Monday, June 30, 2008

In the interest of fairness...

Well, yours truly was bored the other day and was surfing the channels when I see Rod Parsnip on the tube yakking about some law floating around called the 'Fairness Doctrine' and it's basically an attack on 'christian' speech and all that sh*t. So I decided to look stuff up and came up with these links:

From what I read, this Doctrine requires any media outlet (radio, tv, etc.) who basically does any kind of ed-op piece on any issue has to give equal time to the opposing side of the same issue...

Opponents of the Doctrine say it violates the 1st Amendment. How? Don't we have a right to hear all sides of the issue? Or is it 'my way or the highway' with these big media 'giants' controlling things. Why are these moguls afraid to air opposing views on things? Or they afraid that we actually learn about things instead of being constantly being brainwash with their mindless sh*t and one sided news coverage?

Last time I check, the FCC is funded by TAXPAYER MONEY, is in charge of regulating what goes on with PUBLIC AIRWAVES.

Why should we let these moguls dictate what we see on tv or hear on the radio? WE have EVERY RIGHT to hear the WHOLE story. Not just the part that the local prez of the tv station feels like airing.

So, make a petition, contact your local politician, let those clowns in Washington and the FCC, that THESE ARE OUR AIRWAVES AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO HEAR THE WHOLE STORY!

Thanks for reading...



ViperInfidel/SourBlaze said...

The Fairness Doctrine was only applied on a case by case basis. And there were abuses of it occurring; ex., when a show on space exploration came up, sometimes (mostly radio programs were guilty of this one) guests were invited that had little credentials or espoused wild views (ex: in addition to UFO enthusiats and creationism, some shows even brought on Flat Earth Society members and the like). And science wasn't the only field abused; politics, econmics, and other fields were abused by fringe groups as well thanks to the Doctrine.

In addition, some partisan groups felt that the requirement was tantamount to the government "butting into" their broadcasting practices. That was the argument that eventually got its repealment in the 1980s.

avideogameplayer said...

some partisan groups felt that the requirement was tantamount to the government "butting into" their broadcasting practices.

And this is the part that bothers me about it. All these partisan groups want to do is monopolize the airwaves with their 'agenda'.

You gotta take a second and think about the reasoning these groups have when they go on tv, radio, etc and push for something like this.

Is it because it's for the general good or is it something else? And of course, the FCC hasn't done anything about it, they were using the Fairness Doctrine as a 'guideline' and not as a actual 'law'.

And is it REALLY fair for one side of the political spectrum to basically constantly shove their agenda down your throat?


And I honestly don't think our Founding Fathers had this kind of crap in mind when they will writing the Constitution. They believed 'everyone' (I know at the time they were talking about rich, white folks) had a right to free speech.

But I wonder what they would think of this system now...

Blast from the posting past