Save Talk Radio
“Congress is just 23 signatures away from a vote that could finally end the archaic Fairness Doctrine and create a permanent free-market system for talk radio. Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) continues to urge congress members to sign the Broadcaster Freedom Act discharge petition. The petition will “prevent the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from repromulgating the fairness doctrine,” originally initiated in the 1930s under Franklin Roosevelt.
During its glory days, the Fairness Doctrine was never applied to ensure conservatives’ air time. In fact, conservative voices were shunned while liberal bias seemed to mysteriously remain under the radar of the FCC. The Fairness Doctrine’s attempt at “fairness” created the most imbalanced media atmosphere possible. Or, some journalists simply avoided any coverage of controversial issues in order to avoid the nuisance of finding contrasting viewpoints on every issue raised in a story.”
As mentioned in the quote above the act dates back to the 1930’s. Except for the Eisenhower anomaly, the democrats controlled congress for about 70 of those years. Republicans controlled congress for a couple years during the Eisenhower administration, they got control again in 1994 after Clinton reneged on his campaign promise to not raise taxes. The republicans lost control in 2006 because they spent like democrats.
So, setting aside the dozen or so years since the 1930’s that the republicans controlled congress let’s talk about the others. The fairness doctrine allowed a democrat to get air time everytime a republican made a speech or ran an ad. It annoyed me most of those years because I didn’t care about politics but wanted to watch my TV shows and relax to rebuild my energy for another work day. Instead of a short speech or in the case of the State of the Union I got 2 lengthy speeches. Also it gave the democrats the last word.
My recollection is that the followup speeches were free air time for the democrats. Regardless that airtime kept them in front of the people not to get their message out but to attempt to poke holes in the preceding speech.
PENCE UNVEILS BILL TO PROHIBIT RETURN OF “FAIRNESS DOCTRINE” FOR TALK RADIO (link to article)
“There is Nothing Fair about the Fairness Doctrine”
“”The American people love a fair fight, especially where the issues of the day are debated. In a free market, fairness should be determined based upon equal opportunity, not equal results. As some voices are calling for Congress to enforce their idea of ‘fairness’ upon the American people, it would be good for us to proceed with caution whenever some would achieve their ‘fairness’ by limiting the freedom of others.
“Beginning in 1949, the Federal Communications Commission and its precursor developed and enforced the so-called Fairness Doctrine. The Fairness Doctrine required broadcasters to present controversial issues in a fair and balanced manner. However, because of the lack of clarity in the Commission’s ruling, broadcasters opted to offer non-controversial programming in lieu of hours of paperwork or countless legal fees.”
I recall a fictional TV series (The Senator Series) that ran on Sunday evenings back around 1970. Hal Holbrook played a senior senator chairing a committee. It peaked my interest because it was so well done. However, it pointed out some things congress didn’t like so the TV station was forced to kill the show. It made me angry and it said that what Holbrook had been communicating was true.
The only TV station I watch for news is Fox News Channel. My wife likes the local news so I get some exposure to other than Fox but the others don’t go into the same depth. I pick up a lot of information not from Hannity or O’Reilly but from their guests. Hannity, O’Reilly, Fox and Friends and the others that are on all day make available both sides of each story and present experts. Or at least people who have above average information and understanding. Karl Rove and Dick Morris have impressed me so much not only with what they say but how they say it I think they are truly professional.
Now radio: without Rush or Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham I would have no reason to listen to radio. I found them before I retired and was a commuter. I used to listen to NPR, their music was good but when they presented a political view on the taxpayers dollar I felt cheated. I listened to NPR for many years before the alternatives were available. Rush gave me insight and analysis that contradicted NPR but agreed with opinions I had formed over my lifetime. He had better insight and more details as well. Driving to work in the morning the selection available was limited so I listened to Laura Schlessinger. She performs a necessary service to her listeners.
Talk radio fills a very necessary role. The liberals have Air America (if its still on), NPR (taxpayer subsidized) and whatever else is available in other parts of the country.
Congress knows that if you are only exposed to the liberal point of view over and over you are possibly going to think their view is wonderful. For sure it works for those who do not get information from more than one source. The typical TV anchor doesn’t understand what he or she is reading on the air or is restricted by the TV station editors. Rush, Hannity, Laura Ingraham et al can do the background research, take as much time as they want to explain an event and then have callers from all points of view critique them. In my experience as long as a caller is polite, germaine to the current topic they let you listen to the caller personally state his/her question. If these talk show hosts should be propagandists or just plain inaccurate too often they would lose my interest and probably other listeners as well (and airtime ad buyers).
I became interested in politics in the early 1980’s because of a lobbying effort my employer was involved in. We were writing letters to representatives and senators to save our industry. The whole concept woke me up. I think I also had more time available in the evenings to read and follow political events. Prior to that I was in the military, then college, then I worked lots of overtime building my career. As I mentioned Hal Holbrook also got my attention. Killing talk radio would be totalitarian and a major disservice to the American people. It would once again lead to decade after decade of democrat control of both houses of congress.
Ann Coulter recently remarked about an Obama statement “If it weren’t for talk radio I would be 3 points higher in the polls.” Her comment was that if it wasn’t for CNN, ABC, MSNBC, CBS, etc. he would be 10 points behind. I agree with her.
In 1993 I learned about the existence of Rush. In one of his broadcasts just around the time I started listening to him he talked about “Bias Jobs”. He explained that the Bureau of Labor Statistics has an estimated number that they use to take seasonal swings out of quarter to quarter comparisons. It would be like adding some jobs to the employed figures to take into account hurricanes Ike and Katrina. Employment had to decrease since workplaces were destroyed. If you wanted to compare quarter to quarter figures to judge national economic policies you have to make an adjustment. Rush’s point at the time was that the BLS was inflating bias jobs so that when subtracted from the total workforce, unemployed was lower than reality. When you look at the link I provided earlier this week to the BLS employment charts you see 4% around 1993, 1994 that may not be accurate. Another thing I learned from Rush was the significance of the minimum wage. Congress doesn’t really get excited about burger flippers and shelve stockers. These are usually recent high school graduates building a work history or earning money to assist with college expenses. The real significance of minimum wage is that union contracts are based on it. A journeyman plumber may be paid by a formula that is 10 times the minimum wage. So when the burger flipper gets a $.50 an hour increase, the union plumber gets a $5.00 an hour increase. The percent coming out of the union members paycheck for union benefits and dues goes up enough to make a difference.
A little while ago this morning I heard a guest on Fox News say that as a result of Republican policies during the great depression Roosevelt stayed in office for a decade and a half. Maybe as a result of the Fairness doctrine Roosevelt stayed in office. Radio and newspapers were the only means of communication and in early 1930’s average working people probably couldn’t afford either of them. I read economists on the Ludwig Von Mises website tear apart the Roosevelt policies of the 1930’s (they are Libertarian but reading them made me braoden my perspective). In summary I think killing talk radio would be morally criminal and deprive Americans of knowledge they wouldn’t get elsewhere.
Since I was so long winded in this post, I’ll address your other concerns in another post.
