Seriously, this helps how??

[VT-Chicklit]

There is no fairness in the Fairness Doctrine. Its purpose is to silence disent.

 

[Big Daddy]

Actually it's just a method of allowing a rebuttal to what is said on talk shows. 98% of the radio talk shows are conservative based. Obama has stated that he didn't want it. Congress has passed a law stating it wont be re-enacted. It is really nothing but a right wing propaganda talking point which is now a dead issue. Nothing to talk about. I never saw the purpose of it. the people that listen to Rush don't want to hear the other side and the other side doesn't want to listen to people like Rush. Just more scare tactics.

 

[VT-Chicklit]

The Markets need to dictate what is on the Air Waves and on the Net. The cost of putting on programs and issues/ideas that the majorty of the consumers do not want to hear, should not be the responsibility of the businesses that provide programing for these media. These popular programs, like Rush and Glen Beck are on the airwaves because they are paid for by adds that target their listeners. The reason shows stay on the air is because they have large listener bases which generate revnue for those who advertise on these shows. We pay, through our taxes, for stations such as NPR and Public TV to be subsidised so that those programs and views which have a less "commercial" base will be heard. There is no need to hijack the public airwaves with the "Fairness Doctrine".

I know that Obama and the Congress said that they would not reinstitute it, but they have ways to make it more and more difficult for those voices to express dissent. They may not call it the Fairness Doctrine but it will acomplish the same thing, if we let them. All they have to do is require more programming that has a "local" slant. There are only so many broadcasting hours in a day and someone will have to go.

 

[Homesteadmom]

He also said there would be no lobbyists in his administration & he wold not allow earmarks to go thru on bills. Hhhmmmm, how many loobyists are on his staff? How many earmarks are there in these 2 bills alone? Don't trust a thing that comes out of his mouth. Real professional telling Rush to shut up.

 

[Woodland Woman]

When I live at home I have access to whatever media I desire. When I am in my travel trailer I only have access to a few tv stations through antenna. Usually way out in the boonies. It still shocks me to see the political bias on the major network stations and I wonder why people don't complain. Then I realize either this is all people hear and they don't know any better because they don't see anything different. I wonder how the "fairness doctrine" would handle tv bias. The only network I truly see give opposing view points is Fox.

 

[Big Daddy]

When I live at home I have access to whatever media I desire. When I am in my travel trailer I only have access to a few tv stations through antenna. Usually way out in the boonies. It still shocks me to see the political bias on the major network stations and I wonder why people don't complain. Then I realize either this is all people hear and they don't know any better because they don't see anything different. I wonder how the "fairness doctrine" would handle tv bias. The only network I truly see give opposing view points is Fox.

I've never really seen opposing viewpoints on Fox. What I have seen is a guest from the other side who is ganged upon and not allowed to speak. People will believe what they want to believe. People like to hear what they want to hear. If they aren't hearing it than that station is one sided. That is only natural. The stations are owned by people and they will show the programming they want to show. Right now the majority of the country is leaning left of center so I would expect to see that to appeal to the masses.

 

[FarmerDenise]

I get so sick and tired of the talk shows discussing all the political "stuff". It is just one person's opinion and I can't believe that it is put on the air waves and that people actually pay any attention to it! Just turn it off.

 

[On Our own]

Try reading the book NO TIME TO THINK


It documents the change since the advent of 24 hour coverage to specialty stations like CNN. In order to fill air space they had to go to "commentators" who were encouraged to fill air time with opinions.

And the stations ended up airing stuff that was not confirmed and was speculative in order to be "on top of the story".

While MSM sometimes serves as gatekeepers who will censor what is covered, it has also served as gatekeepers who at least tried to maintain some sense of fact checking. It was after the advent of the 24 hour stations that even the big boys like Rather fell into the get it on the air now trap and met their end...

It is good to be able to know what is going on - I am a news junkie myself - but do we really need to know it "now" in the face of the loss of accuracy?

 

[Big Daddy]

It would be neat to have shows like those 2 movie critics used to have. Just 2 guys giving opposing viewpoints uninterrupted on specific issues. They would only be allowed to use facts not lies. That would be interesting. Does any body know any shows like that? I'm not talking debate where they bring on a guest and have a back and forth. That's always slanted in the hosts favor.

 

[CJHames]

I don't think he'll need to do much. Pelosi & company are doing all the work for him.