Comments on: Questioning the constitutionality of the FCC’s “Fairness Doctrine” http://anthologyoi.com/history/american/the-fccs-fairness-doctrine.html?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-fccs-fairness-doctrine Anthology of Ideas is an archive of thoughts and form. Mon, 06 Feb 2012 15:37:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Mike http://anthologyoi.com/history/american/the-fccs-fairness-doctrine.html/comment-page-1#comment-19797 Mike Fri, 14 Mar 2008 16:57:06 +0000 http://localhost/anthologyoi/papers/politics-questioning-the-constitutionality-of-the-fccs-fairness-doctrine.html#comment-19797

This is undeniably a good policy because if there is an issue that affects a certain group of people that donā??t control the radio, their issues deserve to be highlighted as well.

I’m coming in late to this conversation, but the way I see it is that to a point the market should decide what appears on the radio and what doesn’t. While governments should step in to prevent total monopolies, it is up to the people themselves to decide what is and what is not appropriate.

Don’t forget that things like radio and television are businesses, and businesses will always try to make the most money. If they get the most money by gathering donations from wealthy philanthropists with an agenda, than those who disagree need to do something about it.

]]> By: Aaron http://anthologyoi.com/history/american/the-fccs-fairness-doctrine.html/comment-page-1#comment-7794 Aaron Mon, 20 Aug 2007 19:19:24 +0000 http://localhost/anthologyoi/papers/politics-questioning-the-constitutionality-of-the-fccs-fairness-doctrine.html#comment-7794 While I agree with the first tenet of the Fairness Doctrine, I don't believe that the government should be dictating what is or is not balanced. Once they have the power to say that something is too liberal or conservative, it can be manipulated to decided that individuals are too liberal or conservative. If conservatives run 90% of the radio, then you can be sure that 90% of the content on the radio is conservatively biased. It may not be blatant, but it is going to permeate all of the content. I believe fake neutrality is worse than total bias because total bias is easy to spot. While I agree with the first tenet of the Fairness Doctrine, I don’t believe that the government should be dictating what is or is not balanced. Once they have the power to say that something is too liberal or conservative, it can be manipulated to decided that individuals are too liberal or conservative.

If conservatives run 90% of the radio, then you can be sure that 90% of the content on the radio is conservatively biased. It may not be blatant, but it is going to permeate all of the content.

I believe fake neutrality is worse than total bias because total bias is easy to spot.

]]> By: Sean http://anthologyoi.com/history/american/the-fccs-fairness-doctrine.html/comment-page-1#comment-7474 Sean Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:40:07 +0000 http://localhost/anthologyoi/papers/politics-questioning-the-constitutionality-of-the-fccs-fairness-doctrine.html#comment-7474 First of all, the FCC's fairness doctrine had two tenets. The first was that local issues that affected the community had to be brought up. That means that if there was an environmental problem that no one wanted to talk about, if someone brought it to the FCC's attention, it had to be talked about. This is undeniably a good policy because if there is an issue that affects a certain group of people that don't control the radio, their issues deserve to be highlighted as well. The second tenet of the doctrine is what the above article is about. varying viewpoints serve to be heard when the media is being used as the largest supplier of information. Currently conservatives control 90% of radio programming. Should they be heard more just because they can buy the stations out and because they get higher ratings? News needs to be unbiased. On the TV they say, "two inner city children were killed in a shooting today." Not, "Some thugs had a shoot out and two burdens on the state were killed." When talk radio and radio programming are being taken as news, they need to be represent the opposing viewpoints. First of all, the FCC’s fairness doctrine had two tenets. The first was that local issues that affected the community had to be brought up. That means that if there was an environmental problem that no one wanted to talk about, if someone brought it to the FCC’s attention, it had to be talked about. This is undeniably a good policy because if there is an issue that affects a certain group of people that don’t control the radio, their issues deserve to be highlighted as well.
The second tenet of the doctrine is what the above article is about. varying viewpoints serve to be heard when the media is being used as the largest supplier of information. Currently conservatives control 90% of radio programming. Should they be heard more just because they can buy the stations out and because they get higher ratings?
News needs to be unbiased. On the TV they say, “two inner city children were killed in a shooting today.” Not, “Some thugs had a shoot out and two burdens on the state were killed.” When talk radio and radio programming are being taken as news, they need to be represent the opposing viewpoints.

]]>