Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove
So how does that lead to the Fairness Doctrine?
|
It doesn't necessarily lead to the Fairness Doctrine, and I didn't give an opinion on the Fairness Doctrine. Dr. X and you claimed that the government should have little or no control over the valuable and scarce commodities that it has granted. I pointed out why that idea is misguided.
If broadcast television and radio were the only mass-communication media, editorial guidelines would be essential, especially now that ownership has become so concentrated. They're less necessary with the variety of media we have now, but guidelines should still be enacted and enforced.
I wouldn't go with the Fairness Doctrine as it was - the rules were too restrictive and required too much paperwork. I might make broadcast licenses subject to review by non-partisan boards, with reviews triggered by petitions from local markets or done annually.
The mandate to holders of those licenses would be to provide quality service to the community and to have some editorial balance. The review boards would have to see evidence of gross negligence in these areas to warrant termination of the license.
I could be convinced of better methods, but that's the direction I'd lean toward. I'd also see less reason for this if ownership rules went back to what they were before the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
RCMB Donor (only) Features:
: One National Championship, 4 trips to the Final Four, Seven Sweet Sixteens, 11 straight trips to NCAA Tournament, 4 Big Ten Championships. Yeah, we'll keep him.
I'd prefer a more zeitgeist of leave me the **** alone.
Linear Mode
