Don’t be fooled by President Obama’s purported renunciation of the Fairness Doctrine last week. The far left fully intends to use a new regulatory scheme, the Son of The Fairness Doctrine, to regulate conservative talk radio. As Erick Erickson wrote last week on Red State, “Congress will restrict how many stations a company can own in a market. They’ll also require advisory boards for each station and make it easier to address consumer complaints against stations.” Although the left has backed away from the Fairness Doctrine because it is ineffective, they are gathering support for an attack on conservative talk radio.
White House spokesman Ben LaBolt told FOXNews.com that “As the President stated during the campaign, he does not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated.” Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) said to The Washington Times, “I’m glad President Obama finally confirmed his opposition to the Fairness Doctrine … but many Democrats in Congress are still pushing it. With the support of the new administration, now is the time for Congress to take a stand against this kind of censorship.”
The Center for American Progress has discussed the problem in detail in their paper titled ”The Structural Imbalance of Talk Radio” where they argue:
Our analysis in the spring of 2007 of the 257 news/talk stations owned by the top five commercial station owners reveals that 91 percent of the total weekday talk radio programming is conservative, and 9 percent is progressive.
A more detailed explanation is that the Center for American Progress blames ”two primary explanations typically put forth to explain the disparities between conservative and progressive talk radio programming:
- The “repeal” of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 gave station owners and hosts free reign to fill their programming with ideologically conservative content.
- The demands of the marketplace favor conservative shows and audiences over progressive ones.
In short lefties are very upset that so called “progressive” radio is not getting enough airplay and that the American listeners are bored with left wing talk radio. The solution is to heavily regulate talk radio to force feed liberal viewpoints on the American people.
The Center for American Progress’s new regulatory scheme could be termed “The Son of the Fairness Doctrine,” because the goal of this new proposal is the same as the Fairness Doctrine — to regulate conservative talk radio to force unpopular far left viewpoints on America listeners and can be explained as follows:
- Restore local and national caps on the ownership of commercial radio stations. National radio ownership by any one entity should not exceed 5 percent of the total number of AM and FM broadcast stations and for local ownership, no one entity should control more than 10 percent of the total commercial radio stations in a given market. This would be a direct attack on nationally syndicated conservative talk radio hosts that broadcast on a network of radio stations;
- Ensure greater local accountability over radio licensing. This would be done by requiring ”radio broadcast licensees to regularly show that they are operating on behalf of the public interest and provide public documentation and viewing of how they are meeting these obligations;” and,
- Require commercial owners who fail to abide by enforceable public interest obligations to pay a fee (i.e. tax) to support public broadcasting. If the local accountability rule is violated, then the FCC would be empowered to tax ”owners to directly support local, regional, and national public broadcasting.” The tax revenues would go to the “Corporation for Public Broadcasting with clear mandates to support local news and public affairs programming and to cover controversial and political issues in a fair and balanced manner.” The Center for American Progress hopes for enough fines to ”net between $100 million and $250 million” to pay for new left wing government sponsored programming.
Who are the targets of the left. The Center for American Progress mapped out the networks to be targeted:
- CBS – 74% Conservative – 25% “Progressive”
- Clear Channel – 86% Conservative – 14% “Progressive”
- Citadel – 100% Conservative
- Cumulus – 100% Conservative
- Salem – 100% Conservative
Rush Limbaugh penned a letter to President Obama and asked
I have a straightforward question, which I hope you will answer in a straightforward way: Is it your intention to censor talk radio through a variety of contrivances, such as “local content,” “diversity of ownership,” and “public interest” rules — all of which are designed to appeal to populist sentiments but, as you know, are the death knell of talk radio and the AM band?
The Center for American Progress blog, Think Progress, responded with the following:
We have a straightforward question, which we hope you will answer in a straightforward way: When a handful of major media companies control who and what is allowed to be broadcast on the commercial dial, how is that not regulation of radio content? When these same companies then push out one-sided, right-wing information 90 percent of the time, how does that uphold freedom of expression?
So Rush asked President Obama if he plans to regulate talk radio and President Obama’s think tank responded by saying that privately owned media companies should not be allowed to “regulate” radio content. The Center for American Progress explicitly endorses a regulatory scheme that empowers the government’s regulation of Rush Limbaugh by taxing companies that don’t balance out Rush’s conservative viewpoints. Do they not understand that government mandated speech is a violation of the First Amendment right to be free from government mandated viewpoints? Watch out for the Son of the Fairness Doctrine coming to a radio station near you.
Steve Maley
Neil Stevens
Daniel Horowitz
I think the left will go much further than The Son Of Fairness Doctrine
Kenny Solomon (Diary) Monday, February 23rd at 12:42PM EST (link)I can honestly envision these fascist-socialist maniacs simply ignoring The 1st Amendment and existing laws.
Glenn Beck, Rush, Sean Hannity, Neil Boortz and the rest, including the folks at Fox News, conservative magazines like National Review and any media-based dissent or even questioning what’s going on will face actual incarceration. They’ll be charged with sedition, incitement and all sorts of other garbage.
I don’t say this lightly, because I fully believe the people in power are grabbing for the brass ring of total control and they don’t care a whit about The Constitution.
Nothing to do with the First Amendment...
frusorter Tuesday, February 24th at 1:50AM EST (link)It has nothing to do with the First Amendment. It is a reversal of the
1996 Communcations Decency Act (which, among other things,
basically deregulated media ownership). Immediately after the act
passed, a lot of big companies bought a lot of little companies in the
broadcast business, and radio became much less local.
Re-regulation of media ownership in radio markets will hurt the
biggest players the most, which are the News/Talk/Information
stations, at something like 17 percent of the market. They would
have to divest themselves of stations until their market share
dropped below some legal limit in their markets.
Radio and Television stations do not have the right of “Free Speech”.
They are licensed and regulated by the Federal Government. You
have always been able to be fined for saying certain words on the
air (and fined much more harshly since we saw some female
nipple during a popular televised event).
I predict, at no time during the next 4 years will anyone at Fox news
be charged with Sedition.
Kill it early
E Pluribus Unum (Diary) Monday, February 23rd at 12:54PM EST (link)I think it’s vital to shine the bright lights on the FCC’s back-door regulatory efforts before they happen. Once they are in place and you actually have ‘advisory boards’, and ownership requirements and so on, it’ll be the devil’s work getting that crap undone.
Kill the Terrorists
Protect the Borders
Punch the Hippies h/t IMAO
AGREE!
Praying (Diary) Monday, February 23rd at 1:15PM EST (link)nt
No!!!11!1!!1!1! The Bilderbergers are coming
So can ANYBODY tell me what it is........
thesavage1 Monday, February 23rd at 3:40PM EST (link)that we can do to fight this attack on free speech?? Calling our representatives??? Is that enough?? I am open to any suggestions because I will certainly do whatever I need to do to try to help stop this garbage.
I'm ready...
DerKrieger (Diary) Monday, February 23rd at 10:01PM EST (link)for armed rebellion myself. How far down the road to full blown Stalinist Marxism do we have to go before enough people literally rise up and to paraphrase Jefferson, “refresh the tree of liberty with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”?
I’m a patriot and I know where a whole nest of tyrants are.
Seriously though, if the socialists succeed in capturing through their unconstitutional machinations a permanent majority, at what point do we act? Do we wait until our fellows are put in gulags? Put in jail for saying the wrong thing? For thought crimes? Where is the line over which the tyrants must cross before we rise up? Maybe it’s when taxes hit 90%? 80? 70?
What about when Obama gets a couple SC justices and they overturn the individuals right to own a gun? They will try.
What then? Do we willingly turn in our guns like scared sheep?
It seems we’re already accepting national health care with not much more than a lot of anger vented on blogs and through phone calls and e-mails to our Reps and Sens who will continue to ignore us.
Will we continue to surrender our liberties and become an entire nation of lambs ready for slaughter like our cousins in Europe?
Just how much is enough?
“In questions of power, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.” – Thomas Jefferson
“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.” – James Madison
Whenever the legislators endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any further obedience.” — John Locke, 1690
Just how much is enough?
izoneguy (Diary) Monday, February 23rd at 10:04PM EST (link)Well I heard the leftys want to have a summer of rage….
So when they come out it might be time to pick them off.
The point cannot be made often enough: Modern liberalism, as embodied in the Obama presidency, is the defender of the status quo. And the status quo is a road to economic ruin. Political forces cannot redistribute the wealth that the economic system does not produce.