Terrible for fee speech. There's no shortage of outlets for people's opinions. And don't give me bs about the people owning the broadcast spectrum, because the government owns it. And that is not the same thing at all, these days.

fee = free

*shrug* they let sane conservative pundits come on from time to time.

NPR still draws a line between journalism and entertainment, though, and explicitly places themselves on the side of journalism.

Most of your 'conservative' commentators self-identify as entertainers.

I'm no fan of Limbaugh and company, but this obviously is a slap to the face of free speech. I may not like what O'Reilly has to say, but I'll fight for his right to say it.

My knee jerk reaction to this is one of plausible support but my logical reaction is fear of infringement upon Free Speech. It's just a shame that SO many people are eager to encourage these wing nut talk show monsters to make millions spreading fear, hate and misinformation while dividing the country. Legislating against it isn't the answer though.

It's ironic that the type of blithering moron who thinks NPR represents unbalanced, biased journalism is exactly the sort of cretin who actually might benefit from this sort of law.

Which, is, needless to say, still an overwhelmingly bad idea. Well, it's a good idea, in principle, but there would be very little good about its implementation.

The problem here is the restriction against bills of attainder.

I think we'd all be much happier with a raft of legislation that makes it legal to kick whack-job radio hosts in the nuts - no matter what their political leaning is - but in order to be really effective, we'd have to identify them by name.

Like some guy i heard on a colorado AM station last night who was going on about this 'war on christmas' nonsense.

He made no mention of corporate entities preferring to avoid haranguing and threats of lawsuits from people who are JW's or aren't christian and prefer to just say 'holiday'.

Instead, he said it's all about "liberals". And he was taking a poll on whether his listeners thought this was due to:

A: people who hate the first amendment
B: people who always got coal for christmas and hate seeing anyone enjoy it
C: people who are just stupid

My objection to the 'equal time' suggestion is that it would lend this douchebag a shred of legitimacy that he otherwise wouldn't have.

FTFA: By some estimates, conservatives on talk radio dominate liberals by a ratio of 10-to-1

Even in the unlikely event the doctrine was suddenly enforced I'm still fairly sure the 1000-watt KCORN in Bunghole, Nebraska is suddenly going to drop Michael Savage in favor of "'Speak OUT, Sister' -- talk radio's only all-illegal-immigrant-lesbian Esperanto discussion forum"

MacG: Terrible for fee speech.

MacG: fee = free

No, I think you got it right the fist time

There's no need for a Fairness Doctrine. If you don't like what you're hearing on talk radio, turn on TV news.

Well, we'll just see what Rush has to say about this today..:)

How this ends up playing out is that a conservative talk show host will have the one intelligent, well spoken conservative on his show debate some loony, left wing wacko.

Which is basically the Fox News model.

et. viola. "balance"

They came first for the radio stations, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a listener.

/Obligatory

Oh and what implications does this have for Fark?

Are we going to have to give equal "air" time to TGOT, Bevets, and the like?

From TFA
The FCC is considering the matter now, weighing such questions as whether to require stations to create "community advisory boards" made up of "local officials and other community leaders." The boards would tell radio executives whether the content they broadcast is adequately addressing the needs of the community, subject to the board's interpretation.

I really don't like the sound of that.

timmy_the_tooth: How this ends up playing out is that a conservative talk show host will have the one intelligent, well spoken conservative on his show debate some loony, left wing wacko.

Which is basically the Fox News model.

et. viola. "balance"

If you are referring to the former "Hannity & Colmes," I think you got the roles reversed - one intelligent, well-spoken liberal debating a loony, right-wing wacko.

Pocket Ninja: It's ironic that the type of blithering moron who thinks NPR represents unbalanced, biased journalism is exactly the sort of cretin who actually might benefit from this sort of law.

Which, is, needless to say, still an overwhelmingly bad idea. Well, it's a good idea, in principle, but there would be very little good about its implementation.

I came here to post almost exactly that.

GaryPDX: Well, we'll just see what Rush has to say about this today..:)

What kind of "Independent" listens to Rush?

Pocket Ninja: It's ironic that the type of blithering moron who thinks NPR represents unbalanced, biased journalism is exactly the sort of cretin who actually might benefit from this sort of law.

Which, is, needless to say, still an overwhelmingly bad idea. Well, it's a good idea, in principle, but there would be very little good about its implementation.

Exactly. There is no way that this would effect NPR, or any other truly solid news outlet. It would only change AM radio and the like.

BobtheFascist: There's no need for a Fairness Doctrine. If you don't like what you're hearing on talk radio, turn on TV news.

heh. i see what you did there.

Nabb1: timmy_the_tooth: How this ends up playing out is that a conservative talk show host will have the one intelligent, well spoken conservative on his show debate some loony, left wing wacko.

Which is basically the Fox News model.

et. viola. "balance"

If you are referring to the former "Hannity & Colmes," I think you got the roles reversed - one intelligent, well-spoken liberal debating a loony, right-wing wacko.

No I mean their guests.

timmy_the_tooth: No I mean their guests.

Oh, I see. Honestly, I didn't watch the show that much. In fact, I can't really tolerate much on FOXNews.

no.

This is a horrible idea. I can't believe it's being proposed. Oh wait, I can, unfortunately.

Now get them to phase out and free up the AM bands for useful technologies, and we'll talk.

No no no, Obama's going to BAN all right wingers on the radio.
I thought we'd gone over this?

WaltzingMathilda
What kind of "Independent" listens to Rush?

Hell, I know hardcore liberals that listen to Rush. It's funny as hell watching them start to twitch and froth while arguing with a radio.

WaltzingMathilda: What kind of "Independent" listens to Rush?

The rugged individualist kind with loyalties that lie with no major political party.

No Fairness Doctrine. Just rollback the rules that didn't allow one company to own an entire market, and competition will do the rest.

Fairness Doctrine only made sense when technology was limited.

Free speech means exactly that. Terrible idea in any of its forms. I'll give as much money as I can to the ACLU to fight it if gets implemented.

That said, if you listen to talk radio, I think you're a dumb prick who should probably be kicked in the nuts.

/There. Fairness in posting doctrine.

Etchy333: Just rollback the rules that didn't allow one company to own an entire market, and competition will do the rest.



"I would like to call attention to this statement as an example of extreme veractiy and wisdom. Also, allow me to remark OI BASH DER NOGGINZ."

Then are they going to start making Fox News air liberal viewpoints? It's only fair.

Who decides what a "conservative viewpoint" is?

This is not at all like how creationists want equal time for intelligent design to be taught in science classrooms alongside evolution.

Nope, not similar in any way, shape or form whatsoever.

NPR blows...

Whatever. Nothing, and I mean NOTHING, will prevent us mouthy Americans from saying what we want when we want. So what if someone is going to get called on what they say?

Why is everyone so AFRAID of everything?!!?

Going green on "showbiz"? That's hardly fair and balanced.

timmy_the_tooth: Oh and what implications does this have for Fark?

Are we going to have to give equal "air" time to TGOT, Bevets, and the like?

Going to? Fark has gone head over heels to make sure that their opinion is heard.

Holy crap this is retarded. No one wants this. It's not on the agenda. STOP LETTING RUSH LIMBAUGH CONTROL THE NEWS CYCLE.

DamnYankees: Holy crap this is retarded. No one wants this. It's not on the agenda. STOP LETTING RUSH LIMBAUGH CONTROL THE NEWS CYCLE.

THIS

NPR is unbalanced?

they have Click AND Clack!

what more do you people want?

timmy_the_tooth: Oh and what implications does this have for Fark?

Are we going to have to give equal "air" time to TGOT, Bevets, and the like?

BobtheFascist: There's no need for a Fairness Doctrine. If you don't like what you're hearing on talk radio, turn on TV news.

or just read a book

We don't necessarily need the Fairness Doctrine again.

What we need is return of the rules barring media monopolies. The way television, radio, and newspapers have been bought up by megacorps has sanitized our media and watered down presentation of viewpoints. You see what Murdoch wants you to see. Not what 1000 local editors of 1000 independent outlets want you to see.

It's disgusting, un-American, and blatant pandering to corporate interests at the expense of the electorate.

GaryPDX: Well, we'll just see what Rush has to say about this today..:)

he's on Armed forces radio. Air America was denied. He didn't have a problem with that.

The FCC is considering the matter now, weighing such questions as whether to require stations to create "community advisory boards" made up of "local officials and other community leaders." The boards would tell radio executives whether the content they broadcast is adequately addressing the needs of the community, subject to the board's interpretation.

Right here is the sneaky bit. Bringing back the fairness doctrine is the red herring both sides are using to play the "help, help, I'm being repressed" card.

Putting your local political hacks in charge of what viewpoints get aired is no better than a fairness doctrine. Do you want your local James Dobsons and Al Sharptons calling the shots? Okay then.

It's especially unnecessary since all that's really needed for "localism" would be a requirement that X percent of a station's programming be local in origin. Y'know, the bizarre concept where you have an actual living, breathing person in the studio from time to time. So maybe the station can still run Rush and Hannity, but no more of this hooking up to whatever's on the bird 24/7 with the occasional 60-second local news-and-weather break. (And if those hacks want to make their opinions known, they can audition for a show like anybody else. Lord knows they can fill an hour at the county-legislature meeting just fine.)

Thing about that is, right now there are too many radio stations on the air. In exchange for the costs that'll be incurred by hiring more local people, let the owners take the non-performing AM stations dark so as to free up some of the AM dial for other uses.

The article points out that Obama opposes the Fairness Doctrine. It can't get a quote from a single person who does support the Fairness Doctrine. It points out that even the conservative scaremongers on the issue are confident that they no one is going to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine.

And yet it still manages to drum up "OMG the Democrats are going to muzzle Rush!" hysteria.

Sigh.

You have a voice, use it.
House Judiciary Committee
(Democrats) Name District Local # D.C. # ZIP+4
John Conyers Chair / MI-14 (734)675-4084 (202)225-5126 48183-2802
Howard Berman CA-28 (818)994-7200 (202)225-4695 91411-4102
Rick Boucher VA-9 (276)628-1145 (202)225-3861 24210-2839
Jerrold Nadler NY-8 (212)367-7350 (202)225-5635 11224-4561
Robert Scott VA-3 (757)380-1000 (202)225-8351 23607-4333
Melvin Watt NC-12 (704)344-9950 (202)225-1510 28208-5214
Zoe Lofgren CA-16 (408)271-8700 (202)225-3072 95112-5162
Sheila Jackson Lee TX-18 (713)655-0050 (202)225-3816 77002-8028
William Delahunt MA-10 (508)771-0666 (202)225-3111 02601-3128
Robert Wexler FL-19 (561)988-6302 (202)225-3001 33431-6344
Linda Sanchez CA-39 (562)860-5050 (202)225-6676 90703-2694
Steve Cohen TN-9 (901)544-4131 (202)225-3265 38103-1816
Hank Johnson GA-4 (770)987-2291 (202)225-1605 30058-4104
Luis Gutierrez IL-4 (773)384-1655 (202)225-8203 60647-4841
Brad Sherman CA-28 (818)501-9200 (202)225-5911 91403-1791
Anthony Weiner NY-9 (718)520-9001 (202)225-6616 11415-3605
Adam Schiff CA-29 (626)304-2727 (202)225-4176 91103-3966
Artur Davis AL-7 (205)254-1960 (202)225-2665 35203-4014
Debbie Wasserman Schultz FL-20 (954)437-3936 (202)225-7931 33180-2403
Tammy Baldwin WI-2 (608)258-9800 (202)225-2906 53703-5103
Keith Ellison MN-5 (612)522-1212 (202)225-4755 55411-3675
Maxine Waters CA-35 (323)757-8900 (202)225-2201 90003-4597
(Republicans) Name District Local # D.C. # ZIP+4
Lamar S. Smith Ranking / TX-21 (512)306-0439 (202)225-4236 78746-5474
Jim Sensenbrenner WI-5 (262)784-1111 (202)225-5101 53005-6294
Howard Coble NC-6 (336)333-5005 (202)225-3065 27408-5100
Elton Gallegly CA-24 (805)497-2224 (202)225-5811 91361-3018
Bob Goodlatte VA-6 (540)432-2391 (202)225-5431 22802-3707
Steve Chabot OH-1 (513)684-2723 (202)225-2216 45202-2821
Dan Lungren CA-3 (916)859-9906 (202)225-5716 95670-6307
Chris Cannon UT-3 (801)851-2500 (202)225-7751 84601-4424
Ric Keller FL-8 (407)872-1962 (202)225-2176 32801-2046
Darrell Issa CA-49 (760)599-5000 (202)225-3906 92081-7515
Mike Pence IN-6 (765)640-2919 (202)225-3021 46016-1713
Randy Forbes VA-4 (757)382-0080 (202)225-6365 23320-5178
Steve King IA-5 (641)782-2495 (202)225-4426 51503-0817
Tom Feeney FL-24 (407)208-1106 (202)225-2706 32129-4144
Trent Franks AZ-2 (623)776-7911 (202)225-4576 85308-8559
Louie Gohmert TX-1 (903)236-8597 (202)225-3035 75961-4807
Jim Jordan OH-4 (419)522-5757 (202)225-2676 44902-1243

I just think it's funny that neocons are still getting their "news" from the radio.

/welcome to the 19th century
//we have the Internets now, don't cha know!

Mr. Coffee Nerves: "'Speak OUT, Sister' -- talk radio's only all-illegal-immigrant-lesbian Esperanto discussion forum"

Hell, I'd listen to that instead of Michael Savage.

sigdiamond2000: The rugged individualist kind with loyalties that lie with no major political party.

Homos?