More Talks of the Fairness Doctrine

I can't say as I believe that the "Fairness Doctrine" would even come to pass again, but then I think to myself, I never thought it would come to pass to begin with. For those unfamiliar with the Fairness Doctrine, wiki actually does a pretty good job of briefly explaining it.

Repeal of the Fairness doctrine came about on

"August 1987, the FCC abolished the doctrine by a 4-0 vote, in the Syracuse Peace Council decision, which was upheld by a different panel of the Appeals Court for the D.C. Circuit in February 1989. The FCC stated, "the intrusion by government into the content of programming occasioned by the enforcement of [the Fairness Doctrine] restricts the journalistic freedom of broadcasters ... [and] actually inhibits the presentation of controversial issues of public importance to the detriment of the public and the degradation of the editorial prerogative of broadcast journalists," and suggested that, because of the many media voices in the marketplace, the doctrine be deemed unconstitutional."

As Recent as Early 2007

In the 110th Congress (January 2007 to January 2009), where Democrats held a majority of both Houses, no legislation to restore the Fairness Doctrine was introduced.

In 2007, Senator Norm Coleman (Republican of Minnesota) proposed an amendment to a defense appropriations bill that forbade the FCC from "using any funds to adopt a fairness rule." [37] It was blocked, in part on grounds that "the amendment belonged in the Commerce Committee’s jurisdiction".

In the same year, the Broadcaster Freedom Act of 2007 was proposed in the Senate by Senators Coleman with 35 co-sponsors (S.1748) and John Thune (Republican of South Dakota) with 8 co-sponsors (S.1742)[38] and in the House by Republican Representative Mike Pence of Indiana with 208 co-sponsors (H.R. 2905).[39] It provided that

the Commission shall not have the authority to prescribe any rule, regulation, policy, doctrine, standard, or other requirement that has the purpose or effect of reinstating or repromulgating (in whole or in part) the requirement that Broadcasters present opposing viewpoints on controversial issues of public importance, commonly referred to as the `Fairness Doctrine', as repealed in Feneral Fairness Doctrine Obligations of Broadcast Licensees, 50 Fed. Reg. 35418 (1985).[40]

None of these measures came to the floor of either house.

Today from Neal Boortz

The Boortz staff has tried to track this story back to sources ... admittedly, it's pretty sketchy, so bear that in mind as you read. The poll results are real, as is the desire of many on the left to shut down talk radio. After all, if you can't beat 'em, shut 'em down. The stuff about Henry Waxman? No solid source .. but this really sounds just like good ole Henry. Anyway ...
The latest Rasmussen polls show that 38% of Americans believe the government should resurrect the Fairness Doctrine - require radio stations to offer equal amounts of liberal and conservative commentary. This is almost a ten point drop from last August when 47% of Americans said that the government should require radio to be "balanced."

And while Jamie Dupree and others believe that there is no chance of the Fairness Doctrine being reimposed .. I'm not so convinced. Heck, I HOPE that the government holds hearings and dabbles with the idea of bringing it back. The immediate result will be more listeners for talk radio. Some will go away again, many will stay. We have a good beat and we're easy to dance to.
According to this report, senior staff working for the acting FCC Commissioner met with policy and legislative advisers to House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman. Why is that? Because they wanted to discuss ways that the committee can create openings for the FCC to reimpose some form of the Fairness Doctrine, without calling it the "Fairness Doctrine."

Apparently Henry Waxman is also interested in imposing some sort of "balance" on the Internet as well. Wow, even better news for me .. I'll have my radio show and this website for the government to "balance"!

A Democrat committee member (who remains nameless) says that the stimulus package may have opened a door for regulation of the Internet. He says, "The FCC and state and local governments also have oversight over the Internet lines and the cable and telecom companies that operate them. We want to get alternative views on radio and TV, but we also want to makes sure those alternative views are read, heard and seen online, which is becoming increasingly video and audio driven. Thanks to the stimulus package, we've established that broadband networks -- the Internet -- are critical, national infrastructure. We think that gives us an opening to look at what runs over that critical infrastructure."

Didn't I mention that politicians just love to control things? I think I may have said that somewhere before.