Next Bailout: Liberal Media?

Posted February 26th, 2009 at 12.54pm in Ongoing Priorities.

Over the past few months, we’ve seen a seemingly endless parade of bailouts from Washington — for banks, for automobiles, and just about everything else. Today, Congress may be voting on yet another bailout — this time for liberal media. This afternoon, the Senate is expected to take up a proposal by Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois which would clear the way for a restoration of measures designed to chill speech considered too conservative. The Durbin measure is being offered as a substitute to a contrary measure by Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina which would bar the FCC from re-imposing the Fairness Doctrine.

Interestingly, the Durbin amendment doesn’t actually address the Fairness Doctrine itself. Supporters of such a direct attempt to reimpose the doctrine know that such an direct attempt to return to the speech-muzzling rules of the past would be doomed to fail. Notably, even President Obama has declined to support such a step. Instead, the measure would simply require the FCC to promote “diversity” in media ownership and to ensure that broadcast stations licenses are used “in the public interest.”

But who’s to say after all what constitutes proper “diversity” and what is in the “public interest?” Would diversity be enhanced if there were less time devoted to conservative views? Would the “public interest” be served by increasing airtime for Bill Press and Air America?

Just a few days ago the pro-regulation advocacy group Free Press issued a report entitled “The Fairness Doctrine Distraction,” outlining just such a strategy. The problem, the group has long argued, is an imbalance in talk radio - specifically too many conservative voices. But the solution is not the Fairness Doctrine per se. The solution is stricter ownership rules governing who can hold a broadcast license, stricter “localism” and other public interest requirements, and strict rules on the Internet to enforce “neutrality” there.

This is the Left’s agenda for “correcting” the “problem” of too many conservative views on the air. Senator Durbin seems to have taken it to heart. No one should be fooled — it’s the Fairness Doctrine under a different name.

Author: James Gattuso
Interact: Sphere
Share This

Tagged with fairness doctrine
First Amendment

15 Comments

February 26, 2009 Judy Moody, Villa Rica, GA writes:

I guess I just don’t get it….I have never been forced to listen to Rush, Sean, Neal, etc. so why can’t those that prefer not to hear these people simply turn off their radios! JM

February 26, 2009 Michael S. Miller, Florida writes:

Okay, you gotta know this monstrosity is going to pass. So my question is, what are we going to do to fix it when it does pass?

February 26, 2009 Carl Brennan writes:

The socialist’s have a arrived and it is very obvious that people like durbin, is another one of these idiots in washington that he thinks he cannot be critized or approached on all the idiot maneuvers, that is happening in the country.

February 26, 2009 The Game’s Afoot: Durbin Introduces “Diversity” Amendment | Unfair Doctrine writes:

[...] The Foundry: [T]he Durbin amendment doesn’t actually address the Fairness Doctrine itself. Supporters of such a direct attempt to reimpose the doctrine know that such an direct attempt to return to the speech-muzzling rules of the past would be doomed to failure. Notably, even President Obama has declined to support such a step. Instead, the measure would simply require the FCC to promote “diversity” in media ownership and to ensure that broadcast stations licenses are used “in the public interest.” But who’s to say after all what constitutes proper “diversity” and what is in the “public interest?” Would diversity be enhanced if there were less time devoted to conservative views? Would the “public interest” be served by increasing airtime for Bill Press and Air America? Just a few days ago the pro-regulation advocacy group Free Press issued a report entitled “The Fairness Doctrine Distraction,” outlining just such a strategy. The problem, the group has long argued, is an imbalance in talk radio - specifically too many conservative voices. But the solution is not the Fairness Doctrine per se. The solution: stricter ownership rules governing who can hold a broadcast license, stricter “localism” and other public interest requirements, and strict rules on the Internet to enforce “neutrality” there. This was written by Charlie Martin (Colorado). Posted on Thursday, February 26, 2009, at 12:14 pm. Filed under News, Read the whole thing. Tagged Congress, Free Speech, Talk Radio. Bookmark the permalink. Follow comments here with the RSS feed. Post a comment or leave a trackback. [...]

February 26, 2009 Jim Horstman, Ohio writes:

Immediately after George W. was elected, the libs
and media orchestrated the bashing,filling empty
heads with their mantra so much that no Republican
on earth could be elected..so we got Hussain Obama
and we are in BIG TIME TROUBLE. GOD HELP THE USA !!!!

February 26, 2009 liberty 4 usa writes:

Despite the deceptive method they choose- the end game is to protect the ignorance of the voters.

The legal fight will overturn this as an abridgment of free speech- eventually. However, the length of the fight will kill the industry.

If congress would try to regulate the owners of churches for diversity purposes it would effectively be the same.

Of course this is not allowed and is a direct attack on free speech, thus, if the constitution is upheld, this will fail.

However by that time, the damage may have been done, and that is the real danger here.

February 26, 2009 Spiritof76, New Hampshire writes:

I am afraid all the things that are being done in Washington-piling debt, printing money, destroying capitalism, destroying the Constitution including the first ten amendments- are not going to end well in the near future. When law is usurped for political power, people will be left with nothing but direct action to restore our way of life including the most revered US Constitution and the founding principles.
I pray to God that course reversal to freedom will be peaceful.

February 26, 2009 Barb -mn writes:

Many people are waking up and know where the truth is told. People Would rather be told the truth then see and hear liberal media. This is weakening the ratings of the media as it should. And Obama’s ability to indoctrinate the country. They’ll be subsidized (for continued indoctrination purposes)if it isn’t stopped, and then he’ll/they’ll ban the truth be told…unfairness doctrine.

February 27, 2009 Is anything ever really Fair? « Right Wing Chicks writes:

[...] James Gattuso at the Foundry has some information about the Durbin Bill that has been introduced to counter the measure put forth by DeMint. [...]

February 27, 2009 Ann Sweeney, Florida writes:

Recently, here in Jacksonville, a “Progressive” radio station started operating. I tried listening to it, but all I heard was buzz-words, catchphrases, and campaign slogans. On conservative radio I get facts and figures to back up the opinions. I can ignore the showmanship (i.e. bluster) in order to get the truth about the issue being discussed.

February 27, 2009 ra,ohio writes:

They won’t stop until WE stop THEM.

February 27, 2009 Tim AZ writes:

Maybe its time to bombard Station owners with calls telling them to Lawyer up and fight this. It’s time they stand up and earn the money they’ve made from talk radio shows. I think a class action lawsuit would be quite effective. Of course it would be stalled for years. At the same time we could contact all liberal media outlets and inform them that their advertisers will be boycotted if they do not join the lawsuit. We could even contact advertisers and tell them the same thing. I believe this would put massive pressure on our representatives and their Messiah Obama to vaporize this bill long before it ever went to court.

February 27, 2009 Jim, Virginia writes:

Correct me if i’m wrong, but all elected Presidents swear to defend and protect the Constitution of The United States of America. I would think that if they do not act accordingly then that would be an impeachable offense.

March 1, 2009 Alexa CT writes:

I am extremely sick of journalists being activists for liberal causes instead of journalists..I for one have started contacting newhour advertisers on ABC, NBC and CBS letting them know that I will not support their products as long as they support these so called news outlets. I do not want pro Dem or pro Rep. I want hard questions asked, I want facts, not opinions and fawning, I want investigations!!! I think if a few million people followed suit perhaps we could bring about change there. Our Republic must have a free and true press to survive and thrive. It is worth fighting for!

August 28, 2009 Video: Chief Diversity Officer Seeks To Stifle Free Speech | Conservative Principles Now writes:

[...] written about this issue before, here and here, but the Fairness Doctrine is rearing its ugly head again. This time, however, its being pushed by [...]

The Heritage Foundation - Leadership for America

The Foundry