Conservatives Getting All Worked Up Over Fairness-Doctrine Nothing
Well, we've known for awhile that the wingnuts are getting themselves all worked up into a nice paranoid tizzy over the nonexistent evil liberal plan to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine.
Still there was Fox News' Casey Stegall hot on the case today from LA. But notice something missing from the report? That's right -- any actual liberals who are advocating such a thing. So Stegall gives this lame excuse:
But not a single lawmaker who has called for a return of the Fairness Doctrine rules, when offered this national platform, would go on camera to talk about it.
That's right, those evil liberals are so sneaky they're planning this but not talking about it. Though you'd think he'd at least be able to name one of those "single lawmakers."
I'm sure the logical reality -- that in fact there are no liberals who are proposing such a thing anywhere either in Congress or at the FCC -- didn't cross Stegall's mind.
Or at least, they didn't let it ruin an otherwise perfectly good storyline.
Fox News, Fake News. What's the diff?
The liberals were all out giving each other terrorist fist bumps.
hey maybe if they get upset about something that is nonexistent, they'll have less time to cry over things that actually matter and let us move on with our country.
their fears are laughable, but I can understand why they are afraid. Look at what they did for the last 8 years, look how they acted. The bully is finally vulnerable, so now they play the victim.
Goodnight, Frau Blücher
why has'nt that pile o'shit choked on his own ego yet.
is rush the front runner for 2012?
We must start a campaign to beg Rush to save "true" conservatism.
Can you imagine him and Palin in the primaries? The republicans would never find the center in a million years.
I'm getting really tired of seeing RL all over my motherfucking computer screen, all over the internet.
Is it going to stop soon?
S.
...needs to rethink if giving these scumbags more attention isn't actually counterproductive.
Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity. Albert Einstein
I'm just really tired of seeing that asshole Rush Limbaugh every time I visit this or other sites on the 'net. He's so, so stupid. Enough with the stupid people. Let's see some smart folks: Einstien, Coltrane, anybody!!!
"Occurrences in this domain are beyond the reach of exact prediction because of the variety of factors in operation, not because of any lack of order in nature."
[Albert Einstein]
Study the symptoms not the virus...
that's the problem...
right up there with deregulation...
the other day randi rhodes told a story about how Pence (?) got a bill passed (?), for limpball, that will prevent any "fairness doctrine" in the future... can anyone flesh out that story?
And THAT is what Obama is going to do. Address media diversity. The Fairness Doctrine wouldn't do nearly what this could do. The Right is too dumb to even be worried about the correct thing.
by changing licensing regs
the american people own the airwaves
there is not enough local programming or ownership...and that is the problem
One way or the other, call it whatever you like, the Orwellean propaganda bullshit the MSM and wingnuts have been force feeding American's for decades needs to stop.
Fox News should NOT be allowed to call themselves a news outlet. They should have to identify themselves as a GOP corporate fascist disinformation center.
The righties know that with a total media monopoly, gerrymandering on a scale never seen before, and a public that hadn't yet experienced the complete and utter failure of their policies; they could still never muster more than a 51-52% majority at best!
They know that if they lose the ability to lie to the American people unopposed 24/7, they will go back to being a 29% national party again -just like they were in the 60's when I was growing up.
Rush Limbaugh is what a smart person thinks a stupid bigot sounds like.
Ditto what you said.
Keep in mind that the Fairness Doctrine passed Constitutional muster, in that it did not inhibit anybody's rights to free speech. There was some thinking that you cannot mandate truthfulness, because it would trample another's right to lie and another's right to chose to be deceived. The Fairness Doctrine passed muster, because it did not conflict with any of that and was implied as a responsibility of the Fourth Estate in the Constitution. Except as they apply to the government itself, it may not be possible to write laws banning the creation and distribution of propaganda in this country, and the Fairness Doctrine was a way of obtaining the equivalent. That point should be considered before saying that it has no utility. It did serve well as a safeguard.
The DoJ should, regardless what the FCC does, investigate the TV and radio broadcast and cable abuses of monoploly power. There is a de facto monopoly that exists, because control of the effective totality of mass-consumed broadcasted information is controlled by a miniscule cartel of corporations that clearly coordinate their propaganda. The DoJ has perfect grounds for anti-trust actions that both order a revision of the FCC's media ownership rules and also order massive divestiture of media assets. Diversity of media ownership would disrupt the monopolistic abuses of the public that are now the defining feature of that cartel.
Interestingly, back in the late 1990s couple of reporters sued a FOX News station in Florida after they got fired in a dispute over allegations that station management was pressuring them to re-write a story on BGH in a way favorable to the chemical and its maker, Monsanto.
In overturning a jury decision in favor of one of the pair, a state appeals court in Florida in 2003 held that there is no obligation under FCC regulations for broadcast stations to tell the truth in their news broadcasts, that it's merely an informal expectation.
The decision, in .pdf format, is at this link.
Had I been them, I would instead have sued based on hostile work envrionment, claiming retaliation.
I was wondering what Rush was up to. Haven't heard from him in ages. Thanks for the update.
Is Rush the new President?? It's all I hear about anymore.
(my snark meter just went into overload).
And this was quite some time ago....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pg2_MntkMzg <---[NSFW]
I feel like I'm at risk of becoming a god damn ditto head around here. It is just an attempt to resist that saturation. I've never been exposed to more news on this maggot than I've been the last week or so. My God.
Thank God for Bill Hicks too. "I'm I the only one???" LOL.
Come on. Dont be disingenuous. Democratic pols have been calling for the FD for quite awhile. I'm not going to take the time to quote all that did...but two notables would be Sens. Schumer and Durbin. Two senators that I dare say have some pull as the senior senators from NY and IL.
To say that no Dems have been calling for the FD to be reinstated is ignorant at best....
“It’s time to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine. I have this old-fashioned attitude that when Americans hear both sides of the story, they’re in a better position to make a decision.” -Sen Durbin (D-IL)
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/schumer-d...
Nothing disingenuous about it. The claim is not that some Dems think a return to the Fairness Doctrine would be a good idea, it's that there is a "plan" to do it, a - in the word in the bottom-of-the-screen label - "push" for it.
And there isn't. Which I think stinks. I was against the elimination of the Fairness Doctrine and I would strongly favor a return to it. But while some Dems might favor that, there's no sign that any of them intends to to a damn thing about it.
Related to that, your linked article was written by someone who, when it comes to the Fairness Doctrine, has no flipping clue what he's talking about. He said the rule "would require radio stations to balance conservative hosts with liberal ones" and that it would "forc[e] stations to make equal time for liberal talk radio."
That is utter and complete nonsense. First, the Equal Time rule and the Fairness Doctrine were two entirely separate rules. There was no requirement for 'equal time' under the Fairness Doctrine. Not for points of view, not for liberal and conservative talk radio broadcasts. Period.
Nor did the rule require some sort of artificial and equal "balance." After going through several incarnations, in 1949 it settled into much the same form as we came to know it. It required two things: One, that stations were to spend some of their time covering controversial issues of public importance, and two, that contrasting views on those issues were to have a reasonable opportunity to be heard. Again, period. There was not even a requirement that individual broadcasts meet the standard, only that, overall, the station did.
I find it interesting and revealing that conservatives had no problem with the Fairness Doctrine all through the '50s, '60s, and '70s. It was only in the 1980s, under Reagan, at a time when conservative ideas seemed ascendant and it was liberal ideas that needed the opportunity to be heard that conservative voices had enjoyed across the preceding decades, that it was thought such "fairness" was no longer a good idea. (Sidebar: I gave a rather more detailed account of the rise and fall of the Fairness Doctrine over at my place a bit ago.)
Which is also why they're so afraid of the possibility of a return of the Fairness Doctrine now: They know that in a truly open debate where they can't control the microphone, they will lose. All the blusterings about non-existent "plans" and "pushes" for reinstatement of the rule are nothing more than a preemptive strike against that terrifying possibility of open and fair debate.
And, as a final point on this, that is why I really, really wish Dems, liberals, and leftists would stop replying to the right wing's screeching about this by sneering that there's no intention of reinstating the Fairness Doctrine as if you agreed that the rule was a bad thing. That only serves to advance the wingnuts' preemptive strike and make it all but impossible for anyone to actually take any action on the matter. I say a much better response is to ask "What's your problem with fairness?"
it was unworkable when it was in effect
before reagan got rid of it, it had become a joke
the problem is not fairness...it is monopolies
there is no real competition in radio
so some suit in ny is programming for a station in san francisco
it makes no sense
fix the previous bills that allowed corps to own way too many stations and newspapers in one market
put up a bill that forces stations to have more local content
this is not anti capitalist...it is pro capitalist...it will create jobs
of course, it will be a death knell to many of the fringe syndicated guys
..it was the FCC changing the regulations that limited media ownership. Sorry to have to acknowledge it, but it happened under Bill Clinton's FCC.
it was unworkable when it was in effect
It worked just fine for decades, during which time much of what are still considered our best public affairs programming was done.
it had become a joke
Mocked by corporate interests concerned only with the bottom line and conservatives who, having gained the upper hand, intended to use every means available to keep it, yes. A joke, no. And I would say the experience of the years since proves both those contentions.
the problem is not fairness...it is monopolies
I can't agree that those issues overlap to the degree you assert, that is, that fixing B will also fix A. I agree with everything you say about breaking up monopolies, limiting cross-ownership, and requiring more local content. But there is no reason to assume that a broadcast outlet will provide a wider range of opinion just because it it locally owned.
One way to develop that diversity is through low-power stations. People might check out the website of Free Radio Berkeley for some background and ideas.
... if it's pro capitalist, it's bound not to work (for the people, that is).
Very well said.
"But while some Dems might favor that, there's no sign that any of them intends to to a damn thing about it."
Most fortunately, it does not depend upon Congress to do anything at all, which in any event would be about as successful as trying to herd cats. This issue is solely a matter of regulation by an executive agency. The FCC can order a return of the Fairness Doctrine, or an equivalent, by issuing, as they are entitled by law to do, a regulation requiring it. The only impediment to it happening is finding the will to do it. Thereafter, it is a simple matter of drafting the regulations, taking public comments, modifying the regulation to satisfy issues brought up during the comment period - if justified - and then issuing the regulation, which becomes the law of the land. They, like all other federal regulatory agencies, have already been granted rule making regulatory powers through prior specific acts of Congress. If they come up with a regulation that Congress doesn't like, Congress can craft a specific bill to strike the rule down, which becomes law when the president signs it. And, if you think about it, it's now the reverse situation - herding cats to do something against the American People. Not likely that it would happen or that the president would sign such a bill were such a thing to actually make it through Congress. That's one of the reasons for all the worry by these propagandists. They are realizing that the jig will probably be up for them if the FCC is restored to integrity, wherafter any new momentum will inevitably disfavor them.
For as long as these bastards have been abusing We the People, I must admit that I am enjoying seeing them squirm.
You're quite right, of course, that the issue here is regulatory law, not legislative law. And I assure you I'm familiar with the process. However, that's one reason why I said that I really wish folks
If the FCC did move on this, how long do you think it would take for a bill to be introduced to overturn (or block) the rule? How would Congressional Dems react in the face of a shrieking chorus of "tolja so"s from the wingers? How, in fact, would various bloggers who insisted there was no chance of such a move react?
You seem confident that such a bill would not pass. I have no such confidence, especially when, with the left's assent and even unwitting cooperation, the debate has been pre-formed in the right's favor.
Footnote: You might check out Katy's comment below which links to an article reporting how in 2007 the Democrat-majority House voted overwhelmingly to bar the FCC from re-instituting the Fairness Doctrine.
Agree about the screeching.
As you suggest, if the FCC proposed such regulation, I think a blocking Bill would be attempted almost immediately. I had read about the 2007 Democratic vote, but I think that the political environment has shifted considerably since then. The vote was not all that well publicized, and I think that if congressional intentions and actions were placed in the spotlight they would not be so blithe. I also would foresee a major role for the blogosphere in bringing the issue to the forefront of the public's attention and of putting pressure on the congress critters and on the White House. The reason that I don't think it would pass is that I view the majority of the House Democrats as being spineless opportunists who are going to always choose the path of least resistance, and by my read - I could have my head completely up my ass on this - is that opposing such a move would require too much effort and too much courage, because it is too easy to publicize such a move as being anti-American.
In any event, it strikes me that if the attempt to re-reglate isn't made, nothing is going to improve. Hope springs eternal...
Some Dems want it. Many others don't. I don't like the idea at all.
There is no PLAN to re institute the FD. Everyone acknowledges that even if there was, most Dems would vote against it. THAT is the idiocy of the right, claiming there is a plan. That's how the control Freeper Nation . . . they scare them with Boogie Men.
Right off the bat, the guy was not being honest.
I'll add my fair observation > the damn guy was on a 17.166666" screen, not a 103" screen! [Asshole] :-P
Study the symptoms not the virus...
Let's just start a new wing in the Gov't that is called the Ministry of Truth. Who cares about fairness, let's get truth. I don't want to hear balanced lies or lies from all parties...I want to hear truth. It's simple, tell the truth or lose your ability to advertise. This would stop the lies, misinformation, and propaganda quick.
Who cares about the fairness doctrine, it's all a sham anyways. Let's get to the obvious lack of morals, integrity, and journalism in the media. Seems to me, if I lied on the job...I would lose that position...why not these guys?
Could we name it something else? I don't think the name is right, though the intent is a noble and just one. :-)
Study the symptoms not the virus...
I think the FD is a good deal for me. See, I listen to these guys for simple political entertainment...not hard news. Having an equally verbose liberal to point/counterpoint could be fun on those long waits in traffic.
But thats as serious as most take these guys. At least those that can spell Democrat and Republican.
Sign The Petition! (....But It's Not Enough)
The DCCC wants your opinion on Limbaugh's 'hope Obama fails' comments. Fine. BUT DO MORE.
Ask your elected officials to investigate the link between this demagogue and lawmakers. Learn why this UNELECTED freak has so much power over the democratic process. And REMIND the MAJORITY in Congress that those pieces of paper hanging in every radio station are FEDERAL LICENSES......owned and controlled by the People. NOT corporate interests and their stiffling propaganda figureheads.
http://www.dccc.org/page/petition/rush
Really??
Anyone who gets their news and makes their decisions solely from Rush Limbaugh...well lets just say I dont have much faith in their ability to even FIND a polling place.
The only thing more ridiculous then those people would be the ones who seem to make Limbaugh out to be some sort of Conservative flag bearer. Say this with me...he's entertainment...nothing more.
Sheesh...
Snip - Prior to Super Tuesday II, Rush Limbaugh encouraged his large, conservative/Republican audience to cross over and vote for Hillary Clinton in the Texas Primary.
http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=1212
Thanks for your opinion Jay...
Study the symptoms not the virus...
Someone should tell that to the republican congresscritters.
Too many people whom I work or have worked with quote his, and other propagandists, talking points in an unshakable belief that the propaganda represents the absolute facts and truth of matters. They take it as factual reporting, upon which they subsequently act, by voting or whatever as he would have them so do. In effect, they have been successfully manipulated. And, these are otherwise very smart people...chemical engineers, mechanical engineers, scientists, mathemeticians and the like...not your average mouth breathers. One cannot dismiss Limbaugh or FOX or CNN as mere "entertainment", when their propaganda is received and accepted as fact or truth or when those who give their acceptance of the propaganda subsequently act in conformance to the purpose of a given manipulation. American Idol is entertainment.
As has already been said, however, thank you for your opinion.
You really don't think he has influence over those stuck-on-stupid 27%'ers?
You don't think he has been given the power to at least POTENTIALLY shift the electorate to the right and change the outcome of an election?
I think you're naive and ignoring him and permitting what he does is dangerous to our democracy, and ultimately to our country in general - and outrageous.
The GOP: Wholly Owned Subsidiary Of Limbaugh, Inc.
In 2007, he sunk the immigration reform that even Bush & McCain supported...
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0807/544...
Do YOU Have A House Resolution?
Repubs in Congress are so under the thumb of 'Rush Hudson L imbaugh III' they sponsor banana republic, Baath Party-like legislation honoring him.
http://thinkprogress.org/limbaugh-resolution/
Are YOU An Honorary Member Of Congress?
In 94, Gingrich confirmed the future oxy fiend's status as Grand Poobah of the GOP
http://mediamatters.org/countyfair/200901280005
The Friendly, Obedient Senate
GOP Senators trip over themselves to placate Limbaugh...even as they rip any challenge to him.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/28/rush-corn...
with one so ridiculous as RL is not healthy. Take a walk and get some fresh air.
http://www.megabytingit.com/blog/pictures/puz...
Study the symptoms not the virus...
Pence Is Limbaugh's Errand Boy On The Fairness Doctrine
Last year the Indiana Republican wrote legislation barring the FCC from balancing viewpoints on talk radio...Limbaugh's dreaded fear.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/house-vot... 9.html
.
http://www.therandirhodesshow.com/index.php?/...
evidently... but i found more here:
http://search2.thehill.com/search?q=house+vot...
.
this is good, at the end:
At the end of yesterday’s debate, Democratic House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (Wis.) agreed with Republicans that the government should not regulate conservative radio hosts such as Limbaugh and Hannity.
“We ought to let right-wing talk radio go on as they do now,” he said. “Rush and Sean are just about as important in the scheme of things as Paris Hilton, and I would hate to see them gain an ounce of credibility by being forced by a government agency or anybody else to moderate their views enough that they might become modestly influential or respected.”
House votes to ban FCC on ‘fairness’
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/house-vot...
if only they were that irrelevant... still funny...
Keeps em busy. They are so busy with their lunacy that the can't focus on anything where they can be even more dangerous.
ditto.
I worked in broadcasting when THERE WAS A FAIRNESS DOCTRINE. It was a good thing. It created FAIRNESS in commentary and news coverage.
It SHOULD be reinstated... and that TERRIFIES Rush and that bonehead hannity. Why should they be allowed to spread their viscious ANTI-MAINSTREEM partisan bile over Federal airwaves that are owned by you and me... honest, up-standing voting citizens?
They shouldn't. They should be EXILED to commercial satelite delivery for their radio trash... where all the rest of the REAL RADIO TRASH and PORN LIVES AND THRIVES. This wouldn't hurt them... it does mean that their followers (the BUSH-LOVING 20%ers) would have to pay a subscription fee to listen to them.
SPOT ON.
Fox News, Fake News. What's the diff?
Since Fake News usually denotes things like The Onion and The Daily Show, I'd say the difference is those things are usually FUNNY.
Of course, these guys are funny too, but in that way that makes you shriek and tear your hair out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F49e64yq8lI
Regardless of whether or not it is currently being proposed, it is something that must be. The Fairness Doctrine, or something like it, is going to have to be ressurected, or there is going to be no hope of compelling the corporate media to serve the interests of the American public. The subject is an item that has received broad discussion on multiple comment threads here at C&L and on many other blogs, and it is a reasonable assumption that, if Obama takes any measures at all to reform the FCC from its current corrupt and fallen state, it will be a subject for examination. The wingnuts check out liberal and progressive blogs to see what we D-F-hippies are plotting; doubtless, they've run across these discussions. It also seems to me, however, that their preoccupation with the Fairness Doctrine is a confession of sorts, an acknowledgment by them that they are propagandists, an acknowledgment by them that they are deliberately ill-serving the public and ill-informing the public per the requirements of their FCC licenses. They know exectly what they are (how could they not), and they know that they are guilty of abuses. They are trying to pre-empt the inevitable by pre-proagandizing the likely outcomes as an "evil" thing, the end of all civilization. Given this, their campaign to shut such actions down before they get started does not strike me as being crazed wingnuttery that you portray it as being. To my eyes, it has more the appearance of a calculated move, a proactive manipulative strategy, by the corporate leaders who operate these propaganda outlets to protect their agenda.
... by the corporate leaders who operate these propaganda outlets to protect their agenda.
yea... thanks, bill...
do you think he knew what he was doing? ... why o why...
As regards official acts, I don't think there has ever been a time when Clinton did not know exactly what he was doing...in depth. His allowing the FCC to make the changes that they did amounted to a huge sellout of the American people. That's just one of the reasons I've never been able to swallow the BS about "centrist" politicians.
"Centrism" as it is currently in fashion is just coporatism re-marketed in fancy new packaging with attendant flashy jingoism. Being that the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence are the true center of this nation, the only people who have the right to call themselves centrists are the ones who do their utmost to defend and protect the principles, concepts and laws that these documents describe and codify. If a politician strays right or left from that path they may be many things, but a centrist they are not. Isn't it odd that things have become so twisted that anybody who defends Constitutional or Declaration of Independence-based principles is labled a lunatic fringe, leftwing nutcase, while those who do their utmost to destroy those principles and concepts are considered staunch patriots? Talk about Orwellian.
Well said. I agree totally.
Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity. Albert Einstein
Rush represents the Republican mainstream -- shockingly out of touch with the problems, needs and mood of the country.
The whole Limbaugh model of propaganda passing itself off as journalism wouldn't have been possible if the Fairness Doctrine had remained in place. That's why they're in a tizzy, their whole fast and loose way with facts wouldn't fly if they had to be fair. The very idea of fairness scares the crap out of them. Civilized rules are kryptonite to them.
I hear Shithead Hannity ALWAYS crying about the libs wanting to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine - he's trying to get his pinhead 27%'ers all riled up - they must have it POUNDED into their tiny brains that the Fairness Doctrine is not fair at all - otherwise it might not stick in their brains.
EVERY REASONABLE person knows that a truly fair, balanced and TRUTHFUL dialogue on the radio IS fair - and EVERY INTELLIGENT person knows that if you give the American people ALL information they will probably side with common sense - the Democrats!
What I hate MOST about people like Hannity is that THEY are VERY intelligent and clever - and they are DECEITFUL LIARS -
BUT they take advantage of their dumber than average audience - people like Hannity know that they can lie to stupid people and have most of them believe it as fact.
And THAT is what is so DESPICABLE about them.
IF we are a JUST nation of LAWS, like the wingnuts like to claim we are, then it is JUST to NO LONGER ALLOW the LIES AND PROPAGANDA to go unanswered / "unrebutted" over OUR airwaves.
That's the point of propaganda...to make everybody stop thinking, the smart ones and the not so smart ones. You get people reacting with their alligator brains or their emotions, especially if you can appeal to the dark side that resides in everybody but which is usually held in check by their own higher and better angels. That is Hannity's and Limbaugh's craft in trade, bringing out the worst in those who are inclined to let their worst see the light of day. What should never be lost sight of when talking about propagandists, is that they never care the slightest whether those whom they manipulate live or die..those they target for manipulation are nothing more than abstract objects for which (not whom) concepts like well-being are inapplicable irrelevancies. The folks who defend and give their allegiances to the thinking and persons of Hannity, Limbaugh and others should keep that in mind.
Under the terms of their broadcast licenses, these outlets are required to serve the interests of the public. Clearly, they are not. That puts those licenses at risk, if the citizens can make a good enpough case to the FCC.
IN ADDITION to bringing back the Fairness Doctrine (just to piss off conservatives) -
Lets have fun and get the paranoid drug addict kicked off of Armed Forces Radio. Fuck him and his bullshit jihad against "libruuls" (blah blah blah)... El Gordo makes allot of money by "counting" the military as part of his demographics and audience reach. He is not even a former member of the military but a draft dodger. Limbaugh would not qualify for the military with his legal, weight, and drug problems anyway (not to mention moral turpitude having to do with alleged underage sex tourism). If a conservative "must" be on armed forces radio I am sure there are better ones out there than him (I think).
I have always thought that limiting the serviceman's access to neocon propagandists-only radio programming at Armed Forces Radio was a clear violation of laws that prohibit in absolute terms any government agency, body or institution from using propaganda against American citizens. the people who are responsible for intstituting these programming policies, should be punished per the requirements of the law.
That is 100 % Correct thay should be punished!!!!!
Did you realize what you just said?
If a conservative "must" be on armed forces radio I am sure there are better ones out there than him (I think).
At one time you would have been right but since the days of ronald reagan the conservatives have changed.
They are no longer associated with the American people anymore, they are and forever will be the party of the GReedy Old White peoples party.
Don't waste your time trying to find a honest, or intelligent, or trustworthy, or moral, or America loving conservative!
They have all gone greedy and ignorant. Just a party of liars and fools and child molesters.
That is the total makeup of the GOP!
I absolutely agree with your statement, but that's not what I was saying. What I did say is that the gov't cannot deploy any kind of propaganda against Americans. It's against the law to use federal funds to create and deploy propaganda against American citizens, regardless the flavor of the propaganda. That the Pentagon specifically limits all points of view to the conservative/neocon party line, while actively blocking access to other opinions, analyses and points of view - not to mention actual facts, reduces the entire lot of it to propaganda. That's a violation of the law.
nearly obsolete medium. The future is definitely not a.m. radio. Let Rush, Savage, Hannity and the rest of them talk themselves into oblivion. They are on the wrong side of history. Americans don't want a.m. radio, they want the internet. We'll win this battle.
Oh, yeah. The fairness doctrine is b.s.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dL4__kUcD9o
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1359/106600246...
Study the symptoms not the virus...
If it puts the wingnuts shorts in a wad! Then I am all for it.
Whith all the things these assholes have done in the past eight years.
A trip to gitmo without letting anyone knoe where they are for oh about 6 or so years and then let people know they are there but don't let them go because they are terrorists.
Yep use the rules thay made up and nail their stupid asses! all of them limpballs, insanity, slobberage, oliar, who are some of those other idiots like hewit, borrish, any of the traitors from the last eight years!
That would be a wonderful thing to happen in America.
Then we could really say that god blessed America!
What we need is a TRUTH DOCTRINE. If these people, from RUSH, HANNITY on down AND INCLUDING democrats HAD TO TELL THE TRUTH, we'd ALL be better off. Congress needs to pass a law making lying ON AIR a CRIME with fines equaling 25 or 50 percent of a YEARS salary and a YEAR suspension from any public JOB. Make these people have to CHECK THEIR FACTS BEFORE THEY JUST THROW ANY NONSENSE OUT THERE. The fairness doctrine only says the other side has equal time to rebut whatever is said, but it doesn't deal with the lies on both sides.
Republicans are STILL, TO THIS VERY DAY, pushing the absolute LIE that Iraq attacked us on 9/11, PROVEN TO BE A LIE, ADMITTED BY BUSH/CO TO BE A LIE, BUT STILL THE REPUBLICANS ARE TELLING THE LIE.
The Democrats wrote their disgusting BAILOUT BILL, POSTED IT ON LINE FOR ALL THE WORLD TO READ AND STILL CAME ON NATIONAL TV AND LIED ABOUT WHAT WAS IN IT. Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer AND Harry Reid ALL lied about the bill stating there were RESTRAINTS ON EXECUTIVE PAY OR BONUS'S IN THAT BILL AND ACCOUNTING FOR WHAT THEY WOULD DO WITH ALL THOSE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WHEN THEY KNEW FULL WELL THERE WERE NOT, AND NOW THEY HAVE THE NERVE TO COMPLAIN THAT THOSE CROOKS ARE DOING EXACTLY WHAT THEY ALWAYS INTENDED TO DO.
Republicans come on air whining about Illegal Immigration. Every single bill that comes to the floor of congress that does anything for people below their personal income level, non millionaires, in other words or non corporate executive, is fought tooth and nail by Republicans who "are so afraid an illegal immigrant might benefit" blows it out of the water. TRUTH IS, Republicans were in charge of both houses of congress for 12 years, 6 of those they ALSO had the White House. IF they had cared ONE BIT about lessening Illegal Immigration, they could have stopped it immediately. They could have put the National Guard all along the border, they could have given border states billions of dollars to hire millions of new border patrol agents, they could have put business owners who knowingly hired illegals in jail. TRUTH IS the ONLY time Republicans CARE ONE BIT about Illegal Immigrants is when they can be USED as the EXCUSE to stop any assistance for poor, disabled, elderly or CHILDREN! PERIOD! END OF STORY!
YES, A TRUTH DOCTRINE IS WHAT WE NEED AND FACT CHECKERS TO MAKE SURE IT'S ONLY THE TRUTH AND NOT EMBELLISHED OR TWISTED!
...the RICO Act. When these networks lie and decieve, being that they are engaged in interstate commerce and that actual monetary harm can be demonstrated to have occured as a result of those lies and deception (let's say, for example, the cost of the Iraqi war and occupation, which each of us is paying), it should be possible to prosecute the networks and the individuals for RICO-based wire fraud, 1 count for each lie. From my read of the law, all the hurdles that must be passed to qualify for RICO prosecutions are easily satisfied by these propagandists. I've studied this in some detail, and believe it to be a viable option. The interesting thing about RICO, is that it disallow corporations from protecting and indemnifying employees who are "only folowing orders". Like the corporation itself, their assets and their freedom are personally at risk. An aggressively prosecuted RICO act could literally put these people out of business for good.
there werent any liberals to offer any counter-point because theres no reason to discuss something that isnt happening. liberals and other responsible people are off doing real things that are affecting real people. not some fantasy-land idiocy like this 'fairness doctrine'. i guess in limbaughs case it should be the 'fathead doctrine'. yes i had to take a dig. as hes so hard to miss.
You're crazy if you think America doesn't need to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, or something similar. In case y'all haven't noticed, the fact that we kicked the Bush crew out of office hasn't had much effect on the MSM, other than a sudden (cynical?) proliferation of black news reporters.
Sadly, America still gets its "fair and balanced" corporate propaganda from "the most trusted sources" that feed bullshit to the masses 24/7/365. The MSM zoo is still populated almost entirely by corporate flacks with the exception of a few (very popular) outliers like Rachael Maddow and Keith Olberman on TV, then a few more on the radio. These few are vastly outnumbered and out-funded by religious, political and corporate right wingers.
Without a Fairness Doctrine, America will continue to swim in a cesspool of right wing misinformation. How are Americans supposed to make informed decisions in an environment suffused with so much propaganda? The fragile and short-lived advantage liberals had on the internet may not be enough to counter the tide of bullshit that will attempt to distort our perceptions and blame all our woes on Barack Obama's administration.
The right-wingers are going apeshit over this issue even though no one else is talking about it, because they want to preempt framing on the subject in case it ever should come up. And it definitely should come up. The rescinding of the Fairness Doctrine in '87 opened the floodgates to further strengthening of some nefarious societal trends begun by Reagan. I doubt we would have had an anti-environmental movement in the US in the 90s if it weren't for the rash of right-wing radio and TV shows like Limbaugh's.
I mean, my Republican father was as environmentally conscious as most Americans were in the 70s and 80s, but right-wing shows in the 90s caused him to switch to driving a huge, gas-guzzling vehicle and to avoid carpooling, and to brag that he was doing so. And that's just one topic where the right-wing shows' influence has been horrible.
It is annoying that some Democrats are already denying that they would reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, just like they started denying they were liberal when hate-radio-fueled right-wingers started accusing them of being liberal in the early 90s.
The Fairness Doctrine does need to be reinstated! That is not an extreme thing to do!
.
Mr. Neiwert, Perhaps you should check the record before you make such uninformed statements about the Fairness Doctrine. Dick Durbin, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Jeff Bingaman, Debbie Stabenow, Tom Harkin, Bill Clinton, Dianne Feinstein, Charles Schumer all have gone on the record in favor of reinstating the Fairness Doctrine. It seems that the doctrine was not important when only the liberal mainstream press was doing the talking. Now that they have to compete with bigmouths on the conservative side (and they cannot compete with them, as the ratings and financial results suggest), then their only response to their own weaknesses is to attack the strengths (if you call it that) of the other side. It seems that to a liberal, it's censorship when a conservative voices their opposition opinion, but it's fairness when they seek to voice their own opinion without challenge.
Comments are closed on this entry