The American Spectator had an article yesterday regarding Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer’s attempt to bring back the Fairness Doctrine. The Fairness Doctrine had been in place from 1949 until 1987 when it was discontinued by the FCC. In its statement in 1987 upon discontinuing the doctrine the FCC said “Furthermore, we find that the Fairness Doctrine, in operation actually inhibits the presentation of controversial issues of public importance to the detriment of the public and in degradation of the editorial prerogative of broadcast journalists.”

How does it prohibit the presentation of controversial issues you ask? By mandating that on all controversial subjects, such as abortion or same sex marriage, if a radio station were to broadcast an opinion from one side of the debate, the “fairness” doctrine dictates they must also offer the opposing side equal airtime. This means for every Rush Limbaugh there has to be an Al Franken, for every Sean Hannity there has to be a Wendy Wilde.

Sound fair to you? Of course it does… on the surface at least. The idea that both sides to every argument should be aired in order to allow the public to form their own opinion does make sense, unless you examine the logic behind Congressional Legislation mandating it.

The decision to press for re-establishment of the Fairness Doctrine now seems to have developed for two reasons. “First, [Democrats] failed on the radio airwaves with Air America, no one wanted to listen,” says a senior adviser to Pelosi. “Conservative radio is a huge threat and political advantage for Republicans and we have had to find a way to limit it. Second, it looks like the Republicans are going to have someone in the presidential race who has access to media in ways our folks don’t want, so we want to make sure the GOP has no advantages going into 2008.”

That last comment appeared to be a veiled reference to former Sen. Fred Thompson, who appears to be gearing up for a presidential run. Over the past year, he has built a following both over the AM airwaves through the ABC Radio network, as well as through almost daily appearances across cable TV on the TV show Law & Order, where he plays a tough-talking district attorney. (emphasis mine)

Obviously the idea of bringing back the Fairness Doctrine has less to do with educating the public, as it has to do with forcing the American people to listen to liberal rantings. The failure of Air America, and the continuing success of Conservative talk radio is proof the American people, if given a choice, will choose conservative talk radio over liberal talk radio.

This does not bode well for the Democratic Party, so what is their response? Take the choice away! This will leave radio stations with two choices:

1. Use airtime to express opposing opinions to those of their conservative talk radio hosts, thereby running the risk of their listeners changing the station.
2. Avoid broadcasting controversial subjects altogether.

Obviously neither of these options are acceptable.

Sphere: Related Content

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Congress, First Amendment, Politics