[PREV - COG_ZERO] [TOP]
FAIRNESS_GLOW_OF_HINDSIGHT
February 18, 2021
In a piece on the Fairness Doctrine
from 2005 up at the fair.org site, https://fair.org/extra/the-fairness-doctrine/
Steve Rendall tries to correct some
misconceptions, but I think he misses
the mark in some places.
"... it did not require that each program be
internally balanced, nor did it mandate equal
time for opposing points of view. And it didn’t
require that the balance of a station’s program
lineup be anything like 50/50."
"Nor, as Rush Limbaugh has repeatedly claimed,
was the Fairness Doctrine all that stood
between conservative talkshow hosts and the
dominance they would attain after the
doctrine’s repeal. In fact, not one Fairness
Doctrine decision issued by the FCC had ever
concerned itself with talkshows."
"The Fairness Doctrine simply prohibited
stations from broadcasting from a single
perspective, day after day, without
presenting opposing views.
"Indeed, when it was in place, citizen groups
used the Fairness Doctrine as a tool to expand
speech and debate. For instance, it prevented
stations from allowing only one side to be
heard on ballot measures."
"As a guarantor of balance and inclusion,
the Fairness Doctrine was no panacea. It was
somewhat vague, and depended on the vigilance of
listeners and viewers to notice imbalance."
I think Steve Rendall underplays the inevitable
chilling effect of a vague rule that requires
"voluntary compliance".
My impression of those days was the networks did
their best to not say very much-- you don't have It could easily be
to worry about contrasting views if you don't that Limbaugh was
have any view in the first place. right on this one.
Certainly the
timing supports
that thinking:
the Fairness
Doctrine was
dropped in 1987,
and Limbaugh was
picked up by a
New York station
in 1988.
--------
[NEXT - PRIDE_AND_PREJUDICE]