Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your post is a perfect example of why the Fairness Doctrine was useful in the past and can be in the future. Each time that you use "left" in your post above, replace it with "right." To ignore Fox News and radio hosts such as Rush Limbaugh, when you speak of propaganda, illustrates your obvious bias, which I am willing to be you adopted from your chronic exposure to Fox News and other hate-spewing right wing "journalists."
All the Fairness Doctrine would do, as it did in the past, is demand that "Fair and Balanced" be more than a fairytale catch phrase.
What about a little thing called freedom of speech? Do you actually think the mainstream media is "fair and balanced"? If it were, Obama would never have won this election. They reported on what they wanted to be heard. This is why the Fairness Doctrine a crock, designed for those that do not want both sides made public.
What about a little thing called freedom of speech? Do you actually think the mainstream media is "fair and balanced"? If it were, Obama would never have won this election. They reported on what they wanted to be heard. This is why the Fairness Doctrine a crock, designed for those that do not want both sides made public.
I chose the two extremes, but yes there is a continuum for this with other news outlets, whether TV or radio, fitting somewhere on the continuum.
But you honestly don't think that improvements can be made to the way in which news, more often distortions, are presented throughout major media outlets? You don't think it is a problem the way in which these outlets are increasingly consolidated in large-scale corporate conglomerates? Personally, I do. I wish that Obama would take up, at least to some degree, the Fairness Doctrine. But he is against so...
But as this forum illustrates, people often have a hard time even locating the facts of an event, because different media outlets distort those facts by inserting commentary as fact. That's a problem that, in my opinion, needs addressing at some point, but the economy and the Iraq war first please....
Then mandate a FAIRNESS channel or media outlet. You cannot constitutionally shut down a radio station because its content is not fair and balanced. You can't even force them to be fair and balanced. What you can do, is create a fair and balanced source and let the viewers decide if is or not. There is no way within the confines of the constitution they can force this through. It will be taken down by the supreme court.
Being fair and perfect does not matter here, freedom does. Freedom is not perfect, but it is as close as you;re gonna get in this world and life and I'll take it over anything else. We don't live in a perfect world and we all know this.
I watch a variety or news sources, but mostly research for myself because they all have their own slant. When you don't know what else to say you can blame Limbaugh and Fox, but that only makes it apparent you cannot discuss anything intelligently like most of your ilk.
I watch a variety or news sources, but mostly research for myself because they all have their own slant. When you don't know what else to say you can blame Limbaugh and Fox, but that only makes it apparent you cannot discuss anything intelligently like most of your ilk.
Now that last part you definitely got from Limbaugh.
Today on CNN, their guest said Obama will absolutely shut down right wing radio in American. How in God's name can he F-ing do this in the United states of America?
Some moron said it, so it must be true....oh the outrage!
You spend time watching and listening to propaganda but you dont spend three minutes to look up information that's right at your fingertips and free.
Obama's press secretary, Michael Ortiz, told B&C that Obama "considers this debate to be a distraction from the conversation we should be having about opening up the airwaves and modern communications to as many diverse viewpoints as possible." Obama is more concerned about achieving diversity through "media-ownership caps, network neutrality, public broadcasting, as well as increasing minority ownership of broadcasting and print outlets."
Obama Says No To Fairness Doctrine (http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6575718.html?q=obama+%22fairness+doctrine%22 - broken link)
God you really do need everything explained to you don't you? He already has the plans under way. This was all but confirmed by some of his staffers. It's a done deal. I don't care what he told you 4 months ago buddy. He waffles and lies about everything, why would this be any different?
I'm not afraid of the Fairness Doctrine at all. Passing this would be political suicide to the Democrats, and they know it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As do I for the "little one" comment. *group hug*
