The Fairness Doctrine Elimination -- Contributing to Red/Blue State Split in US?

[Fake Post]

Does anyone else think that a contributing factor may be the relaxation (elimination) of the Fairness Doctrine with broadcasters combined with the lack of civility among the right wingers?

BTW for you younger folk, this is not new. Check out when radio was in its infancy. Radio preachers learned early on that yelling at the masses was a way to get an audience. This led to Congress first instituting the Fairness Doctrine. It will interesting to see if the Democrats can bring back the Fairness Doctrine and stop the fire and brimstone Neocons who have hijacked the airwaves to spew their venom.

[Pro]

You may be surprised at this - from ME - but I have no problem with the sheer volume of Right wing radio and television shows.

Why? Because there is an audience. That's good enough. Nothing gets on the air unless there is an audience for it.

I don't believe that many of these people are changing votes. Or at least not very many votes. I could be wrong, but I think there is a lot of "choir preaching" going on.

And if people get their political ideas from what a radio or television host spews, then we get what we deserve.

I'm all for letting the marketplace determine who gets on the air.

[New York'rr]

Talk Radio has been a great success for conservatives and a total failure for liberals. That's too bad, since the liberals are now givng up and quitting (cutting and running from Talk Radio), no longer attempting to succeed in Talk Radio, which has led them to consider bringing back the "Fairness Doctrine".

Why has liberal talk radio failed so miserably? There are many theories, but one of them is that radio requires the listeners to actually listen and think for themselves instead of having everything spoon-fed to them like TV News does for its audience. And people who think for themselves are much less likely to fall for the left-wing socialist BS which passes for news and commentary on television today.

However, it is a shame that Err America failed and Al Franken went silent, because at least while he was in business there was less reason for the liberals to whine and moan about "unfairness" and call for a law to ban radio talk shows that they don't like.

Of course, freedom of speech is a fundamental right, the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, but liberals and Democrats do not respect the Bill of Rights and will go to whatever length they consider necessary to remain in power, including censoring free speech. Which is exactly what happens when the government tries to regulate what can and cannot be said on the radio, or anywhere else in public.

If the Nancy-Boys try to revive the "Fairness Doctrine" it will backfire on them. There, I said it.

In fact, so far, since the Nancy-Boys have been in charge, they have been stumbling along pretty badly - all their talk about ethics turned out to be a joke, with Nancy Pelosi's handpicked committee chairmen being laughed at instead of being elected cahrimen of powerful committees. You know, if Newt Gingrich had picked a bunch of committee chairmen in '94 when he became Speaker, and they were all laughed right out the door like the House of Representatives did to Nancy Pelosi's choices for committee chairs, Gingrich would have been labeled as somewhat ineffective and not much of a leader. And if he proposed a law to censor the rights of liberal broadcasters to speak their mind, he would have been ridden out of town on a rail, tarred and feathered. Which just goes to show what a bunch of hypocrites the Nancy-Boys truly are.

So far, they have been in charge for a month and they are still acting like the Desperate Dems they had been before they won. Taking back the Congress in '06 has made it necessary for them to actually govern for a change....this is the best they can come up with?

Hey, if I disagree with radio talk show host and consumer advocate Clark Howard, who says that saving money is the right thing to do, shouldn't I be given free time on the radio to sing the praises of spending money like drunken sailor? After all, it's my opinion, and as long as Clark Howard gets the chance to talk about saving, why doesn't the Fairness Doctrine require that I be given three hours a day to advocate wasteful spending? Hmmm? Who is supposed to decide what is "Fair", if not the free market, which is the case today? I ain't gonna hold my breath waiting for the left-wingers to try to identify an answer to that pressing question.

[The Mockingbird]

Originally posted by New York'rr:
Talk Radio has been a great success for conservatives and a total failure for liberals. That's too bad, since the liberals are now givng up and quitting (cutting and running from Talk Radio), no longer attempting to succeed in Talk Radio, which has led them to consider bringing back the "Fairness Doctrine".

Why has liberal talk radio failed so miserably? There are many theories, but one of them is that radio requires the listeners to actually listen and think for themselves instead of having everything spoon-fed to them like TV News does for its audience. And people who think for themselves are much less likely to fall for the left-wing socialist BS which passes for news and commentary on television today.

However, it is a shame that Err America failed and Al Franken went silent, because at least while he was in business there was less reason for the liberals to whine and moan about "unfairness" and call for a law to ban radio talk shows that they don't like.

Of course, freedom of speech is a fundamental right, the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, but liberals and Democrats do not respect the Bill of Rights and will go to whatever length they consider necessary to remain in power, including censoring free speech. Which is exactly what happens when the government tries to regulate what can and cannot be said on the radio, or anywhere else in public.

If the Nancy-Boys try to revive the "Fairness Doctrine" it will backfire on them. There, I said it.

In fact, so far, since the Nancy-Boys have been in charge, they have been stumbling along pretty badly - all their talk about ethics turned out to be a joke, with Nancy Pelosi's handpicked committee chairmen being laughed at instead of being elected cahrimen of powerful committees. You know, if Newt Gingrich had picked a bunch of committee chairmen in '94 when he became Speaker, and they were all laughed right out the door like the House of Representatives did to Nancy Pelosi's choices for committee chairs, Gingrich would have been labeled as somewhat ineffective and not much of a leader. And if he proposed a law to censor the rights of liberal broadcasters to speak their mind, he would have been ridden out of town on a rail, tarred and feathered. Which just goes to show what a bunch of hypocrites the Nancy-Boys truly are.

So far, they have been in charge for a month and they are still acting like the Desperate Dems they had been before they won. Taking back the Congress in '06 has made it necessary for them to actually govern for a change....this is the best they can come up with?

Hey, if I disagree with radio talk show host and consumer advocate Clark Howard, who says that saving money is the right thing to do, shouldn't I be given free time on the radio to sing the praises of spending money like drunken sailor? After all, it's my opinion, and as long as Clark Howard gets the chance to talk about saving, why doesn't the Fairness Doctrine require that I be given three hours a day to advocate wasteful spending? Hmmm? Who is supposed to decide what is "Fair", if not the free market, which is the case today? I ain't gonna hold my breath waiting for the left-wingers to try to identify an answer to that pressing question.Looks like the rhetoric train just pulled into the station.

I see a lot of loaded words and phrases like "socialism", "wasteful spending", "Nancy Boys".

I see an argument that Talk Radio somehow magically encourages thinking. Limbaugh's loyalists proudly call themselves "Dittoheads". How exactly is this "thinking for themselves?"

Just curious.

I'm not a liberal, but it seems to me that keeping America the greatest nation in the world requires the Left and Right to stop the name calling and work together.

Splitting the nation into two groups who automatically disagree with each other on everything, out of principle, is a recipe for inertia.

P.S. The reason talk radio does so well is because the target audience (old people) listen to more radio during the day.

[ February 03, 2007, 10:58 PM: Message edited by: The Mockingbird ]

[New York'rr]

A "recipe for inertia".....? Do you even know what inertia is? Dividing the country is going to cause a body in motion to remain in motion? You consider that to be a problem, apparently, but "inertia" is not the word you're grasping for.

So basically you are saying that you want to take away the daytime talk radio entertainment from the old folks whom you picture in your mind sitting by the glow of their radio listening to Rush Limbaugh.

Sounds like a recipe for bringing a body in motion down on some young whippersnapper's head if they try anything of the sort.

[Marty McFly]

It will interesting to see if the Democrats can bring back the Fairness Doctrine and stop the fire and brimstone Neocons who have hijacked the airwaves to spew their venom. Simply amazing.

Sucks to have freedom in America, huh?

[The Mockingbird]

Originally posted by New York'rr:
A "recipe for inertia".....? Do you even know what inertia is? Dividing the country is going to cause a body in motion to remain in motion? You consider that to be a problem, apparently, but "inertia" is not the word you're grasping for.

So basically you are saying that you want to take away the daytime talk radio entertainment from the old folks whom you picture in your mind sitting by the glow of their radio listening to Rush Limbaugh.

Sounds like a recipe for bringing a body in motion down on some young whippersnapper's head if they try anything of the sort.1) Apparently you aren't completely familiar with the concept of reading.

First, via the American Heritage Dictionary:

in·er·tia (ĭ-nûr'shə) Pronunciation Key
n.
1. Physics The tendency of a body to resist acceleration; the tendency of a body at rest to remain at rest or of a body in straight line motion to stay in motion in a straight line unless acted on by an outside force.
2. Resistance or disinclination to motion, action, or change: the inertia of an entrenched bureaucracy. So, apparently, I do indeed know what inertia is, and you apparently have an eighth grade understanding of the concept.

2) I never said anything about taking away talk radio from the old people, I was merely pointing out the demographical basis for the financial success of the programming, which you seem to mistake for a superior memetic.

Anything else? Or am I interrupting your radio time?

[Pro]

As I said, I have no problem letting the marketplace decide.

They only way I'd want to see them pulled from stations is if listenership declined and/or they became unprofitable.

However I would prohibit stations that carry these shows labeling them as "public affairs" on their license renewals (as many of them do). They are entertainment shows and should be labeled as such.