Fox News: 'Fairness Doctrine' no match for ratings and money

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Fox_slams_Fairness_Doctrine_in_favor_0627.html

Fox News: 'Fairness Doctrine' no match for ratings and money
David Edwards and Muriel Kane
Published: Wednesday June 27, 2007

"This next one may make you think twice about freedom of speech," announced Fox News on Wednesday, stating that the federal government wants to "resurrect" the Fairness Doctrine from "back in the 40's." The Fairness Doctrine, which required broadcasters to present both sides of controversial issues, was federal policy from 1949 until 1987.

Fox then turned to two regular guests, editor of the conservative National Review Rich Lowry and assistant professor of urban studies Marc Lamont Hill, to debate the issue.

Lowry, who dominated the discussion, began by saying, "The market is working here. You have extremely talented conservative talk radio show hosts like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. And they're on the air because they get ratings. And broadcasters, guess what, they care about ratings because they want money."

- snip -

Hill cited a study showing that more than half the people are either liberal or moderate and that outlets owned by large conglomerates are more likely to be conservative than those with local control

"Ratings," was Lowry's immediate rejoinder. "If there were a liberal who could get the kind of ratings, they would be on 600 stations just like Rush Limbaugh."

"It's not that simple," Hill attempted to interject, but Lowry continued with his argument as Fox ended the segment

also propaganda and attack

divide and conquer

keep people passive and entertained

GOOD!

Ed Schultz has pointed out: "If there were a liberal who could get the kind of ratings, they would be on 600 stations just like Rush Limbaugh."
that is NOT true, there are liberals that get ratings.

he's been beaten by Air America, and probably more that I don't remember.

To hell with accuracy, honesty, or fairness.

This is exactly why we need the Fairness Doctrine updated and reinstated, or all we're going to know is what Rupert Murdock wants us to know.

The RW deep-thinkers all seem to know what it says, and bloviate long and hard on the subject, but I have not seen any proposed legislation or regulation. Or will it simply be a resurrection of the 1987 version?

Thanks for the help...

That is why big advertisers won't advertise on Air America. They don't like the anti-corporate message. That is why we had three Air America stations in Ohio in 2006 and none today.

Ratings is never a good enough reason to grant monopolies to media conglomerates. The licenses for the public airways exist to serve the public interest.