Another Two Party Tango: The Fairness Doctrine

ANOTHER TWO PARTY TANGO: THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE
By: Andrew Evans

You might have heard about the Fairness Doctrine in the past couple of years especially this past month or so. So what is the Fairness Doctrine and what is the entire buzz about it? Let’s look at it the old fashioned way, by breaking it down to see the whole. The Fairness Doctrine is supposedly all about requiring different view points to be heard in broadcasting. It was instituted back in 1949 but the FCC stopped enforcing it back in 1987. The Fairness Doctrine was determined by the FCC Commissioners so basically government bureaucrats decide on what is considered “fair views” on the airwaves. I guess someone has to do it. So who are these commissioners? They are appointed by the President to five year terms and are confirmed by the Senate. Only three of the commissioners can be from the same political party….hmmmm there is the kicker coming I just know it.

Sow why did the Fairness Doctrine originally come about? It came about in 1949 when radio and print was king of the media and television was still in its relative infancy. Back then in America there were far fewer media outlets and broadcasters and to make sure the American public were fairly informed due to the number of media outlets, the Fairness Doctrine was born. Of course you will hear some say that now there is more media consolidation than ever before and only a few people own the vast majority of traditional media outlets and they control the news. That is a disturbing trend but that is better left for another article (even though I am against too much media consolidation).

When most people discuss or think about the doctrine it is usually in regards to broadcasting of political or social viewpoints. So the commissioners have to decide what is “fair” when it comes to viewpoints on broadcasts? But all the commissioners are either Republican or Democrat right? EXACTLY, there is the kicker I was writing about!! This is not about fairness at all the doctrine is all about the twisted two party tango of American politics, the usual suspects, the Democrats and Republicans. The recent talk of the Fairness Doctrine is really aimed at talk radio where conservative viewpoints dominate the airwaves. Staunch liberals of course would like to change that. There was the Air America network which launched liberal talk radio and that did not fare very well on the open market. So the high up liberals got to thinking about the Fairness Doctrine again. Getting the doctrine up and running again would force liberal views back onto the airwaves and other broadcasts.

I know what you are thinking (at least I think you do, I could be wrong) isn’t having all views being heard the correct thing. Isn’t it that truly “fair”? Yes of course it is but this not about fairness this is about Liberals vs. Conservatives, plain and simple. Why is it just about their bickering and jockeying for position in the hearts and minds of Americans? The answer is as varied and strong as the American people. The answer is what about the Centrists/Moderates, Libertarians, Greens, Communists, Anarchists, Constitution, white power, black power…etc, etc. What about their viewpoints, aren’t their views just as viable as that of the Democrats and Republicans? Who will insure that their viewpoints are heard on broadcasts on the radio and television? The Democrats and Republicans on the FCC and in Congress? I truly doubt that. This is reason number one why the Fairness Doctrine would not work in today’s America and there are two more as well.

The second reason why the Fairness Doctrine will not work is because for it to work properly and “fairly” it would take up so much time on broadcasts it would be virtually impossible. You think political punditry is bad now, imagine with the Fairness Doctrine. Whole universities would be set up to jut churn out political pundits from all different political and social viewpoints. The talking heads of politics would drive us all insane. An average news broadcast could take hours and hours. Isn’t it enough we already have 24 hour news stations and I like to listen to what passes for music on the radio. I don’t want to have to listen to the whole FM dial just become nothing but political and social news to accommodate all the new viewpoints, although that would be fair it is still completely impractical. One good thing though is it would probably get rid of all commercials on the radio and on television. But wait that can’t be good aren’t we capitalist? We need to sell and know what stuff to buy! So impractability is the second reason why the Fairness Doctrine would not work.

The third and final reason why the Fairness Doctrine would not work is the American media and communication landscape has changed since 1987 when it was enforcement was ended. You know what has changed; chances are you found this article using one of the tools that changed it. You are probably reading this article online on a blog or website. You might be using you mobile phone to do so or using a satellite in reading it somehow. Our communication and media has changed. Anyone who wants to get their views out to Americans can throw up a website, can blog, can host their own Internet radio show. The tools are there to get you message out there. The growth of cable and satellite television and radio has opened up new media and broadcasting outlets since the days of 1987. America has come a long way since 1949 and 1987; let’s not go back to the tools of the past in the call for fairness when really it is nothing but a power struggle between the Democrats and Republicans. Nothing in the media is unbiased, we are all human. You want varied information just like anything good and worthy in life you have look and work for it but the information is out there along with the “truths” of all kinds of different viewpoints.


--Update it looks like the Senate supposedly has passed a permanent ban on the Fairness Doctrine today. President Obama has said he does not support the Fairness Doctrine being reinstituted. The Republicans led this charge spurned on by conservative talk radio. So does the is end the debate of course not because we all know nothing is permanent in politics and governing, except taxes.--

--This is just my thoughts on the matter--