The measure failed by a 305-115 vote in the House. It probably would have been defeated in the Senate as well in spite of staunch support by Hillary, Kerry, Durban, Feinstein and others.
In a nutshell, the Fairness Doctrine would force radio and television outlets that broadcast “controversial” programming to devote equal time to opposing viewpoints.
The idea behind re-launching the Fairness Doctrine is a thinly veiled effort on the part of the nation’s liberals to shut down conservative political talk radio.
Commercial liberal talk radio has failed. Air America, the flagship of liberal talk radio movement, is a testament to that.
The only liberal talk radio left is (NPR) which is taxpayer funded. National Public Radio (NPR) is funded by taxpayers and is made up of Liberal talk hosts such as the unabashedly liberal Juan Williams (pictured).
Since NPR is taxpayer funded it should provide equal airtime to conservative political programs. It does not.
What about the Fairness Doctrine and the Constitution? Should we kill free speech in the name of fairness?
The Constitution protects free speech, not equal speech.
Congress is to make no law abridging the freedom of speech whether we like the speech or not.
It's simple; speech is to be free even if it is not fair. Fair is too subjective a word. Our founding fathers guaranteed us free speech, not fair speech, and there is a big difference
If they ever want to bring the Fairness Doctrine back, they should apply it to TV and radio that is taxpayer funded.
For every Juan Williams hour on NPR there should be a Sean Hannity (lower picture) hour etc.
An equal number of hours for conservative radio as for liberal radio.
Rather than having the government regulate what people can say, we should let the market decide what people want to hear. That’s precisely why the Fairness Doctrine was abandoned, and that’s why it ought not to be revived.
A picture of my cave
..
..
