mfrybeasley
119288
2158
27
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Fairness-Doctrine
Jul 2, 2022 9:36 PM
mfrybeasley
119288
2158
27
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Fairness-Doctrine
Grillparzer
The Fairness Doctrine applied to broadcast media. Everything on cable and the net wouldn't be effected.
Ihatedecidingonausername
But this site doesn't even believe in this. There are plenty of topics commenters won't allow expression of alternative viewpoints
totolapse
That was tied into limited airwaves/frequencies per memory.
Filanwizard
It probably would not end Fox News, cable stations are not licensed which is why they can show anything
Filanwizard
Broadcast networks honestly still sit pretty fair.
EdwardEH
But what would that do to fox entertainment news?
Perfzilla
wait, this isn't Jeopardy
inkasep1
I'll take Reality is Bullshit for 400.
cbale2000
You realize this would hurt left-wing news FAR more than right-wing news, right? Left wing media outnumbers the right like 10:1.
cbale2000
Also, it only applies to broadcast licenses, meaning cable and internet are totally unaffected.
cbale2000
The entire premise was that there isn't enough radio spectrum for a lot of channels so the few channels that exist should be "fair" to all.
cbale2000
... but that logic ONLY applies to limited radio spectrum, and with the advent of digital TV, it arguably doesn't even affect that anymore.
RobertTheBruise
How can so many people be so stupid they can't understand something as simple as the first amendment?
peggleforscale
When people are emotional they don’t care about consequences, don’t forget people tend to pick and choose how they interpret laws and which
peggleforscale
ones benefit their cause. But yeah people forget about freedom of speech.
OkButWhyWereTheyFilming
Just another checkmark on the list of terrible stuff that Reagan did.
DorkJedi
Useless today. FCC only has authority over broadcast. Internet and cable are immune.
zoobbb
So Reagan was a piece of shit President whose policies are hurting us 40 years later, what will it be like 40 years from now from Trump…
zoobbb
I’m honestly scared.
flynnman504
"There is no explicit constitutional right to the truth" - Clarence Thomas probably
JustAPileOfCats
Thomas just wants the 9th Amendment abolished.
Tumescentpie
And the 13th
DrKidemonas
And the 14th. And Obergefell. And due process.
SomeDetroitGuy
The Fairness Doctrine doesn't concern itself with the truth. It requires news to give lies equal weight and equal time to the truth.
loot1heal2self
Birds aren’t real.
rbudrick
Including bald eagles.
DestructorKitten
As someone who was YOUNG in the 80s, hearing this makes me wonder how many of our societal problems can be traced back to Reagan.
JackDawesLovesmybigwhat
Computer Fraud and abuse act, Robert Bork and his scary views on monopoly power, there's more I'm not remembering.
dartmaster666
Reagan didn't remove it. The FCC repealed it. Don't be so gullible. Even @OP's source says this.
crapybarra
Before we can do any of this we need to remove the 1929 House Cap and then we need to get some capable Democrats in the right places.
conjuratio
Supremes will strike that down too
SomeDetroitGuy
I mean, it is blatantly Unconstitutional so yeah, they would. Why should news be required to carry Trump's election lies? Or lies about
SomeDetroitGuy
vaccines? Why should they be required to give equal weight to climate skeptics and climate scientists?
Furyustyles
Well the democrats on the FCC panel at the time voted to do away with it as well.
LurkerOfDarkness
Diana Ross has a lot to answer for....
imPatience23
We are reaping the rewards of the Reagan revolution. Ignorant, poor, down trodden. Just the way his puppet masters wanted
BryanTenn
Damn. I just Listened to Master of Puppets.
Ikusame
People say Trump was bad, they dont quiet realize the hell of Reagan that we're still living day to day.
dartmaster666
THIS IS ALL A LIE. "In 1985 FCC released a report stating that the doctrine hurt the public interest and violated free speech rights of ¹
dartmaster666
broadcasters guaranteed by the First Amendment." Then, "June 1987, Congress attempted to preempt the FCC decision and codify the Fairness ²
dartmaster666
Doctrine. The bill passed but the legislation was vetoed by President Ronald Reagan. Congress was unable to muster enough votes to ³
dartmaster666
Reagan's veto." SO, THE FCC REMOVED IT, NOT REAGAN. He just vetoed the LAW congress tried to pass which violated the first amendment ⁴
dartmaster666
of broadcasters. ⁵
dartmaster666
@OP source even says the FCC repealed it. "In 1987 the FCC formally repealed the fairness doctrine...." ⁶
WhellerNG
The fairness doctrine didn’t apply to cable networks because they don’t have broadcast licences.
captainnewbi
if 99.99% of scientists agree on something and 1 person disagrees, they should not have equal news coverage. the fairness doc is crap...
bigheeb76
Murdock was the one. Now see what he runs? Faux News.
armagetz
Which never would have been subject to Fairness doctrine anyway….so what’s your point?
SteveMND
Now you'd THINK that with all their lambasting of the "Mainstream Media," the Right would be ALL ABOUT forcing equal time, but obviously no.
dartmaster666
The FCC repealed it, not Reagan.
PballQhead
Wouldn't stand today. It was passed to make sure a scarce resource, broadcast frequencies, was appropriately shared. The advent of cable is>
PballQhead
what killed it - the essentially unlimited nature of cable broadcasting meant that no one channel could monopolize a meaningful part of the>
dartmaster666
No, the FCC repealed it because it violated broadcaster's first amendment rights. Not Reagan. @OP's source even says so.
PballQhead
spectrum. I'd bet my next paycheck it would lose 9-0.
rbudrick
Yet, I would not today.
saeheria
Republicans would oppose this, since they are reliant on lies and propaganda to maintain power with their supporters
FlawedSquad
Their supporters don't seem to care that they out-and-out LIE. It's the party's bread & butter.
dartmaster666
Funny, this post is an out and out lie. Look at the source. The FCC repealed it.
SomeDetroitGuy
Why would the Republicans oppose forcing news media to give their lies equal weight to the truth? What a shitty take. This is a Republican's
SomeDetroitGuy
wet dream - every lie they spill is required by law to be treated JUST LIKE the truth??? They'd gucking LOVE that.
Izdleve
Forced "fairness" is reporting has proven to be a bad idea. Every time someone wanted to talk climate change, vaccinations, insert widely
Izdleve
Accepted truth here, they'd have to find someone who disagreed and then you had 2 people arguing as equals over a scientific fact with a
Izdleve
Real split of 99% vs 1% which would cause people to "get confused" and see them as equal talking points. It would be nice to force harmful
Izdleve
Outlets to tell the truth too l, even as just a dissenting opinion, but it opens up reporting on facts to look like reporting on opinions.
tiberiuswhythecrapcantweuseunderscoresxxvii
I'm not opposed to this, but note that they'd take advantage of it and say, "okay, present both sides of climate change, evolution, etc" :|
myownalarum
It had to be accurate and factual as well, which is what makes it work
SomeDetroitGuy
No, it explicitly DID NOT have to be accurate and factual. It explicitly REQUIRED THE NEWS TO PUSH LIES so they can be "fair" to the liars.
SIGMA920
You can be factual while also editorializing and being biased. Being accurate is even easier.
JCstormz
not just put back but updated for the internet age
[deleted]
[deleted]
Base841
As you say, the feds got involved regulating broadcasters since they used the public RF spectrum. Doesn't apply to cable or Internet. cont..
Base841
... New laws affecting content on the Internet to accomplish the same as Fairness Doctrine did. PLUS return FD to broadcast!!!
gadaboutpoet
YES. PLEASE.
crapybarra
*Alex Jones* let me tell you theses reptilian commies have forced me to call my news "entertainment" but i sweat it's the absolute TRUTH!"
crapybarra
and the sorry fucks will believe him or just not care. They are junkies and they are hooked. They need to be rehab'd but first, like all
crapybarra
junkies, the gotta want it and that only happens after they hit rock bottom. Gonna be a long shitty ride, people.
Imalwaysready
How?
snova595
From snopes: What's True The FCC did abandon the Fairness Doctrine under the Reagan administration in 1987. 1/
snova595
What's False The Fairness Doctrine applied only to broadcast licensees, and as a cable television channel, Fox News would in all /2
snova595
likelihood never have been constrained by the doctrine's requirement to present a range of viewpoints on every issue.
snova595
But yes, it needs to be brought back and updated.
inkasep1
Please no. This was and still is a bad idea. It SOUNDS good in theory, but---
inkasep1
There's a reason that most of the people pushing for this are the BoTh SiDeS folks.
thebookofknowledge3000
armagetz
Yeah, I don’t think the proponents of this realize this includes making segments showing the anti-vax perspective, and covering it (1)
armagetz
((2)respectfully as something reasonable.
JCstormz
"opponents of the vaccine, has made x,y,z claims, there are no scientific evidence to support such claims"
just4thelolz
Do other countries have something like it?
THISISYELLING
Why would it matter if they did or not?
just4thelolz
Would be interesting to compare and contrast and to see the effect of it in modern media.
staceyjorgenson31415
https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/info_sht/b304.htm Canada ??
sambaah05
Does that cover cable/satellite?
just4thelolz
Thank you!
SomeDetroitGuy
Huh. Kind of surprised that Canadian broadcasters are legally required to spread lies and treat them as equal to the truth.
SIGMA920
Canada also forces a lot of investment into Canadian created media:
SIGMA920
https://www.canada.ca/en/radio-television-telecommunications/news/2018/08/crtc-requires-the-production-of-canadian-original-content.html
SomeDetroitGuy
The Fairness Doctrine was blatantly Unconstitutional and was horrible policy. It would require anti-vaxxers to get equal time to health care
SomeDetroitGuy
professionals. It would require Big Lie proponents to get equal time to election experts. It would require climate skeptics to get equal
SomeDetroitGuy
time to image scientists. In short, it would REQUIRE news organizations to spend HALF THEIR TIME LYING.
DeathScourge
Vs lying all the time???
WhyWhatWhereandWTF
Unfortunately the fairness doctrine only covered the Air Waves. Cable, or satellite is not is not government owned.
WhyWhatWhereandWTF
The reason they needed it gone was because conglomerates wanted to be able to force local stations to air their propaganda
dartmaster666
Where did you get that shit? The FCC repealed it because it violated broadcaster's 1sr amendment rights, not Reagan. Educate yourself.
WhyWhatWhereandWTF
I lived through it dipshit. I was part of the a group who opposed the repeal in court dumbass.
dartmaster666
I lived through as well douche canoe. The FCC did repeal it. That is the truth. I guess you can't handle it asshat.
WhyWhatWhereandWTF
What an idiot.