Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) wants to reinstate The Fairness Doctrine. I believe that is the Democratic Party position also. Sen. Bingamen said, “I would want this station and all stations to have to present a balanced perspective and different points of view instead of always hammering away at one side of the political . . . I guess my thought is that talk radio and media generally should have a higher calling than just reflect a particular point of view. I think they should use their authority to try to – their broadcast power to present an informed discussion of public issues.”
But as you may already know, when they say “talk radio,” they really mean Rush Limbaugh.
The problem with “fairness” is that it all depends on what one’s idea of “normalcy” is. There literally isn’t time for all voices, nor is there a market, nor should we bend over backwards to make sure there is a market for views almost no-one takes seriously.
I kinda like people who consider both sides. One of the great things about Chesterton, for instance, is that he didn’t just surround himself with right thinkers but talked to all the smart people he knew–and often came down unpredictably as the result of his thoughtful approach.
I kinda get nightmares when I start thinking that the government is going to mandate, by law, what opinions are “reasonable” and therefore require representation on privately-run radio stations. Then I remember that it doesn’t matter because the internet is making radio obselete anyway.
I’m sure radio stations like that argument, Chestertonian R. Eh, so what if the government ruins your programing. You’re obsolete already anyway. I’m sure some will try to apply fairness to the Internet somehow. Hopefully, if they try it, they will discredit themselves and drop our of congress.
The obsolescence line is more of a relief than an argument.
So far, the internet seems to be pretty good at keeping further ahead of censorship than one might think; kinda like the printing press managed to lower censorship from manuscript culture.