The Return of the Fairness Doctrine?

Slithe writes "Last week at the National Conference for Media Reform, Ohio congressman Dennis Kucinich (a long-shot candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination) stated that the Fairness Doctrine may be reinstated. Kucinich will be heading up a new House subcommittee that will focus on issues around the FCC. The Fairness Doctrine was an FCC regulation that required broadcast media to present controversial issues in an honest, equal, and balanced manner. The FCC repealed it in 1987 — Democrats at the time tried to forestall this move but were ultimately thwarted by a veto by President Ronald Reagan. Critics of the Fairness Doctrine have stated that it was only used to intimidate and silence political opposition. At the convention, Kucinich said, 'We know the media has become the servant of a very narrow corporate agenda. We are now in a position to move a progressive agenda to where it is visible.'" In the interest of fairness, here is a Republican, free-market perspective on the return of the Fairness Doctrine.

So, now Slashdot will be required to have dupes?

[Anonymous Coward]

With different headlines????

Re:flamewar comin'

[OECD]

And like him, I am worried that the media is now in the hands of so few people, but who would police this "fairness?

Who will watch the watchers of what the watchers watch?

Re:flamewar comin'

[mspohr]

That's easy. We all know FOX is "fair and balanced"... we'll just let them decide.

Re:I agree, what does "balanced" even mean?

[dangitman]

What about Timecube?

What about the Timecube? The Timecube is humanity's future, and your denial of it demonstrates that you are ACADEMICALLY RETARDED and subject to the whims of JESUS HOMOSEXUALITY under the influence of the WORLD BANK.

Re:I agree, what does "balanced" even mean?

[dangitman]

Who determines what constitutes a controversy and what doesn't?

I do.

What you don't seem to know...

[nietsch]

Is that your political right wing (so right in fact they'd be titled neonazi in europe) realised some decades ago that the media did not favour their standpoints. So they set up an orchestrated campaign to get 'their' people in key places in the media. You can just outright buy a paper, but it is much more productive to go slow and support those few journalists that support your political views and use your influence to get these people into key places. Which is what they did. A few decades later, the middle ground has swayed so much to the right, that the rest of the world is afraid you will fall of the edge. Considering how fascitoid your gouvernment/country has become, it might have fallen already.
(your sercret service commands you to attack this anti-american post as hard as you can. Do you pattriotic duty and defend our free nation against those liberal foreigners, support out troups!)

Re:Get to the root: Tax net assets

[dangitman]

Support the Hutter Prize for Lossless Compression of Huma [hutter1.net]

I think your .sig could do with a better compression method.

Re:BULLSHIT

[Anonymous Coward]

I call BS on what you are saying...

Criticizing Bush invasion of Iraq is liberal and not-sane.

Criticizing Bush for immigration is sane...