• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A new Fairness Doctrine

D

Digger

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
1,302
Reaction score
489
I have a proposal to force both the liberal and the conservative media bubbles to allow conflicting viewpoints in. We tell Congress to tell the FCC to tell MSNBC and FOX to co produce a 1/2 hour evening news segment that airs during prime time. They have to air the exact same segment, and if either of them vetos than both of them have to play a half our of dead air during prime time.
 
Digger said:
I have a proposal to force both the liberal and the conservative media bubbles to allow conflicting viewpoints in. We tell Congress to tell the FCC to tell MSNBC and FOX to co produce a 1/2 hour evening news segment that airs during prime time. They have to air the exact same segment, and if either of them vetos than both of them have to play a half our of dead air during prime time.
Click to expand...

Why would this be a good thing, Digger?
 
Digger said:
I have a proposal to force both the liberal and the conservative media bubbles to allow conflicting viewpoints in. We tell Congress to tell the FCC to tell MSNBC and FOX to co produce a 1/2 hour evening news segment that airs during prime time. They have to air the exact same segment, and if either of them vetos than both of them have to play a half our of dead air during prime time.
Click to expand...

If there were the ONLY TWO outlets that had fairness problems that would be fine. Unfortunately the problem is far more widespread.
 
This is not a terrible idea on the surface, however you end up giving equal time to conspiracy theorists with actual experts

One.doctor telling you smoking kills you, and a lobbyist telling you that smoke cleanses your lungs, both with equal time...
 
It would be better if we just made it illegal to misrepresent the truth, and fine every channel for false information.

Fox would spend more than they have on covering up sexual abuse charges...
 
Digger said:
I have a proposal to force both the liberal and the conservative media bubbles to allow conflicting viewpoints in. We tell Congress to tell the FCC to tell MSNBC and FOX to co produce a 1/2 hour evening news segment that airs during prime time. They have to air the exact same segment, and if either of them vetos than both of them have to play a half our of dead air during prime time.
Click to expand...

Let the press keep its freedom. Fox News is getting its message out and so are other outlets. In Russia and other socialist countries there is no freedom of the press, but the government controlled press publishes what the government wants its subjected citizens to hear.
 
marke said:
Let the press keep its freedom. Fox News is getting its message out and so are other outlets. In Russia and other socialist countries there is no freedom of the press, but the government controlled press publishes what the government wants its subjected citizens to hear.
Click to expand...

Your ignorance is astounding, you believe that Russia is socialist?!?

It's as socialist as Hitler's party.

I really don't know why I bother responding to someone soooo far out of reality...
 
Digger said:
But it's a start?
Click to expand...

It would only be something to consider if it applied to every network, and even then I would have to vote no. Our free press must remain free.
 
Felis Leo said:
Why would this be a good thing, Digger?
Click to expand...

Everyone agrees one of the biggest problems we've gotten too polarized. Nobody listens to each other anymore. So we can't come together and compromise when we need to, which is all the time because like it or not we live in the same country and we're going to have to learn how to get along. This is a way to force some people listen to what the other side has to say.

Washington is kind of designed to seize up and maintain the status quo unless there's a sustained long term consensus to change it. But we've had a gradual and now severe expansion of executive powers. We have an erosion of the filibuster in the Senate. We've had a constitutional crisis over the Supreme Court, and an erosion of the impartiality of the federal courts.

If you're a Republican, you might be feeling like you're living your dream right now. But remember, half of the country hates you, and the pendulum will swing back eventually, and you're going to be sorry. You know that politicians can't be trusted, so we need to have restraints put on the most powerful man in the world. In the end the only restraint on tyranny is a vibrant civil society filled with educated, informed people. This is one step in that direction.
 
GDViking said:
Your ignorance is astounding, you believe that Russia is socialist?!?

It's as socialist as Hitler's party.

I really don't know why I bother responding to someone soooo far out of reality...
Click to expand...

Some people call Russia's socialism 'communism' and some people call Bernie Sanders' communism 'socialism.'
 
Digger said:
Everyone agrees one of the biggest problems we've gotten too polarized. Nobody listens to each other anymore. So we can't come together and compromise when we need to, which is all the time because like it or not we live in the same country and we're going to have to learn how to get along. This is a way to force some people listen to what the other side has to say.

Washington is kind of designed to seize up and maintain the status quo unless there's a sustained long term consensus to change it. But we've had a gradual and now severe expansion of executive powers. We have an erosion of the filibuster in the Senate. We've had a constitutional crisis over the Supreme Court, and an erosion of the impartiality of the federal courts.

If you're a Republican, you might be feeling like you're living your dream right now. But remember, half of the country hates you, and the pendulum will swing back eventually, and you're going to be sorry. You know that politicians can't be trusted, so we need to have restraints put on the most powerful man in the world. In the end the only restraint on tyranny is a vibrant civil society filled with educated, informed people. This is one step in that direction.
Click to expand...

Neither party actually wants that. If we weren't divided they would then actually have to work for their money.
 
marke said:
Let the press keep its freedom. Fox News is getting its message out and so are other outlets. In Russia and other socialist countries there is no freedom of the press, but the government controlled press publishes what the government wants its subjected citizens to hear.
Click to expand...

But the government isn't telling any anyone what to say here. It's licensing public airwaves in the case of broadcast and supplying public infrastructure in the case of the internet. So it gets to make certain stipulations. This has been the rationale for all sorts of various mandates and restrictions throughout the years. When it really comes down to it, the government sticks its nose anywhere it damn well pleases. Conservatives and liberals do it alike. Parental advisory stickers. Cigarette packs. Calories on menus. Nutrition information. This one isn't all that different from the Fairness Doctrine.
 
Nap said:
Neither party actually wants that. If we weren't divided they would then actually have to work for their money.
Click to expand...

Well of course neither party wants it. When they get their turn at the top of the pendulum, it's a gravy train. But we still have elections. We can tell Congress what to do if there's support in the both party bases.
 
Digger said:
I have a proposal to force both the liberal and the conservative media bubbles to allow conflicting viewpoints in. We tell Congress to tell the FCC to tell MSNBC and FOX to co produce a 1/2 hour evening news segment that airs during prime time. They have to air the exact same segment, and if either of them vetos than both of them have to play a half our of dead air during prime time.
Click to expand...

So you want to make it official the ONLY opinions on TV are the official stance of the Democratic Party and the official stance of the Democratic Party - equal time even if one side or the other is outright lying - and every one else and every other of the 101 view points are silenced.

Put simply, you want to protect the status quo bosses every way possible.
 
joko104 said:
So you want to make it official the ONLY opinions on TV are the official stance of the Democratic Party and the official stance of the Democratic Party - equal time even if one side or the other is outright lying - and every one else and every other of the 101 view points are silenced.

Put simply, you want to protect the status quo bosses every way possible.
Click to expand...

It must pass muster with the Ministry of Truth.

Look at how well that concept is working out in China as this Bug out of Wuhan rampages!
 
Digger said:
Well of course neither party wants it. When they get their turn at the top of the pendulum, it's a gravy train. But we still have elections. We can tell Congress what to do if there's support in the both party bases.
Click to expand...

The problem is that everyone thinks that their Congress person is the exception to the rule and it is the rest that are the problem. It is the reason we are stuck in this neverending cycle of frustration and disapproval with congress.
 
Nap said:
The problem is that everyone thinks that their Congress person is the exception to the rule and it is the rest that are the problem. It is the reason we are stuck in this neverending cycle of frustration and disapproval with congress.
Click to expand...

Is this when I chime in with my "People are thin gruel now, we used to be better" argument?
 
Digger said:
But the government isn't telling any anyone what to say here. It's licensing public airwaves in the case of broadcast and supplying public infrastructure in the case of the internet. So it gets to make certain stipulations. This has been the rationale for all sorts of various mandates and restrictions throughout the years. When it really comes down to it, the government sticks its nose anywhere it damn well pleases. Conservatives and liberals do it alike. Parental advisory stickers. Cigarette packs. Calories on menus. Nutrition information. This one isn't all that different from the Fairness Doctrine.
Click to expand...

It is not a good idea to allow government workers to determine what is fair or not.
 
marke said:
It is not a good idea to allow government workers to determine what is fair or not.
Click to expand...

So the judiciary is a bad idea?
 
Digger said:
I have a proposal to force both the liberal and the conservative media bubbles to allow conflicting viewpoints in. We tell Congress to tell the FCC to tell MSNBC and FOX to co produce a 1/2 hour evening news segment that airs during prime time. They have to air the exact same segment, and if either of them vetos than both of them have to play a half our of dead air during prime time.
Click to expand...

Has this penalty already been applied?
 
The internet renders any fairness doctrine next to useless. The only effective counter to propaganda is education.
 
Digger said:
I have a proposal to force both the liberal and the conservative media bubbles to allow conflicting viewpoints in. We tell Congress to tell the FCC to tell MSNBC and FOX to co produce a 1/2 hour evening news segment that airs during prime time. They have to air the exact same segment, and if either of them vetos than both of them have to play a half our of dead air during prime time.
Click to expand...

This still means that we refer to CNN/Fox as "news", and it would be impractical to force an unbiased reporting scheme.

Assuming the media gets special privileges, and then uses that to project political propaganda, I think a better idea would be to classify news outlets the same way that a sitcom or adventure show is classified.

In other words, the FCC would regulate "news" in the same way it would regulate Airwolf or Game of Thrones. "Reporters" from CNN/Fox would be treated (and respected) as if they were reporting from Airwolf News or Game of Thrones News.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom