Genachowski Plans to Delete Fairness Doctrine From Code of Federal Regs

[alp227]

Source: Broadcasting & Cable

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski has told Congress he supports striking the so-called 'fairness doctrine' and a couple of its corollaries from the Code of Federal Regulations.

That came in a letter responding to a request from Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Greg Walden (R- Ore.), the chairs of the House Energy & Commerce Committee and Communications Subcommittee, that the FCC officially deep-six the doctrine, pointing to President Obama's directive earlier this year to federal agencies to review outdated regs still on the books.

"I fully support deleting the Fairness Doctrine and related provisions form the Code of Federal Regulations," he wrote in a letter dated June 6 (a copy of which was obtained by B&C), " so that there can be no mistake that what has been a dead letter is truly dead." He said that his staff was currently reviewing its regs, which has focused to date on rules still actively governing licensees, but that he expected they would recommend the deletion of the fairness doctrine and related corollaries, which provided for free response time for personal attacks and equal time for other candidates if a station endorsed a candidate in an editorial. The corollaries were repealed by the FCC in 2000.

"I look forward to effectuating this change when acting on the staff's recommendations and anticipate that the process can be completed in the near future," he wrote. He reiterated that he felt the doctrine had the potential to chill speech and should have been abandoned when it was more than two decades ago.

Read more: http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/469359-Genachowski_Plans_to_Delete_Fairness_Doctrine_From_Code_of_Federal_Regs.php

[calimary]

1. Fuck.

[WhiteTara]

3. +1

[FiveGoodMen]

2. Of course. Think what would happen to this country if we started requiring fairness!

[Autumn]

4. It must not be a necessary thing then.

I wonder why it has the potential to "chill speech". And "who's" speech will it chill.

[progrocktv]

5. Genachowski is a fucking IDIOT!

First ENCOURAGING metered billing, no neutrality for mobile devices and now this?!?!

THIS GUY IS SUCH A TOOL!

[Iliyah]

6. I thought it was already

obsolete, I mean, look at hate radio and fake news. They don't have to abide by the fairness doctrine thats why they can say and do anything untruthful without penalty.

[boppers]

18. In 1986, the Supreme Court ruled the FCC was not required to enforce it.

In 1987, the FCC abolished it.

This is just paperwork cleanup, removing regulations still on the books that are no longer enforced.

[No Elephants]

24. Not really. Whatg the FCC ceased to enforce, it can choose to enforce again.

Or, the Executive can require the FCC to enforce again, via Executive Order.

However, once the regs are wiped from the books, the only way to resume the Fairness Doctrine is to commence another lengthy and expensive public rule-making process. And, these days, we will never get rules as favorable to "fairness" as we did when the fairness rules were first promulgated.

So, no, this is a lot more significant than paperwork clean up.

[boppers]

28. "we will never get rules as favorable"...because the premises have changed.

The fairness doctrine was found to be legal specifically for a) limited spectrum applications, b) when there was a public commons, and c) fairly limited choices. It was created was back in the early days of AM radio, when a home radio tuner could get maybe 10 stations at most, and sustained up to the end of TV being dominated by three (three!) channels.

It doesn't apply to satellite radio, cable TV, satellite TV, web TV, web radio, websites, (etc.) because those all fail the third point (limited choices)... and analog TV has since been replaced with digital, and the AM spectrum has been added to by FM and satellite, rendering even the limited argument on radio a bit... challenging.

Personally, I don't want DU to be required to have 50% of it's articles to be from freepers, or my local NPR station to be required to carry Rush Limbaugh, in order for DU and NPR to be "fair".

[ooglymoogly]

8. Yes, Genachowski is an idiot, but then, that is why he is exactly where he is.

I think we need to look a little higher up the food chain. Who is pulling the strings on this giant leap to the right. "Outdated regulations" indeed, almost as priceless as "Looking forward" to cover up crimes.

[saras]

12. +1000

He is indeed a tool, so we must look at who has hold of the handle.

[Jackpine Radical]

19. There's a lot of outdated stuff on the books--

like the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution, which are no longer in force. Except maybe for the 2nd one.

[Kingofalldems]

7. Fox News defenders will like this one

:shrug:

[sofa king]

22. It also reminds me of something K. Olbermann just said.

One of the things he complained about--or at least noted--in his Rolling Stone interview is that his new job is with a television network that does nothing but television, allowing him the freedom to report that he did not enjoy under NBC, which had many other interests and legal obligations which KO was not permitted to mention and which sometimes killed the stories he wanted to report on.

But yes, more specifically, non-enforcement of the Fairness Doctrine is what allows Fox News to be "fair and balanced," in quotes because it's total bullshit.

[blackspade]

9. What an asshole.

This crap never seems to stop.
I mean seriously, in response to GOP douchebags?
It seems the GOP gets everything it wants these days and progressives get shit.

[No Elephants]

23. A Democrat currently heads the Executive Branch, of which the FCC is part.

Inconvenient truth.

[blackspade]

27. I'm well aware of that.

That is what makes his acquiescing to two GOP senators even more galling.

[Bandit]

10. It really doesn't mater any longer

Not all that much is broadcast any more. It is mostly Cable Networks and they are not controlled by the fairness doctrine anyway.. It would not effect Fox News even the slightest if it were reinstated..

[Festivito]

11. It needs to be strengthened in relation to cost of entering each medium.

If FM is full and it costs a million to enter it, then each issue needs a million dollars of attention unless it gets a fair hearing. Just say'n, just think'n.

[cstanleytech]

14. Dont hold your breath

The people who own the media probably own more than enough in congress and the senate (both democrat and republican) not to mention seats on the SCOTUS to squash almost any attempts at implementing the doctrine.

[fascisthunter]

13. so they can propagandize citizens more?

fuck this! THIS is why America is misinformed... and watch the idiots in our own party go along with the right wing AGAIN.

[boppers]

17. It was abolished in 1987.

24 years ago.

I don't know why Americans aren't aware of this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine#Revocation

edit: math

[U4ikLefty]

21. water is wet.

[placton]

15. another Obadem!

I am so ovah him

[midnight]

16. What a bunch of wieners.... You just knew they were up to something more nasty than a bulge

in a pair of grey shorts..

[robcon]

20. The Fairness Doctrine is at loggerheads with the First Amendment

You can be for one, but not the other.

[No Elephants]

25. With all due respect, bullshit. We regulate plenty on the public airwaves and the SCOTUS

has repeatedly held that such regulation is Constitutional. I can't speak for this activist neocon SCOTUS, of course, only for Justices who actually respect the rule of law, the Constitutional balance of powers and judicial doctrines like stare decisis.

[boppers]

29. We justified regulating it because it was such a limited resource.

Those limits have been thoroughly broken... we no longer have 3 major VHF TV stations and one AM radio band.

[No Elephants]

26. Another instance in which a Dem President does that which would cause an uproar if done by a Rethug.

Occasionally, the reverse happens, but as our nation keeps marching to the right, most of the nation's policies are Republican nowadays.

[George Wythe]

30. Don't stop there, delete all of the mindless regulations.

[onehandle]

31. FCC chairman agrees to strike Fairness Doctrine from rulebooks

Source: The Hill

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski said his agency will remove the Fairness Doctrine from the rulebooks in response to a recent request from House Republicans.

"I fully support deleting the Fairness Doctrine and related provisions from the Code of Federal Regulations, so that there can be no mistake that what has been a dead letter is truly dead," Genachowski wrote in a letter Monday to House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.).

"I look forward to effectuating this change when acting on the staff's recommendations and anticipate that the process can be completed in the near future."

Genachowski has frequently voiced his opposition to the rule, which required broadcasters to cover controversial public issues in a manner deemed fair and balanced by the FCC.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/165369-fcc-chairman-agrees-to-strike-fairness-doctrine-from-rule-books

[Liberal Veteran]

32. Fuck you, Ronald Reagan.

Will we never be rid of the damage you did to America?

[Poll_Blind]

33. Appointed by Obama. (sigh)

PB

[FirstLight]

34. wait, what?

FCC Chair can remove a rule like this from the rulebooks at the *request* of house rethugs?

this doesn't seem like proper protocol,

but then again, like the current news channels and bullshit we hear in the media has been held up to any standard is laughable

[cstanleytech]

38. It was abandoned decades ago

so this in of itself isnt a big deal, the real big deal was when the republicans sold us out decades ago to do away with it.

[boppers]

35. See also:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4875961

It's dead, and has been dead, for a long time now.

[Angry Dragon]

36. We don't need any of that fairness stuff

justs gets in the way of hate and bigotry and lies

[City Lights]

37. Swell. Just swell. nt

[RVN VET]

39. Tell me about hope and change again.

I'm about outta hope. At least Obama went after the Wall Street criminals who wrecked the economy; and he close Guantanamo, eliminated Bush's tax-cuts, and fought fiercely for the public employees' unions in Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and . . .no, I can't snark about it. It's beyond depressing.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

40. We knew it all along; but it's official now...

Rethuglicans and the FCC are opposed to fairness.

[blackspade]

41. Posted yesterday!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4875961

[Liberty Belle]

42. AAaaaaaaghhhhhhh! Have Democrats gone nuts?

We need to ENSHRINE AND BRING BACK the Fairness Doctrine to get nuts like Limbaugh off the air.

[Demeter]

43. He'd strike one as unenlightened

but I'd recommend striking HIM, first.

[Javaman]

44. While the Fairness Doctrine was denuded years ago...

it being removed from the books effectively eliminates any shred of hope of it ever returning.

one more step toward fascism.

I shake my head and wonder what our "elected" and appointed officials think when they do such things. but then again, certain actions don't occur in a vacuum.

We are dying.

[jmowreader]

45. In the modern era, ownership restrictions are more important than the Fairness Doctrine

If you go down the list of exceptions in the Fairness Doctrine (internet, cable television, satellite radio), you will quickly see it's basically irrelevant in the modern era. Even if we had a Fairness Doctrine that was in full force, Fox News and Breitbart would be allowed to continue just as they are because they're exempt from the Doctrine's provisions.

The problem we have today is the loosened ownership restrictions:

The Communications Act of 1934, if I remember correctly, allowed one company to own an AM radio station, an FM radio station, a television station and a newspaper company that produced a morning and an afternoon newspaper. (In Spokane, the Cowles family owned KHQ-AM, KHQ-FM, KHQ-TV and the two newspapers, but the Spokesman-Review had a different staff using different offices in the building than the Spokane Daily Chronicle did.)

In 1992, Congress allowed a company to own more than two radio stations in the same market.

The Communications Act of 2006 allowed one company to own one-third of all the media outlets in town, in any combination.

Michael Powell's FCC upped this to 45 percent.

In the Old Days a right-wing station would meet the requirements of the Fairness Doctrine by building a huge fancy set for their right wing show, bring on highly attractive wingers with beautiful voices and expensive clothing to spread the RW gospel, and then at the end have a five-minute rebuttal by finding the squeakiest, ugliest liberal in town and putting him on camera in a dimly lit, unadorned studio in a cheap suit and no makeup to talk about how wrong the preceding 55 minutes were. The problem is, now two rich RW zealots can come to town, buy 90 percent of the media between them and crowd out the opposition, which of course goes full-tilt RW crazy to attempt to compete.

If you want to hear something besides far-right blather on the air, you need to get back to the pre-Bush I ownership rules.

[Vidar]

46. Deleting Genachowski would be a far better idea.