Advertisement
HomeCollectionsFairness Doctrine
IN THE NEWS

Fairness Doctrine

FEATURED ARTICLES
NEWS
By CLARENCE PAGE | July 27, 2007
Like witch doctors conjuring up zombies in a bad B-movie, certain members of Congress are trying to bring the Fairness Doctrine back from the grave. Forget it, folks. Changing times already have put a stake through its heart. I don't say that as an enemy of fairness or balance. I say it as a realist and a former broadcast industry insider who has seen media and political giants humbled by the new media. My education began when I ran the community affairs department at a CBS-owned TV station in Chicago for two years in the early 1980s.
ARTICLES BY DATE
NEWS
January 21, 2014
I have a hard time understanding The Sun's fairness doctrine. We often read on this editorial page about our need to be fair to illegal immigrants (Dream Act, drivers licenses), minorities (income and education achievement disparities), our poor citizens (support for a minimum wage increase and opposition to food stamp adjustments), but nothing about the productive class of Maryland citizens. The productive class are those Marylanders who work full time, pay taxes, save their money (a responsible act or they could end up a ward of the state)
Advertisement
NEWS
September 3, 1993
Rush Limbaugh says the effort to revive the Fairness Doctrine VTC is an attack on him specifically and radio talk show hosts generally because they are conservatives. Ditto says syndicated columnist Cal Thomas (Opinion * Commentary page, Sept. 1), ditto says the Wall Street Journal editorial page, and ditto say lots of local radio talk jockeys.Whack-o, we say. Paranoid fantasy. Consider:* The leader of the effort to codify the old Fairness Doctrine is Sen. Ernest Hollings, D-S.C. Americans for Democratic Action says his "liberal quotient" in Senate votes last year was 35. By comparison, Paul Sarbanes and Barbara Mikulski got 100. Even Sam Nunn, D-Ga.
NEWS
By RON SMITH | August 21, 2009
Reflecting on my 24 years hosting a radio talk show, I realize once again how timing is everything in life. In 1984, when I worked Saturday nights and as a vacation fill-in, talk radio was pretty primitive. There was no Internet, no cell phones, not even fax machines. The programs we did back then were drastically limited, both in who was likely to call in and in the ways we hosts collected news and opinion pieces to talk about on the air. The callers were stay-at-homes, the proverbial little old ladies in tennis shoes, or, late at night, insomniacs of one sort or another.
NEWS
By CAL THOMAS | September 1, 1993
Washington. -- When Congress returns from vacation after Labor Day, one of the little pieces of mischievous legislation it will consider is the misnamed ''Fairness Doctrine.'' Before 1987, it required that broadcasters provide balanced and fair coverage of issues and ideas.The Federal Communications Commission did away with the Fairness Doctrine in 1987. It believed there were sufficient broadcast and cable opportunities on which to air conflicting viewpoints so that government no longer needed to serve as an ideological watchdog.
NEWS
By LARRY BUMGARDNER | October 10, 1993
It's hard to vote against "fairness." For that and other moresinister reasons, it appears that Congress may reinstate an outdated and dangerously mislabeled broadcasting rule known as the Fairness Doctrine.The Fairness Doctrine required radio and TV stations to provide balance in their overall programming by showing both sides of controversial issues -- or, in simple terms, to be fair. But broadcasters and other critics have called the rule anything but fair since it was first officially imposed by the Federal Communications Commission in 1949.
NEWS
By RON SMITH | October 29, 2008
It's hard to think of anything less liberal than a liberal with power. The people who peddle themselves as conservatives without being conservative in any real sense whatsoever are bad enough, I admit, what with their insistence that we shield ourselves from terrorists bent on harming us by waging perpetual war in Eurasia while establishing a surveillance state here at home. Who could possibly object to something called the USA PATRIOT Act? Perhaps you've forgotten that some genius figured out that titling the proposed law as the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act would yield the soul-stirring acronym used to sell the bill as something necessary.
NEWS
By RON SMITH | August 21, 2009
Reflecting on my 24 years hosting a radio talk show, I realize once again how timing is everything in life. In 1984, when I worked Saturday nights and as a vacation fill-in, talk radio was pretty primitive. There was no Internet, no cell phones, not even fax machines. The programs we did back then were drastically limited, both in who was likely to call in and in the ways we hosts collected news and opinion pieces to talk about on the air. The callers were stay-at-homes, the proverbial little old ladies in tennis shoes, or, late at night, insomniacs of one sort or another.
NEWS
November 3, 2008
Fairness Doctrine would protect public Re-establishing the Fairness Doctrine, or some version of it, would hardly be, as Ron Smith suggests, an imposition upon the First Amendment ("Will we let government squelch political speech?" Commentary, Oct. 29). Rush Limbaugh would remain free to spew his hate-filled tirades throughout our great land. Mr. Smith says that requiring stations to give equal time to opposing views might undermine talk radio's commercial viability. That is far from clear, but in any case, the First Amendment is silent on the question of its commercial success.
NEWS
January 21, 2014
I have a hard time understanding The Sun's fairness doctrine. We often read on this editorial page about our need to be fair to illegal immigrants (Dream Act, drivers licenses), minorities (income and education achievement disparities), our poor citizens (support for a minimum wage increase and opposition to food stamp adjustments), but nothing about the productive class of Maryland citizens. The productive class are those Marylanders who work full time, pay taxes, save their money (a responsible act or they could end up a ward of the state)
NEWS
November 3, 2008
Fairness Doctrine would protect public Re-establishing the Fairness Doctrine, or some version of it, would hardly be, as Ron Smith suggests, an imposition upon the First Amendment ("Will we let government squelch political speech?" Commentary, Oct. 29). Rush Limbaugh would remain free to spew his hate-filled tirades throughout our great land. Mr. Smith says that requiring stations to give equal time to opposing views might undermine talk radio's commercial viability. That is far from clear, but in any case, the First Amendment is silent on the question of its commercial success.
NEWS
By RON SMITH | October 29, 2008
It's hard to think of anything less liberal than a liberal with power. The people who peddle themselves as conservatives without being conservative in any real sense whatsoever are bad enough, I admit, what with their insistence that we shield ourselves from terrorists bent on harming us by waging perpetual war in Eurasia while establishing a surveillance state here at home. Who could possibly object to something called the USA PATRIOT Act? Perhaps you've forgotten that some genius figured out that titling the proposed law as the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act would yield the soul-stirring acronym used to sell the bill as something necessary.
NEWS
By CLARENCE PAGE | July 27, 2007
Like witch doctors conjuring up zombies in a bad B-movie, certain members of Congress are trying to bring the Fairness Doctrine back from the grave. Forget it, folks. Changing times already have put a stake through its heart. I don't say that as an enemy of fairness or balance. I say it as a realist and a former broadcast industry insider who has seen media and political giants humbled by the new media. My education began when I ran the community affairs department at a CBS-owned TV station in Chicago for two years in the early 1980s.
NEWS
March 13, 2004
Gay marriages pose real threat to the rule of the law No doubt Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, never thought his name would be associated with the likes of Orval Faubus, Lester Maddox and George Wallace. However, Mr. Newsom has a lot more in common with those men than he probably would like to admit ("Backing same-sex marriage," March 8). All four men served in the executive branch of governments and, as such, swore oaths to uphold and enforce the laws. Despite these oaths, all apparently came to believe that because they were bigger than the law, their defiance of it was justified.
NEWS
By Cal Thomas | March 3, 2004
ARLINGTON, Va. -- The argument most often heard in favor of same-sex "marriage" is that it is the "fair" thing to do. This is an interesting position, because having jettisoned one standard for marriage, those pushing for the inclusion of same-sex marriage now appeal to the public on the basis of another standard. But if there are to be no standards, or only "standards" that shift with the changing winds of culture (which then don't count as standards at all), on what basis are advocates of same-sex marriage appealing to the majority of us who, according to opinion polls, want to keep marriage for heterosexuals only?
NEWS
By New York Times News Service | November 27, 1993
Its creators call it "C-Span with attitude." Its detractors call it the political equivalent of televangelism.On Dec. 6, the Free Congress Foundation, a conservative group, is set to begin what seems to be the nation's first public affairs channel with a declared ideological spin.The channel, National Empowerment Television, or NET, will offer weekly programs like "The Progress Report," with Rep. Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., as host; "War Games," a look at military strategy, and "Youngbloods," a call-in show for young people that has as its stated aim "challenging the cynicism" of MTV.The channel, it seems, is supposed to do for conservative political views what Court TV has done for the legal system: make them a fixture of popular culture.
NEWS
By New York Times News Service | November 27, 1993
Its creators call it "C-Span with attitude." Its detractors call it the political equivalent of televangelism.On Dec. 6, the Free Congress Foundation, a conservative group, is set to begin what seems to be the nation's first public affairs channel with a declared ideological spin.The channel, National Empowerment Television, or NET, will offer weekly programs like "The Progress Report," with Rep. Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., as host; "War Games," a look at military strategy, and "Youngbloods," a call-in show for young people that has as its stated aim "challenging the cynicism" of MTV.The channel, it seems, is supposed to do for conservative political views what Court TV has done for the legal system: make them a fixture of popular culture.
NEWS
March 13, 2004
Gay marriages pose real threat to the rule of the law No doubt Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, never thought his name would be associated with the likes of Orval Faubus, Lester Maddox and George Wallace. However, Mr. Newsom has a lot more in common with those men than he probably would like to admit ("Backing same-sex marriage," March 8). All four men served in the executive branch of governments and, as such, swore oaths to uphold and enforce the laws. Despite these oaths, all apparently came to believe that because they were bigger than the law, their defiance of it was justified.
NEWS
By LARRY BUMGARDNER | October 10, 1993
It's hard to vote against "fairness." For that and other moresinister reasons, it appears that Congress may reinstate an outdated and dangerously mislabeled broadcasting rule known as the Fairness Doctrine.The Fairness Doctrine required radio and TV stations to provide balance in their overall programming by showing both sides of controversial issues -- or, in simple terms, to be fair. But broadcasters and other critics have called the rule anything but fair since it was first officially imposed by the Federal Communications Commission in 1949.
NEWS
September 3, 1993
Rush Limbaugh says the effort to revive the Fairness Doctrine VTC is an attack on him specifically and radio talk show hosts generally because they are conservatives. Ditto says syndicated columnist Cal Thomas (Opinion * Commentary page, Sept. 1), ditto says the Wall Street Journal editorial page, and ditto say lots of local radio talk jockeys.Whack-o, we say. Paranoid fantasy. Consider:* The leader of the effort to codify the old Fairness Doctrine is Sen. Ernest Hollings, D-S.C. Americans for Democratic Action says his "liberal quotient" in Senate votes last year was 35. By comparison, Paul Sarbanes and Barbara Mikulski got 100. Even Sam Nunn, D-Ga.
Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.