Forgot your password?
Type your email address below and click the sign up button to create an account.
That's all great! BUT THE PEOPLE own the airwaves. Plain and simple. Individuals have a right to hear opposing views and not be spoon fed hate and lies. NO MATTER WHO IS TELLING THEM.Satellite and cable or a different matter all together. Many here are confusing the two.
The Fairness Doctrine was a crock of crap. Just as the posts of a poster or two in this blog. TURN IT OFF! CHANGE THE CHANNEL! Economic survival mandates that anything that genrates revenue in excess of expense is a worthy enterprise. Just because your point of view doesn't pay it's way., does not mean that you entittled to equal PAID airtime. I've tried to listen to YOUR talk show folks via Sirius. No wonder you are a failure on the airwaves. Ban NPR funding. Public funding of one point of view should be illegal!
The airwaves do belong to the people. Why do you think they have to have a license. It isn't anything political, it is just a fact. The airwaves belong to the people. Always has. In 1927, the Radio Act (47 U.S.C.A § 81 et seq.) became law and the Federal Radio Commission (FRC) was created to police the broadcasting industry. Two important tenets of broadcasting were introduced by the law. The first was that stations must broadcast "in the public interest, convenience, or necessity." The second was that the people, not the radio stations, owned the airwaves. In its efforts to see that the airwaves were used in the appropriate manner, government regulation faced obstacles as it attempted to ensure suitable government-funded programming, appropriate programming for children, and equal access to broadcasting for minorities. Additional challenges were created by changing technology as cable television went underground and satellite television took to outer space.Law Encyclopedia: Broadcasting It's tough to argue with folks that read and write.
BigJ..."What about those Southern Consevative talk show host bashing MLK 24/7 during the 1960's?"Okay, I'll bite. What about them???? In the first place, that was 40 years ago. In the second place, no fairness doctrine was needed then or now. If anyone wanted to start up a radio show that praised MLK, he could have. Now, whether it would have attracted enough sponsors to stay on the air is another question entirely, but it has nothing to do with the GOVERNMENT. It has everything to do with people voting with their dollars. If you want to start up a talk show praising Barack Hussein Obama this afternoon, you can. You can try to sell time on it to make money. Good luck!!! It's called capitalism and it works everytime it's tried. Getting rich isn't a sure thing, but if you have the courage to try, go for it. Then, if you're such a fan of Barack Hussein Obama, I guess you'd want a guarantee of success. Be careful, though. If you get rich running a radio program, your president will tax the hell out of you and maybe give some of your money to ME. Wouldn't THAT be a hoot.
The fairness doctrine has everything to do with campaigns. If you have a Democrat ad then you would have to have a Republican ad, one for one. Doesn't make any difference how much money you had or you could run any show you want.Campaigns are not businesses where one business who has a lot of money they can run more ads. It would definitely have a rule for one to one campaign ads.
My hair stands on end, when I hear someone state something is for or against the people. "The Airways belong to THE PEOPLE. " Sounds like someone that believes in government control of the airways. So what I am hearing is that corporations are fools for investing the resources to put on programs for profits, because they do not own the resources they invest, therefore they do not own the right to profits. Then your statement that "these people" lie on their broadcast, yet you do not support who these people are. True the Fairness Doctrine presently has nothing to do with campaign financing, and true in the past that the Republican Party has outspent the Democrat Party. So it sounds like ragman supports unlimited campaign fund raising and spending, which means the candidate with the most money will win. Or, in a more simple statement, the election is bought and paid for.
The Airwaves belong to THE PEOPLE. It is that simple. The airwaves don't belong to any one corporation. They never have. When these people lie in their broadcast, (it crosses all political ilks) they would be held accountable. The fairness doctrine was in force for years, and there was a reason. It worked. It has nothing to do with the First Amendment. That's pretty plain and simple as well. Say what you want on air, but be ready to have an opposing view. Years ago CBS put on a documentary about hunting that was rather biased against hunters. "The Guns of Autumn" or something like that. CBS then had to let a pro hunting group put on a documentary about hunting from their perspective. What is wrong with that?Financing of elections has nothing to do with the fairness doctrine. For many years the Right out spent and received more donations than the Dems, now the right is whining; what's wrong with this picture.
As an unabashed liberal, I have to come here to say I hope the Fairness Doctrine never comes back. I just don't understand how it isn't a straight up violation of the First Amendment.
One can only hope that if it were revived, the conservatives on the Supreme Court could have the final say and strike it down once and for all.
No this should not come about. If you have a conservative you must have a liberal? No, the radio is free market. If the consumer wants it then there ya go. If they don't then it doesn't make it on the airways long. Unless you are Air America. You know it won't apply to MSNationaBarackChannel. They have Mica the Dem, Matthews the solid Dem or liberal worked for Tip and Jimmy. You have the Air America hand me down and then bathtub boy Olbermann. Never a more hate filled person ever on the air and works blogging on the most hate filled blog DailyKos. The channel would have to fire most of the people. Fox News lets all come on and speak unlike MSNBC.
I agree that it should. Of course the Dems are going to say we should have already passed some Campaign Finance Reform. Too bad soo sad. You would think with the economy being in the crapper more people would be hollering about a millionair such as Obama begging for a few bucks from the poor huddled masses. I thought only Republicans were rich?