For years conservatives have been warning against the return of the Fairness Doctrine and for years those same conservatives have been called paranoid. Now, the liberals make no pretense of hiding their true intent to bring back the Fairness Doctrine cleverly disguised as something less "hot-button"ish, no doubt.
This time they want to include the internet. That means bloggers. So, whenever I post a story, I will have to give equal coverage of the opposing side. Forget about expecting the readers to do their own research, let us just spoon feed them so they don't have to do anything, except sit there. That sounds alot like the current administrations policies on just about everything else, doesn't it?
"Commissioner Michael Copps held meetings last week with policy and legislative advisers to House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman to discuss ways the committee can create openings for the FCC to put in place a form of the "Fairness Doctrine" without actually calling it such.
Waxman is also interested, say sources, in looking at how the Internet is being used for content and free speech purposes. "It's all about diversity in media," says a House Energy staffer, familiar with the meetings. "Does one radio station or one station group control four of the five most powerful outlets in one community? Do four stations in one region carry Rush Limbaugh, and nothing else during the same time slot? Does one heavily trafficked Internet site present one side of an issue and not link to sites that present alternative views? These are some of the questions the chairman is thinking about right now, and we are going to have an FCC that will finally have the people in place to answer them."
The last time I checked, radio stations are not publicly owned. Don't private owners still have a right to broadcast anything they think will make money? The abject failure of liberal talk radio is a perfect example of why we do not need any doctrine mandating "fairness" That is the beauty of a free market system. People will listen to what they want to hear and quickly reject that which they do not wish to hear.
I don't listen to liberal talk radio because I do not like liberal talk radio. I think the question for Waxman needs to be "fair for who"? Is it "fair" to handcuff sucessful radio formats with a proven recipe for failure i.e. liberal talking points? Is it "fair" to force millions of private citizens to present both sides of an issue, when for every conservative blogger there is a liberal blogger.
Trust me, it isn't hard to find liberal talking points, just pick up almost any newspaper and see for yourself.
"But Copps has been a supporter of putting in place policies that would allow the federal government to have greater oversight over the content that TV and radio stations broadcast to the public, and both the FCC and Waxman are looking to licensing and renewal of licensing as a means of enforcing "Fairness Doctrine" type policies without actually using the hot-button term "Fairness Doctrine."
Right, the Fairness Doctrine isn't a fairness doctrine and the stimulus bill isn't a trojan horse for socialism either, right Senator Waxman?