After the Democrat victory in the election, many congressional Democrats showed renewed interest in the "fairness doctrine," where the FCC will determine "balance" on the airwaves. The ending of the policy in 1987 helped propel the many choices in talk radio available today. However, with New York Democrat Charles Schumer comparing the regulation of speech to the regulation of pornography, this policy stands a large chance of resurfacing during Barack Obama's administration.
However, defenders of free speech still exist on the left. One such defender is frequent Denver Post contributor Ed Quillen, who in today's column provides good arguments for keeping the "fairness doctrine" dead.
...Even in this remote area I can listen to Rush Limbaugh or Amy Goodman as the mood strikes, so why should any station be obliged to offer both?
That's just in radio. I can watch Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow on MSNBC, or Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes on Fox News, Lou Dobbs on CNN or some pro-immigrant documentary on FSTV. And there's the Internet, where the channels and opinions are nearly innumerable.
So if there ever was a justification for the Fairness Doctrine, on the basis of limited channels, it certainly doesn't apply now.
Ah, but there's talk radio, which really took off after the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine, and which is generally rather right-wing. Reviving the Fairness Doctrine could stifle those operations, and doubtless that would please some left-wingers who don't trust "the marketplace of ideas."
But the conservative talk-show hosts, at least in Colorado, aren't out to squelch other voices. I've been on programs hosted by Mike Rosen, Gunny Bob Newman and Amy Oliver; they gave me a chance to state and explain my views before they argued with me. Even without a Fairness Doctrine, hosts do bring in opposing viewpoints.
Ed Quillen is exactly correct. The idea that a government committee of "smart people" can determine a subjective quality such as "fairness" for a private business is absurd. Unfortunately, people seeking government intervention in private business seems to be somewhat popular at this juncture.
Barack Obama claimed opposition to the "fairness doctrine" during the campaign. However, Barack Obama is not known for opposing his party during his legislative career, either. Likely, if a bill arrived on his desk, he would sign it. However, support from left-leaning columnists such as Ed Quillen will help defenders of free speech prevent this monstrosity from reappearing in federal policy,
by Civil Sense
Comments