCC rules and regulations. www.fcc.gov.
2. Yes it does.
3. No. If you read the history of it, and I need to look it up, owners of radio stations began to pull any programming that would require a rebuttal. (spelling is off today!) In a "free" world or "free" speech you would expect that a competing radio station with an alternative opinion should work. Notice that Air America did not work. Note also that some will PAY for satellite service. For some reason people do NOT listen or want to listen to "the other side". Is this because they are too confident or too vain? I do not know the answer.
Mark: THanks for the nice post. I'm glad that my post inspired some thought. I, too, have noticed the demise of good news reporting. Note that if you watch another news show from other countries that they are a little "dry" compared to ours here in the States. If you have cable watch CCTV news. This is from China and is government run. Note that it is dry, seemingly factual, and yet you know there is some background government influence. "just the facts" seems to be lacking in our society.
Always looking for more opinions!
Bill
I agree. Fairness = facism when it comes to regulating "balance" on the air waves. Why is it that some liberals claim to revere tolerance and diversity except when it comes to the first amendment? Think critically people.
Post a Comment