Dems consider reviving the “Fairness” Doctrine.

Please pay attention to the above matter.  The gov is looking at ways to limit freedom of speech.  Other countries who impose restrictions on talk radio broadcasts are generally viewed as “totalitarian regimes”.  I’m sure that Chavez could give some pointers.  (A funny sidebar is that while many FM stations thrive on sexually explicit language in their programs, what the gov finds offensive is political speech, and it was political speech that our Founding Fathers were determined to protect when they wrote up the Bill of Rights)

The Obamamessiah does not like differing opinions.  Possibly, in part, because he fairs so badly in “off the cuff” comments.  One item, that is not widely known (because the MSM failed to report it) is that Obama had pre-selected reporters that were allowed to ask him questions during his first prime time news conference.  Possibly, they failed to report this item, because they were afraid that they would be “black-listed” at future events.

So, the Messiah is hand picking those who are “good” enough to ask him questions.  I think that the next logical step is to eliminate those that question him.  Those in talk radio.

Many dems are now talking about the necessity of the “Fairness” Doctrine.  Bill Clinton recently came out as on of the latest proponents of the measure.

The libs have “locked in” most of the media outlets, and now they are eyeing the only one that they haven’t managed to get.  The radio waves.  They have tried to “play fair”.  They had their “Air America” channel – which ended up a miserable bankrupt failure.  And, since they weren’t able to win fairly, they are now eyeing ways to “cheat”.

And be on the lookout – because the “Fairness” Doctrine is being repackaged.  Renamed, so to speak. 

Acting FCC Chair Sees Government Role in Pushing ‘Media Diversity’

So, they think that the Government has the responsibility to force “media diversity” down our throats.  Egad.  As if the stupid diversity lecture at work wasn’t enough….

Acting Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael Copps says he doesn’t support bringing back the controversial Fairness Doctrine, but he does think government has a role in enforcing media “diversity.”

That role includes re-examining licensing and other regulations for radio stations — including AM stations dominated by talk radio — to make them “more reflective” of public interests.

The government will re-examine the licensing of radio stations, to make them more reflective of “public interest”.  And who is the supreme being who gets to decide what is in the public interest?  I’m pretty sure that it isn’t you, the listener, who tunes in (or out).

Doesn’t the consumer of a product (in this case radio shows) determine what they like and what they don’t like?  Why should the government have such a large role in choosing what YOU listen to? 

If a more diverse program would be a marketable item, wouldn’t someone have capitalized on that market by now?

Frankly, just the line that “the government has a role in ENFORCING media diversity” sends chills down my spine.

UPDATE:  Michelle Malkin has further comments on her site.

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

View Technorati blog reactions.

Related Posts