Fairness Doctrine

1. 60

   BillyDRitchieposted 12 years ago

   Okay, we used to have it, now we don't.  It is no surprise that with the repealing of the FD came the rise of talk radio.  Now we have certain groups clamoring for its return.
   
   Do we let the free market determine what gets on the air?
   
   Do we let government dictate what gets on the air?
   
   I'm of the opinion that we allow the free market to determine the success or failure of a given talk show host.  Stations put on shows that garner ratings, and thus revenue.  Why should they be forced to give air time to hosts or shows that nobody listens to, nobody wants to advertise on, all in the name of "fairness"?
   
   Remind me again why government should have a say in the operations of radio or television stations?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Last time I checked, if I didn't like something, i could just TURN OFF THE DAMNED RADIO!!!
      
      Are people really so stupid that they can't figure out to just turn TVs or Media off? Really?

      replyreport
      1. 76

         lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         If you were a talk-radio fan Evan, what they did to it is tragic.
         People like me, who were home during the day, and didn't like soap-opera's...the music channels here suck...it was a nice thought-provoking way to get your work done.
         
         They have dumbed down America with their narrow minds.
         And it hurts cause we used to be such open-hearted people.
         Now we are narrow and pursed-lipped.

         replyreport
2. 60

   knolyourselfposted 12 years ago

   "Remind me again why government should have a say in the operations of radio or television stations?"
   How many environmentalists are allowed on the national media? I'd say about none. Ever hear of 'mountain-top removal'? Would doubt that too. Corporate profits protect corporate profits otherwise known as propaganda.

   replyreport
   1. 76

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Very true. And I don't believe this meme that "talk-radio is all right-wing because that's what people want"..
      I live in a Liberal state,and  you are telling me that people want only right-wing radio?
      I don't buy it...there is something else going on.
      Granted, I live in a backwater (Cape Cod),--no offense P-Town!!) but we never had Air-America here.
      
      And, in fact, you can call me crazy, but right wing take over started happening with the election of GHW Bush, and his announcement on sept.11, 1991, of a New World Order.
      That's when Russssshhhhhhh came on here at 12:00 noon, on every station available! Then the other points of view were phased out, and voila...it's rabid righty-talk 20 hrs a day. Has remained so ever since....until last year. We got Revolution Radio. Even though it's a real poor signal, at least when the weather is good, you can hear other human beings beside the one-sided monotone of "Liberals are bad", "Obama is the Devil" and "We own America".
      
      And, like my hero Neil Young told us, it's a thousand points of Light on a homeless man: That's the NWO.

      replyreport
3. 67

   Flightkeeperposted 12 years ago

   Of course the libtards are clamoring for its return, they are unable to silence their opposition and they do the fascistic thing by trying to get government to do their dirty deed.

   replyreport
   1. 76

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Good example of righty hate-talk radio!!!

      replyreport
4. 60

   knolyourselfposted 12 years ago

   "And, in fact, you can call me crazy, but right wing take over started happening with the election of GHW Bush,". I believe it was Bill Clinton signing the
   "Telecommunications Act of 1996" which allowed the total concentration of media now controlled by pretty much six corporations. Think millionaire media owners are going to support socialism. That is a rhetorical question.

   replyreport
   1. 76

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, a furtherance of the Order....
      Clinton also had NAFTA, Welfare "Reform", and he signed the Graham, Bailey, Leach Act.
      And, it was then that the crack/cocaine disparity in sentencing started....asked for by the Congressional Black Caucus, who were looking for a way to end the destruction crack caused in their communities....
      Brought on by Ollie North and the CIA, who put the crack and guns in ghettos, to fund their Contra war!
      
      God, what a smarmy gloppity goop of swamp-water!!!

      replyreport
5. 76

   lovemychrisposted 12 years ago

   And Bush did something in 2000, having to do with band-width, or something, which further gave the consolidations more control of the media.
   Pelosi and the Dems in Congress reversed it in 06 or 7 when they took control of Congress....it is in the archives of Democracy Now, but I don't know how to search for it!
   They talked about it on a show, and that is WHY we now have Revolution radio....

   replyreport
6. 60

   knolyourselfposted 12 years ago

   You mean this:
   http://gigaom.com/2007/03/14/700mhz-explained/

   replyreport
   1. 76

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      That sounds like it....the 2006 part, and it does make sense, since this new station didn't start til last year....
      But I could not make sense of that!

      replyreport
7. 61

   lady_love158posted 12 years ago

   The left is doing everything it can to control free speech. That's what net neutrality us all about and of course the fairness doctrine is another piece of the puzzle. The left wants to control energy speech healthcare guns and banking because that way they can control the people... its all spelled out in my OP on liberal ideology and its EVIL!

   replyreport
   1. 67

      Flightkeeperposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I don't think it's evil.  Liberal idiology taken to extremes is just plain stupid.  But the followers of extreme liberal ideology don't have the means to fund their stupidity so they get other people to do so.  Nine times out of ten they're pretty successful because at the core of liberal ideology is charity, but they twist it to such an extent to gain power and it ends up enabling unhealthy habits. It's time to recognize it and put those guys out to pasture where they won't do any damage and recognize them for the freaks that they are.

      replyreport
   2. 76

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Oh give me a break! I remember when talk radio was fair and balanced...for REAL, not just shucking and jiving like Fixed.
      Not only did the right..the Moral Majority to be exact, ruin talk radio,they also started the train of capitilizing public tv and radio---which are supposed to be a public service,NOT commercialized! I don't know what they're so afraid of. Or else it's just prudeness--forced on everybody!

      replyreport
8. 60

   knolyourselfposted 12 years ago

   "The left is doing everything it can to control free speech. That's what net neutrality us all about..."
   Did you mean net neutrality is about free speech? The capitalists are the one's trying to destroy net neutrality.

   replyreport
9. 60

   BillyDRitchieposted 12 years ago

   LMC's blatherings notwithstanding, the fact is that radio stations air programming that gets ratings, and in the world of talk radio, for whatever reason, that tends to be conservative talk.  There are the occasional liberal hosts who succeed, namely those who manage to be actually entertaining, but for the most part, it is a conservative world.
   
   If liberal shows drew the same ratings, you can bet the stations or networks would add them as well.
   
   So remind me again why government should be n the position of telling radio station what they must air and for how long?

   replyreport
   1. 88

      gracenotesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I would agree -- because of the fragile state of our U.S. economy, "talk" radio stations are in trouble and must do what they can to survive.  They've got to attract nationally syndicated shows that will draw big ratings, or die.
      
      The management of said radio stations will not give local radio personalities a lot of time to build an audience.  The talk show hosts either produce, or they are out of there in a couple of years.
      
      I've listened to talk radio for many, many years -- probably before most of you were born.
      
      I remember the pre-fairness doctrine radio stations, at least in my state.  For most of the 1970's (except the last part), economic conditions were good, so stations could afford to be patient about their market share.
      
      From the 70's, early 80's, I remember a lot of what I call "frivolous" and occasionally entertaining radio programs that didn't go into any depth on issues.
      
      One of them was a local radio host in Houston who I used to listen to all of the time, even though I detected a liberal bias in his comments.  I listened to him because he was a rather appealing fellow, at least to my teenaged ears.  But one of his favorite replies was "I'm not here to give opinions; I'm here to listen to them!"
      
      Actually, during that particular era, I don't remember even one radio host who had a noticeable conservative outlook.  Still, I was an avid listener of all kinds of programs.
      
      I would listen to any host that I found entertaining, and I must say that there are some outstanding "talkers" on a national level who draw an audience from among those who disagree with them, for that very reason.

      replyreport
      1. 76

         lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I've listened since 85, and I remember exactly when things began to change.
         Now, I can't stomache it. And it's a shame, because there is no longer a debate.
         It's a one-sided poltical and religious ideology smear-fest.IMO

         replyreport
   2. 76

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      They are not!
      Money is buying the PUBLIC airwaves, and putting people on who support their politics.

      replyreport
10. 85

    Stacie Lposted 12 years ago

    when Donald Regan told Ronald Reagan to speed it up .was a turning point in American politics, economy and the middle class
    
    I couldn't beleive that the champion of the middle class, Bill Clinton, signed such an agreement...are all politicians on the take?
    it doesn't matter what "party" you belong to,the old ideologies are no more....they would have us voters fighting  amongst ourselves to keep the focus off them..
    
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTcL6Xc_eMM

    replyreport