Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Fairness Doctrine.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Hawkeye-X Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-04 04:51 PM
Original message
Fairness Doctrine.
Let's review the old Fairness Doctrine before St. Raygun set the motion to destroy it.

(Stolen from wikipedia.com)

The Fairness Doctrine was a policy enforced in the United States by the Federal Communications Commission that required broadcast licensees to present controversial issues of public importance, and to present such issues in a fair and balanced manner.

In Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC (1969), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Fairness Doctrine, under challenges that it violated the First Amendment.

The Doctrine was enforced throughout the entire history of the FCC (and its precursor, the Federal Radio Commission) until 1987, when the FCC repealed it in the Syracuse Peace Conference decision in 1987. The primary reason was that the commission felt that the doctrine had grown to inhibit rather than enhance debate, and due to the many media voices in the marketplace at the time, the doctrine was probably unconstitutional.

The two corollary rules, the personal attack rule and the political editorial rule, remained in practice even after the repeal of the fairness doctrine. The personal attack rule is pertinent whenever a person or small group is subject to a character attack during a broadcast. Stations must notify such persons or groups within a week of the attack, send them transcripts of what was said, and offer the opportunity to respond on the air. The political editorial rule applies when a station broadcasts editorials endorsing or opposing candidates for public office, and stipulates that the candidates not endorsed be notified and allowed a reasonable opportunity to respond.

The Court of Appeals for Washington D.C. ordered the FCC to justify these corollary rules in light of the decision to axe the fairness doctrine. The commission did not do so promptly, and in 2000 the ordered their repeal.


If we had an opportunity to rewrite the Fairness Doctrine based on the light of the conservative media bullshit, how would you write it, and make sure it is enforced fairly?

Hawkeye-X
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Senior citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-04 09:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. Any publication or broadcast outlet

which serves an area where it does not give at least 50% of it's news/editorial space or airtime to views and opinions that reflect those of the simple majority of registered voters in that area, shall, upon petition to the FCC by an elected representative of such voters, along with appropriate documentation, forfeit their license to broadcast in that area, or in the case of print media, upon petition by a local elected representative to the local District Attorney's office, be ordered to cut the number of issues distributed in that area by half to allow for fair competition.

This shall not apply in areas where the views and opinions of the majority of registered voters are already given adequate expression by means of similar and comparable media.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 05:01 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC