100 days and counting, and still no Fairness Doctrine?
It’s well past the hundred-day mark.
Does anybody know how that whole “Re-Impose the Fairness Doctrine” campaign is going? You know, the one by which the Democrats intended to silence dissent from the right by squelching talk radio?
And I forget: Can anybody remind me what the Dem game plan was? Were they intending to silence talk radio before, or after, the federal government moved to confiscate all the guns?
I could see it either way.
On the one hand, you’d want to shut down the dissent first, so there couldn’t be any public outcry once the gun-grabbing started.
On the other hand, you might want to get all those guns off the street before you made your move on freedom of speech. So … can I get an update?
Buehler?
Boortz?
Limbaugh?
Anyone?
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
165 comments Add your comment
Copyleft
May 4th, 2009
12:40 pm
Jay, ssshhh! Don’t start poking holes in the Right-Wing Fear Agenda! They NEED these paranoid fantasies to keep the ‘base’ energized!
What’s left of it, that is….
mm
May 4th, 2009
12:41 pm
They’re waiting until after they take everyone’s firstborn.
Joe Matarotz
May 4th, 2009
12:43 pm
If there was a plan to take ALL of the talking heads and ship them off to somewhere, I would support it. The South Pole looks like a good destination. And Bookman could go along to make sure they arrive safely. Good plan. I like it.
Redneck Convert
May 4th, 2009
12:51 pm
Well, I halfway expect Bookman is making fun of us people on the Right. If it hadn’t of been for us screaming so loud about it the libruls would already have old Rush out of a job or maybe Sean or Neal. Anyhow, libruls wouldn’t listen to AM radio where our people are. They go in for FM or CDs or other sissy ways of getting their minds made up for them.
Just because we ain’t seen a plot to take away our radio people don’t mean one ain’t there.
TnGelding
May 4th, 2009
12:51 pm
Man, you’re prolific today. Must have had a “good” weekend.
Let ‘em keep their guns. Just put a dollar tax on each bullet.
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/shared-gen/ap/National/US_Florida_Slayings.html?cxntlid=homepage_tab_newstab&imw=Y
Talk radio is mostly entertainment and preaches to the choir.
Yeah, Obama had all kinds of tricks up his sleeve. I’m surprised the announcement today on tax reform didn’t spook the markets. Maybe the boys on the Street know it will never happen.
Midori
May 4th, 2009
12:53 pm
and why not make Joe the cruise director?
TnGelding
May 4th, 2009
12:56 pm
S&P 500 has reached 899.01 today. Will it make 900?
I say no, but we’ll see.
Taxpayer
May 4th, 2009
12:56 pm
Actually, the secret plan is to chisel out South Carolina and set it adrift while all the GOPers are there celebrating Confederate heritage month. All of their lines of communication with the real world will be instantly severed.
GayGrayGeek
May 4th, 2009
1:01 pm
Taxpayer @ 12:56 – Doesn’t that imply that the G.NO!.P’ers currently have lines of communication with the Real World?
Midori
May 4th, 2009
1:03 pm
good news – the Boston Globe has struck a deal, and will not have to cease publishing.
N.J,
May 4th, 2009
1:03 pm
There are TWO sections of the Fairness Doctrine, and Obama is using the portion that favors a president to the hilt. Regardless of ownership, all stations are required to report on matters of national importance, and among those included, are speeches of the President of the United States. The president can preempt any program on any network on a matter HE deems of national importance. I loved it when he selected the middle of Hannity to give a speech of “national importance”
Taxpayer
May 4th, 2009
1:07 pm
Have you taken time out to thank your off-shore tax cheat today. Remember every April 15, when you’re out getting teabagged by this nation’s wealthy, to say a special thanks to the scum that left you holding the bag for $100 billion in annual taxes that they left for you to pay.
N.J,
May 4th, 2009
1:08 pm
Obama has something more subtle in mind for the “Fairness Doctrine” and it is already in the laws, its just been ignored until now:
Obama is way smarter than that. What he has in mind is an indirect and far more means to accomplish the demise of conservative talk — America’s last town hall. The analogy is to the proverbial frog in the pot of water. Put him into boiling water, and out he’ll hop. Instant Boston Tea Party. Here, then, is the Obama plan to slow cook the First Amendment:
Charles Benton is Chairman of the Benton Foundation, with offices in Obama’s Chicago as well as in Obama’s Washington. Benton proclaims at his Foundation’s web site, “[O]ur number one national communications policy priority must be the eradication of racial and gender discrimination in media and telecommunications. Our shared goal: seeing the day when all Americans possess the tools to compete in commerce, to contribute to and enjoy the fruits of democracy, to receive unbiased and uncensored news and information, to create our culture. “ [emphasis added]
The Federal Communications Commission has a vague rule called “localism,” which requires stations to serve the interests of their local communities in order to hold onto their broadcast licenses. Obama, who gets to replace FCC Chairman Kevin Martin right away, needs only three votes from the five-member FCC to define localism his way.
Jim Boulet, Jr., the head of English First in Washington, D.C., one of whose projects is http://www.keeprushontheair.com, has been studying and warning for months about the morphing of FCC localism. Boulet notes to Human Events the following:
• On September 20, 2007, Obama submitted a pro-localism written statement to an FCC hearing at the Chicago headquarters of Rev. Jess Jackson Sr.’s Operation Push. One month later, an insistent Obama sent a public letter to Chairman Martin stating, “The Commission has failed to further the goals of diversity in the media and promote localism.”
• The head of Obama’s transition team is John Podesta, President and CEO of the Center for American Progress. In 2007, the Center issued a report, The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio, which concluded there were too many conservatives on the radio because of “the absence of localism in American radio markets” and urged the FCC to “[e]nsure greater local accountability over radio licensing.
• Podesta’s choice as head of the FCC transition team is Henry Rivera, a Director and General Counsel of the above-noted Benton Foundation and chairman of the Minority Media Telecommunications Council, which has stated: “Broadcasters must reach beyond the business sector and look for leaders [think community organizers] in the civic, religious, and non-profit sectors that regularly serve the needs of the community, particularly the needs of minority groups that are typically poorly served by the broadcasting industry as a whole.”
• Bowing to this pressure even while Bush is still President, the FCC proposed on January 24, 2008, the creation of permanent station advisory boards comprised of local officials and other community leaders, to periodically advise them of local needs and issues to ensure content diversity on the air.
• Any station that fails to placate these “local community leaders” would then be subject to license revocation by the FCC with an accelerated license review every two years as opposed to the current eight years. This would allow each station license in America to be attacked twice during just one Obama term.
Question: What organization first used “localism” at the FCC in this fashion? Answer: The United Church of Christ, Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s highly-politicized denomination. UCC has an entity called the Office of Communication, Inc., which successfully took a broadcast license away from a Southern station it felt was not covering the civil rights movement fairly. This is just one reason John McCain should have realized Rev. Wright was fair game in the campaign.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=29566
You see, its not necessary. Obama can simply have the FCC not renew the licenses of stations that do not respect the “localism” doctrine that is a legal requirement for stations.
Taxpayer
May 4th, 2009
1:09 pm
The lines are there, GayGrayGeek. They don’t use them to communicate with the real world so they won’t even notice when the lines are severed.
Susan Myers
May 4th, 2009
1:10 pm
Republicans should just move on to their next phony issue to be outraged about.
BDAtlanta
May 4th, 2009
1:13 pm
Trying to get the righties riled up on a Monday? Hehehe
If we muzzle those guys half the population won’t know what to think or what to say.
Fly-On-The-Wall
May 4th, 2009
1:14 pm
N.J., your posting is made to look omnious. Is localism a bad thing or good thing? I’m more asking questions then trying to pin anyone in a corner. If the media stations help the local market more isn’t that a good things or is there something more evil in this?
Wyld Byll Hyltnyr
May 4th, 2009
1:14 pm
Jay crows, “100 days and counting, and still no Fairness Doctrine?” as if to infer that the Obamateur adminstration is an “honest broker” and fair in its treatment of others who whold views that are displeasing to the Ob-amatuer administration.
In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Let us now consider the cold hard facts of the Chrsyler bankruptcy and the AIG bonuses.
First, the US bankruptcy system represents a tried an true “equitable” remedy available to those who can no longer meet their contractual obligations. Bankruptcy is built upon, and has functioned in fufilling its intended purpose, solely because its foundation rests firmly on the priority of creditor claims. The priority of creditor claims provides the framework for order to that which otherwise would be an irretreivably tangled ball of yarn. The priority of creditor claims, simply, means that secured senior creditors get paid before unsecured senior creditors, who before junior creditors, who get paid before preferred shareholders, who get paid before common shareholders, who get paid last. In the Chrysler matter, President Ob-amatuer laid the full force and power of the presidency, and now we now directly threatened to scourge the reputaion of certain, secured creditors to benefit his largest politcal supporter the UAW. It is without direct precedent, and counter to the operation of bankruptcy law, that benefits and benefits that awarded to an inferior class (Ob-amateur’s UAW freinds)exceeded, by a large margin, those poor secured creditors who stood, albiet legally and correctly, in the path of President Ob-amatuer’s kick back to his largest supporters.
Coming on the heels of President Ob-amateur’s similar bullying actions to disgorge lawfully earned bonuses, no matter how unsavory, from private citizens who were AIG executives is most troubling.
For you see, our President has no trouble in setting aside the law to wrongfully take property from those who are not pleasing to him (AIG executives, Chrysler secured creditors) to give to those who have been his supporter.
The next questions are: 1) how are we different from a third world banana republic since our president sets aside law at his whim; and 2) will President Ob-ama set aside the 2012 Presidential election to avoid the inevitable defeat to Jindahl/Palin?
SaveOurRepublic
May 4th, 2009
1:15 pm
An attempt at levity nor the (lack of) immediate implementation of these goals do not mean they aren’t legitimate items on the agenda. Make no mistake, the 1st & 2nd Amendment are indeed in the collective cross-hairs of the (Globalist Elite) controlled Dems & their RINO allies.
http://www.gunowners.org
N.J,
May 4th, 2009
1:22 pm
Depends. If you have a small right wing radio station in the middle of a non right wing area, if that stations actually harms the lives and interests of the people in that community, should they be allowed to have a federal license?
Most radio stations in this nation are small ones.
I would rather see the fairness doctrine reinstated, but changing legislation is harder than using legislation that already exists.
We have the courts to decide what IS and IS not of interest to local communities.
You forget, that the airwaves do not belong to the station owner. Its like boating on a lake on public land. You own the boat, not the water.
The airwaves are the property of the people of the United States, not the station owners. The station is the boat. The airwaves what they float their message on.
Brian
May 4th, 2009
1:24 pm
The quest for the Fairness Doctrine is still on going Jay, just not at the top of the agenda right now. As for gun control, all you have to do is google HR 45. If if ain’t pro-Obama and pro-government it’s going to be illegal.
N.J,
May 4th, 2009
1:24 pm
Typical conservative answer. The markets are not everything in a community. There are churches, schools, social organizations and so on.
Taxpayer
May 4th, 2009
1:24 pm
BDAtlanta,
If you get them riled up early in the week, they’ll provide cheap entertainment for days with virtually no added maintenance.
pat
May 4th, 2009
1:26 pm
It’s not for lack of effort.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10202008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/dems_get_set_to_muzzle_the_right_134399.htm
On October 22, 2008, Senator Jeff Bingaman (Democrat of New Mexico) told a conservative talk radio host in Albuquerque, New Mexico:
“I would want this station and all stations to have to present a balanced perspective and different points of view. All I’m saying is that for many, many years we operated under a Fairness Doctrine in this country, and I think the country was well-served. I think the public discussion was at a higher level and more intelligent in those days than it has become since.”
On December 15, 2008, U.S. Representative Anna Eshoo (Democrat of California) told The Daily Post in Palo Alto, California that she thought it should also apply to cable and satellite broadcasters.
” I’ll work on bringing it back. I still believe in it. It should and will affect everyone.”
On February 4, 2009, Senator Debbie Stabenow (Democrat of Michigan) told radio host and WorldNetDaily columnist Bill Press, when asked whether it was time to bring back the Doctrine:
” I think it’s absolutely time to pass a standard. Now, whether it’s called the Fairness Standard, whether it’s called something else — I absolutely think it’s time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves.”
When Press asked if she would seek Senate hearings on such accountability in 2009, she replied:
” I have already had some discussions with colleagues and, you know, I feel like that’s gonna happen. Yep.”
A week later, on February 11, 2009, Senator Tom Harkin (Democrat of Iowa) told Press, “…we gotta get the Fairness Doctrine back in law again.” Later in response to Press’s assertion that “…they are just shutting down progressive talk from one city after another,” Senator Harkin responded, “Exactly, and that’s why we need the fair — that’s why we need the Fairness Doctrine back.” [27]
Former President Bill Clinton has also shown support for the Fairness Doctrine. During a February 13, 2009, appearance on the Mario Solis Marich radio show, Clinton said:
” Well, you either ought to have the Fairness Doctrine or we ought to have more balance on the other side, because essentially there’s always been a lot of big money to support the right wing talk shows.”
Why can’t liberals compete in talk shows? Because their ideas sound even stupider when spoken orally.
If the left is so popular, why does it feel the need to hush conservative talk shows? They shouldn’t have any listeners right?
Brian
May 4th, 2009
1:26 pm
It’s ok that your rights are going to dissapear one after the other as long as the government has got your back right?
Mrs. Godzilla
May 4th, 2009
1:26 pm
Maybe they were confused.
Could they have meant the Hailess Doctrine – no bald Guys?
The Careless Doctrine?
The Bearless Doctrine – highly touted by Stephen Colbert?
Doggone/GA
May 4th, 2009
1:27 pm
“Republicans should just move on to their next phony issue ”
Shhh! Don’t use those words “move on” – their a trigger for them, don’t you know.
N.J,
May 4th, 2009
1:28 pm
hr 45 IS NEITHER LEGAL OR ILLEGAL. It’s not even unconstitutional. Congress has passed amendments to the constitition and repealed them. They have changed the constitutions body by using amendment.
All the constitution currently grants is the right to own and bear arms. if you can still own a gun if licensing and registration are required, no law has been broken. It does not take a gun out of anyones hand and that is all that the constitution requires. Laws that prohibit felons from owning guns are far more unconstitutional than HR 45, depending on the felony.
Susan Myers
May 4th, 2009
1:28 pm
I am not the least bit frightened by Limbaugh, Hannity, etc. – I do not listen to them, as I find them to be coarse and offensive buffoons, but I sincerely believe they and their slimy kind were major factors in the recent elevation of a freshman Senator from Illinois to the White House. We couldn’t have done it without them, and now, as a bonus, they are orchestrating the evacuation of a once-major political party into a wilderness from which they (hopefully) will never emerge.
Mac
May 4th, 2009
1:34 pm
“evacuation of a once-major political party.” Heh, heh … potty humor … gotta love it.
Bosch
May 4th, 2009
1:34 pm
Yeah, and lots of other strawman issues haven’t come to past in 100 days either – the best one was the Obama police department SS guys/gals.
What other things was he gonna do? So many crazy fears, so many theories, it’s hard to keep up with all the loony wingnut fears of things in their twisted imaginations.
Wyld Byll Hyltnyr
May 4th, 2009
1:37 pm
Jay, have you instituted your own fairness doctrine or did my post get hung in your filter? If the latter, what word go me?
SaveOurRepublic
May 4th, 2009
1:38 pm
Further intel as to “Bacrock Obuma’s” plans for our 2nd Amendment rights.
http://www.newswithviews.com/guest_opinion/guest146.htm
Jay
May 4th, 2009
1:39 pm
Don’t know what got it snagged Byll — the filter operates in its own mysterious way sometimes — but it is now freed.
Atlas Shrugging
May 4th, 2009
1:40 pm
Hello rep-ugants and dem-wit parasites, it’s 8:30 p.m. here in the Doha and I spent more money entertaining clients today than most of you underachievers will earn in a month. I just read were the black prince of the Obomonation has a new plan to steal my money in order to lift you parasites up to a higher plane. Since the Messiah is the only hope you losers have to rise up from the oppression of the rep-ugnats and soar to new heights of luxury (obviously you have neither the intellect or the ambition to obtain wealth) may he be successful in purloining the billions of dollars he needs to keep you parasites in free cheese. As for my money, I plan on keeping it along with my freedom, you losers can keep the CHANGE…..
pat
May 4th, 2009
1:41 pm
Susan, if you do not listen to them how do you know what they say? Wouldn’t it be prudent to actually know what you are protesting against? You wouldn’t burn a book because somebody told you it was bad would you?
How do you knw their stance on the issues if you don’t listen to them. How do you know what they say and how do you know if you don’t like it if you don’t listen to them.
If you are going to hate someone, you should probably know why. Lest you be made a fool.
Dusty
May 4th, 2009
1:41 pm
I think that Freedom of Speech is definitely in danger here.
If American citizens don’t know when to cut OFF their radio, they are too dumb to be “saved” by government regulations.
Our Constitution says there should be no “filters” on free speech.
Should Obama try for such screening, his true agenda on American freedoms will be displayed.
I don’t believe liberals want a muzzle on conservatives. The same unfair muzzle can be placed on libs at a later opportune time. What is fair now will be fair later.
FAIRNESS DOCTRINE? Sounds more like political discrimination. I hope it dies a natural death.
TnGelding
May 4th, 2009
1:42 pm
Midori
May 4th, 2009
1:03 pm
Why would any company want to continue the labor intensive and environmentally damaging task of publishing an obsolete newspaper? The cost of delivery alone should make it a no-brainer.
Why do you think Jay is preparing for the future, which should be now, with this blog?
N.J,
May 4th, 2009
1:44 pm
Well there are methods of silencing speech, simply by overwhelming it. liberal talk radio never got off the ground for this reason. The owners of the more powerful clear channel stations with 50 100 or even 500 thousand watt stations basically drowned out the lower powered stations that remained for liberal talk radio to get licenses on. This, by most standards would be considered supression of free speech. Which is why the local community portions of the legislation exist to begin with.
Without this, wealthy vested interests can put what they wish on the airwaves and make certain that other points of view are either not heard, or can only be heard a block away from the station.
It was easier for me to hear the Atlanta Air America station at night near Miami, than it was to hear it IN the Atlanta Metro area day or night after I moved here. There was no local community interest at all in that case.
Bosch
May 4th, 2009
1:45 pm
Oh yeah, I forgot he was gonna take everybody’s guns and ammonition away – how could I forget that one. We’ll need all our guns when the Gitmo prisoners break out of jail.
And I haven’t been forced to pray on a prayer mat facing Mecca in the past 100 days? Anybody else have?
Oh, I just know there’s more – come on guys/gals – help me out – I’m sleep deprived today and I can’t think.
Taxpayer
May 4th, 2009
1:46 pm
Dusty supporting free speech! Seems to me it was only a few threads back that Dusty was calling to remove one of my posts that she claimed ‘offended’ her poor sensitive eyes.
Bosch
May 4th, 2009
1:48 pm
Dusty,
Yes, there are filters on free speech in our Constitution.
Susan Myers
May 4th, 2009
1:49 pm
pat @ 1:41,
You don’t get out much, do you? Ever heard of transcripts?
Oh, and I never said I hate them. Lest you be made a fool.
Dave R
May 4th, 2009
1:49 pm
NJ, get real. Liberal talk radio never gets off the ground because your spokespeople have nothing worthwhile to say.
If you have nothing worthwhile to say, sponsors don’t buy ads because their ad money isn’t going towards people who will listen to them.
It’s that whole capitalism thing you don’t think works.
Guess what? It does. And that is why liberal talk radio doesn’t succeed.
N.J,
May 4th, 2009
1:57 pm
Its amusing that people who are so popular with the right wing, have such a low popularity rating with the general public.
the king of right wing talk, Rush Limbaugh, may be popular with the right wing, but as far as the American people are concerned:
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll. March 31-April 1, 2009. N=900 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.
.
“I’m going to read you the names of several individuals and groups. Please tell me whether you have a generally favorable or unfavorable opinion of each one. If you’ve never heard of one please just say so. Rush Limbaugh.”
.
Favorable 31 %
Unfavorable 52%
Unsure 13%
Never
Heard of 5%
3/31 – 4/1/09
An even more specialized poll:
Ipsos/McClatchy Poll conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs. March 5-9, 2009. N=1,070 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.
.
“What is your opinion of Rush Limbaugh: very favorable, somewhat favorable, somewhat unfavorable, or very unfavorable?”
.
Very
Favorable 11 %
Somewhat
Favorable 19%
Somewhat
Unfavorable 13%
Very
Unfavorable 33 %
No Opinion/Unsure 24%
3/5-9/09
Other polls that break the demographic by Democrat, Republican and independent show that Limbaugh has
Republicans favorable 48%
Republicans unfavorable 28%
Democrats favorable 8%
Democrats unfavorable 67%
Indpendents favorable 30%
Independents unfavorable 41%
Total favorable 27%
Total Unfavorable 46%
March 4-5, 2009
What is more interesting is that since Obama was elected, Limbaughs favorability ratings have taken a bit of a drubbing, but they were never all that high among Democrats and more to the point Independents to begin with.
http://www.pollingreport.com/l.htm#Limbaugh
Limbaugh is pretty much the standard when it comes to approval ratings for all right wing talk show hosts.
To be honest, if that many of the owners of the airwaves disapprove of right wing talk, while censoring them is not a democratic way of handling things, making certain that opposing points of view CAN be heard in all media markets is more than appropriate.
TnGelding
May 4th, 2009
1:59 pm
S&P reached 899.89, but retreated slightly.
Capitalism doesn’t work well when the weathiest accumulate too much.
Susan Myers
May 4th, 2009
2:02 pm
In general liberals are better educated and don’t need or appreciate being told what to think.
Taxpayer
May 4th, 2009
2:02 pm
…Ever wonder why Rush “Boss” Limbaugh’s syndicated radio show is all over the place like the proverbial cheap suit?
If you do much driving in rural areas — e.g. between cities — “Boss” Limbaugh’s bloviations are often the only thing you can pick up on a car radio. Hey, that’s what CD players are for.
Did Rush accrue hundreds of local radio affiliates across the country because his political views are mainstream? That’s obviously not it. OK, so why IS his show so “popular?” Why do hundreds of stations around the country carry his show, the most widely syndicated talkfest in the country?
Glad you asked.
The real story is not generally well-known. The only reason I know is through my covering the business of radio for years for several major daily newspapers and also, for industry trade magazines like Radio World.
It’s because — ready for this? — Rush’s show was, and presumably still is, given away for free to many local radio stations.
This shocker is because of a little-known practice in broadcast syndication called a “barter deal.” (Barter deals were briefly mentioned in Michael Wolff’s first-rate recent piece on Rush in Vanity Fair).
Here’s how a barter deal works: To launch the show, Limbaugh’s syndicator, Premiere Radio Networks — the same folks who syndicate wingnut du jour Glen Beck — gave Limbaugh’s three hours away — that’s right, no cash — to local radio stations, mostly in medium and smaller markets, back in the early 1990’s…
booger
May 4th, 2009
2:06 pm
Obama has been involved in more important things lately:
1] bankrupting our country
2] Creating a toxic business environment for all US businesses, large and small.
3] Taking over and running auto companies and banks. Firing anyone he feels needs it.
4] Going to Europe to get help on economic stimulus and in Afghanistan, and coming back with ZIP.
5] Giving unions controlling interest in auto companies while kicking shareholders and bond holders in the teeth.
6] Raising taxes on those outside his voter base and cutting taxes on his voter base.
7] laying the groundwork for taking control of more and more private enterprise.
So you see Jay, the mans been busy. give him a chance. you’ve done nothing but ctitize Obama from day one.
Dave R
May 4th, 2009
2:07 pm
Spoken like a true Socialist, NJ.
The only reason the “people” own the airwaves is because the GOVERNMENT decided it was so.
Under your rules, the GOVERNMENT can now control the thoughts being spread across those airwaves, in direct violation of the 1st amendment. That’s what this all boils down to – the GOVERNMENT controlling what content goes out over airwaves they should never have “owned” in the first place.