Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Libs Trying to "Fix" Talk Radio
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 214825" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p>I think in principle, most Americans believe in fairness and also believe in the freedom that all sides should be able to express their point of view. I actually think in most circles this is a given but there are extremes on both sides where this is truly not the case. But here is where this whole thing becomes a concern for me and it's based on legal precedence.</p><p> </p><p>Radio is a gov't regulated medium in that in order to broadcast, you must get a license to do so and then abide by the rules and regulations that govern this medium. One of the reasons Stern (besides a boatload of money) went to sat. radio was this medium is not regulated and therefore he has a wide open format that is only limited by his audience itself in whether they tune in or tune out.</p><p> </p><p>OK, now to the real point of this. For the most part, the internet itself isn't regulated but the means of it's delivery is. The phone lines and even the cables lines are a gov't regulated vehicle and with that in mind consider this scenario for just a moment.</p><p> </p><p>Talk radio is forever changed to be almost non-existent when Congress brings back the Fairness Doctrine. Now I happen to believe that won't be completely true but let's use the worse case situation for the moment. OK, Sean, Rush, Savage, etc. are out of a job but still have an audience demanding their presence. On the internet they go (I know it would be Sat. radio but humor me) and these guys are back up and running. They even gain a wider audience with all the new wireless devices out there so all of a sudden the voices that Congress tried to stampout has become even bigger. Some political aid in Washington who is trying to make a name for themselves and could care less about principles and freedoms(you know the kind of person that just threw out the immigration bill for example <img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/group1/wink.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":wink:" title="Wink :wink:" data-shortname=":wink:" />) decides under the Commerce Clause that being that the medium of internet transport is a regulated industry that the Fairness Doctrine also has application and now Congress widens it's footprint to include the internet. OK, it's done so what would we see here?</p><p> </p><p>Are we balanced enough in our discussions on the many topics here? Here's one for ya. Does management's view get open and equal time? Or how about this. There were 2 posters here who expressed views different form the majority here but also had a little bit of a meanstreak that went beyond proper edicate and have since been banned. Under this Fairness Doctrine application could a case be made that they would have to come back in order for this forum to comply with the law? </p><p> </p><p>I've always felt that power and the ability to exercise authority was like sex. If a little bit is good, a lot is even better and all the time is awesome! It is the truly a rare person who in that moment when given the opportunity for sex, when there's no chance of something going wrong such as you're with the one you love but that urge is there that you don't drop what you are doing and laspe into the throws of passion. Gov't power IMO is just like this and it take one principled person to resist it's allure. Do you truly have faith that the elected officials in Washington can resist the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 214825, member: 2189"] I think in principle, most Americans believe in fairness and also believe in the freedom that all sides should be able to express their point of view. I actually think in most circles this is a given but there are extremes on both sides where this is truly not the case. But here is where this whole thing becomes a concern for me and it's based on legal precedence. Radio is a gov't regulated medium in that in order to broadcast, you must get a license to do so and then abide by the rules and regulations that govern this medium. One of the reasons Stern (besides a boatload of money) went to sat. radio was this medium is not regulated and therefore he has a wide open format that is only limited by his audience itself in whether they tune in or tune out. OK, now to the real point of this. For the most part, the internet itself isn't regulated but the means of it's delivery is. The phone lines and even the cables lines are a gov't regulated vehicle and with that in mind consider this scenario for just a moment. Talk radio is forever changed to be almost non-existent when Congress brings back the Fairness Doctrine. Now I happen to believe that won't be completely true but let's use the worse case situation for the moment. OK, Sean, Rush, Savage, etc. are out of a job but still have an audience demanding their presence. On the internet they go (I know it would be Sat. radio but humor me) and these guys are back up and running. They even gain a wider audience with all the new wireless devices out there so all of a sudden the voices that Congress tried to stampout has become even bigger. Some political aid in Washington who is trying to make a name for themselves and could care less about principles and freedoms(you know the kind of person that just threw out the immigration bill for example :wink:) decides under the Commerce Clause that being that the medium of internet transport is a regulated industry that the Fairness Doctrine also has application and now Congress widens it's footprint to include the internet. OK, it's done so what would we see here? Are we balanced enough in our discussions on the many topics here? Here's one for ya. Does management's view get open and equal time? Or how about this. There were 2 posters here who expressed views different form the majority here but also had a little bit of a meanstreak that went beyond proper edicate and have since been banned. Under this Fairness Doctrine application could a case be made that they would have to come back in order for this forum to comply with the law? I've always felt that power and the ability to exercise authority was like sex. If a little bit is good, a lot is even better and all the time is awesome! It is the truly a rare person who in that moment when given the opportunity for sex, when there's no chance of something going wrong such as you're with the one you love but that urge is there that you don't drop what you are doing and laspe into the throws of passion. Gov't power IMO is just like this and it take one principled person to resist it's allure. Do you truly have faith that the elected officials in Washington can resist the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Libs Trying to "Fix" Talk Radio
Top