@@Caseylawtonwhere does the fairness doctrine decide whats true? If anything, it distinctly does the opposite. If the radio show agrees something is true, and the bureaucrats agree something is true, and the people agree something is true, but the issue is being discussed for people, then all of these factions must step aside and let the opposing viewpoint take the mic and say something they all consider false.
I lean more conservative but I think this was a good law and wouldn't mind to see it reinstated. As it stands media became too much of an echo chamber. I have not seen any satisfactory arguments to date as to why this was repealed.
90% accurate content. No mention of the FCC and their leniency in enforcing the Fairness Doctrine because of the huge burden it placed on media to track and follow. No mention of the FCC's seven day rule for those with opposing points of view to request equal time. No mention of the Supreme Court cases: 1. Red Lion v. FCC, which initially ruled the Fairness Doctrine as Constitutional; and 2. Meredith Corp. v. FCC which determined that the Fairness Doctrine violated the First Amendment rights of broadcasters.
Hmmmm so the public gets this and no mention of the dumbing down it causes. Without the Fairness Doctrine Sean Hannity Can Spew this Propaganda as if It Were The Truth. ua-cam.com/video/t27ie4qFlXM/v-deo.html
WE LIVE IN A POST TRUTH ENVIRONMENT FOX's ua-cam.com/video/96XjN_jas44/v-deo.html Technique For Lying Some People Say Senator Patrick Moynihan said "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts."
Also forgot how Republicans scream fowl over the media and are the ones that got rid of it and how the media largely fought keep knowing the result of its dismissal. Its removal was the start of the rights corporate facist coup.
The FCC Fairness Doctrine did, and cannot, apply to websites and cable TV channels, per the 1st Amendment. The doctrine only applied to licensed broadcast stations and origination cablecasting (due to the scarce nature of electronic media decades ago; the fact that radio and TV broadcasting itself is scarce, public and pervasive by nature; and the fact that cable TV operators have a unique relationship with TV stations). Plenty of right-wingers, also, had careers on broadcast radio and TV; and Rush Limbaugh’s career, on broadcast radio, started during the early-1970’s. Other right-wingers had their own syndicated show on broadcast radio and TV before the doctrine was abolished before 1987. The doctrine was also barely enforced when Jimmy Carter was president; and the lack of enforcement, by the FCC, was a reaction to the fact that many TV networks, during the Nixon Administration, were afraid of the doctrine enforced by the FCC back when the FCC itself had a friendly relationship with the Nixon Administration (which loved to make attempts at censoring critics of the administration itself). It’s also doubtful that the doctrine would be upheld by the federal judiciary today. Just look up the fact that, in 2000 (when cable TV channel and websites were around, unlike 4 decades before that year), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the Personal-Attack Rule was unconstitutional; and that ruling was authored by a judge nominated by President Bill Clinton (who himself has a favorable opinion toward the FCC Fairness Doctrine).
Great information, although there should be laws to prevent propaganda on the news and social media (including legislatures) that make their viewers too dumb to vote.
We need to bring this law back!
It didn't do shit. Wasn't enforced. Not to mention centralizing what is "true" is a recipe for disaster
@@Caseylawtonwhere does the fairness doctrine decide whats true? If anything, it distinctly does the opposite. If the radio show agrees something is true, and the bureaucrats agree something is true, and the people agree something is true, but the issue is being discussed for people, then all of these factions must step aside and let the opposing viewpoint take the mic and say something they all consider false.
Great summary
You need to do a video on this!
@@Baphomets_Kid i second this
We need to bring this back and not just for cable news, but for the internet.
How exactly can you do that on the internet?
@@barnacles1352 he wants censorship and restrictions lmfao
There are legal protocols used to stop crime on internet..hmmm..but really who is gonna stop a bunch of assholes shit posting on 4Chan, 8Chan, etc.
Yeah good luck enforcing that
@@barnacles1352in practice, i suppose it would be the revival of net neutrality modified for the same purposes
Murdoch was Reagan's buddy...that's why he did it!
Hey, could you provide some references? I'm trying to find more information about this docrine.
Any Media/Communication Law textbook likely has information. Mass Media Law and Ethics has a detailed section on Fairness Doctrine.
Wikipedia is good for basic rundown.
@@rebeccairvine5768 ua-cam.com/video/bRZYrFwwNMA/v-deo.html
@@donnadrury5101 her channel has been closed because it was pure BS.
I lean more conservative but I think this was a good law and wouldn't mind to see it reinstated. As it stands media became too much of an echo chamber. I have not seen any satisfactory arguments to date as to why this was repealed.
Because the fairness doctrine violates the First Ammendment.
@@4.0gpa44 it really doesn’t though
to issue and to what 1:37
90% accurate content. No mention of the FCC and their leniency in enforcing the Fairness Doctrine because of the huge burden it placed on media to track and follow. No mention of the FCC's seven day rule for those with opposing points of view to request equal time. No mention of the Supreme Court cases: 1. Red Lion v. FCC, which initially ruled the Fairness Doctrine as Constitutional; and 2. Meredith Corp. v. FCC which determined that the Fairness Doctrine violated the First Amendment rights of broadcasters.
Hmmmm so the public gets this and no mention of the dumbing down it causes. Without the Fairness Doctrine Sean Hannity Can Spew this Propaganda as if It Were The Truth. ua-cam.com/video/t27ie4qFlXM/v-deo.html
WE LIVE IN A POST TRUTH ENVIRONMENT FOX's
ua-cam.com/video/96XjN_jas44/v-deo.html
Technique For Lying Some People Say
Senator Patrick Moynihan said
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions,
but not their own facts."
Also forgot how Republicans scream fowl over the media and are the ones that got rid of it and how the media largely fought keep knowing the result of its dismissal. Its removal was the start of the rights corporate facist coup.
This was excellent
I wish more people knew about this.
Thank you
Fahrenheit 451 stopped being a work of fiction with Reagan. 1984 became a model.
Excellent historical summary.
The real problem was allowing entertainment to be called "news".Why? Hmmm …
Fairness Doctrine canceled, in comes Fox. This country is toast.
The FCC Fairness Doctrine did, and cannot, apply to websites and cable TV channels, per the 1st Amendment. The doctrine only applied to licensed broadcast stations and origination cablecasting (due to the scarce nature of electronic media decades ago; the fact that radio and TV broadcasting itself is scarce, public and pervasive by nature; and the fact that cable TV operators have a unique relationship with TV stations).
Plenty of right-wingers, also, had careers on broadcast radio and TV; and Rush Limbaugh’s career, on broadcast radio, started during the early-1970’s. Other right-wingers had their own syndicated show on broadcast radio and TV before the doctrine was abolished before 1987.
The doctrine was also barely enforced when Jimmy Carter was president; and the lack of enforcement, by the FCC, was a reaction to the fact that many TV networks, during the Nixon Administration, were afraid of the doctrine enforced by the FCC back when the FCC itself had a friendly relationship with the Nixon Administration (which loved to make attempts at censoring critics of the administration itself).
It’s also doubtful that the doctrine would be upheld by the federal judiciary today. Just look up the fact that, in 2000 (when cable TV channel and websites were around, unlike 4 decades before that year), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the Personal-Attack Rule was unconstitutional; and that ruling was authored by a judge nominated by President Bill Clinton (who himself has a favorable opinion toward the FCC Fairness Doctrine).
Great information, although there should be laws to prevent propaganda on the news and social media (including legislatures) that make their viewers too dumb to vote.
Another thing Reagan f#%^! Up for us... WHY repel it without a backup?
Thus the division
Carnival not so much as a freak and clown shows these days.