::::::::
Sorry if I am a broken record on the following subject but as I've learned from the GOP, things bear repeating over and over so that people can revisit any given "issue".
So: can anyone tell me why the Fairness Doctrine is such a big taboo even with President Obama and some Democrats opposing it? It was, understandably a Republican who took it out because the Republicans wanted to hand over everything to the corpies. But why didn't Clinton try to put it back rather than rubber stamping the FCC minus that Fairness Doctrine? Fast forward to now and WHY is Obama opposing it?
The easy big money access to hate radio on the right is made possible and enhanced by lack of any Fairness Doctrine. The right has billionaires like Koch a billionaire from Texas (?) and like Rupert Murdoch who pump money into Fox News and networks on right wing radio that carry things like Michael Savage and Rush Limbaugh.
These billionaires and corpies get a huge return on their patronage: They want to gain two things: 1)political advantage; AND 2) profit from all the ratings gleaned from hate audiences being sitrred up on the right. They both set the agenda on the right and reap the profits from the seeds of hate they sow.
The Fairness Doctrine was put in back in the late 20's I believe just for that reason: to keep big money from dominating the airwaves with one sided views only they could afford to pay for while the other side couldn't afford to pay for the opposing view being aired.
So why is it sacrosanct to allow continued whipping up hatred for political control plus reaping corporate profit (ratings)? Why are key Democrats opposing it when it is undermining Obama's reform aganda and presidency ? Is it because they the Democrat leaders are corporate lackeys too that serve profits rather than the American people?
So what if the Republicans scream censorship ?You know they don't want fairness now when they have a corporate monopoly in every faction of the media. Independent ownership of mass media outlets went from 80 under Clinton to 5 under Bush. It's no wonder Republicans oppose any fairness hindering their 'free speech' (aka hate), but why do Democrats have any problem with levelling the playing field in favor of including everyone in the views presented so the public can hear all sides?
Since Ross Perot, you've seen a corresponding drop in 3rd party representation in the media. Look at how Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul were both treated, let alone Ralph Nader, locked out of conventions, locked out of debates...
We NEED the Fairness Doctrine. It would even be to the Republican party's future benefit since the Republican party is decaying and splintering and if they want a fighting chance of getting a 3rd independent party going, they're going to need it on the 'right' also. And the left has been shut out of fair representation by lack of a Fairness Doctrine (including time provision).
Can anyone tell me why it would be opposed by Obama and some Democrats in Congress ?
