I just noticed it’s the last day of July and I haven’t posted anything about Christian radio in a while. So, I thought I would talk about the Fairness Doctrine.
What is the Fairness Doctrine? Anyone who’s in radio knows.
Wikipedia puts it best — “The Fairness Doctrine was introduced in the U.S. in 1949 (Report on Editorializing by Broadcast Licensees, 13 F.C.C. 1246 [1949]). The doctrine remained a matter of general policy, and was applied on a case-by-case basis until 1967, when certain provisions of the doctrine were incorporated into FCC regulations. [2] It did not require equal time for opposing views, but required that contrasting viewpoints be presented. The Fairness Doctrine had two basic elements: It required broadcasters to devote some of their airtime to discussing controversial matters of public interest, and to air contrasting views regarding those matters. Stations were given wide latitude as to how to provide contrasting views: It could be done through news segments, public affairs shows or editorials.”
Well, it’s being discussed again in Congress. Actually it’s not — Democrats have been ordered NOT to talk about it because if Senator Barak Obama wins the presidency, they’ll push a new Fairness Doctrine, in an attempt to silence conservative talk radio and Christian radio.
However, there is a bill pending in Congress that could change that.
H.R. 2905 and S. 1742, sponsored respectively by Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN), Senators John Thune (R-SD) and Norm Coleman (R-MN), prohibits the FCC from reinstating the “Fairness Doctrine,” which was in effect until 1987 when the FCC withdrew it. As of October 2007, H.R. 2905 and S. 1742 are in the first stage of the legislative process where they are being considered in committee and may undergo significant changes in markup sessions.
It is important for free speech to contact our congressional representative and tell them we support to bills H.R. 2905 and S. 1742 for Broadcast Freedom as they currently are written.
It amends the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), notwithstanding any other provision of any Act, from having the authority to require broadcasters to present opposing viewpoints on controversial issues of public importance, commonly referred to as the Fairness Doctrine.
House Speaker Nancy Palosi, however, has said she will NOT bring the proposed bill to the floor for consideration. She knows many of her colleagues would vote for the bill…blocking her attempt to return the fairness doctine to FCC regulations.
Why should you care? Well, for Christian radio that COULD mean that when ever we talk about the Christian faith, we’ll also have to open the mic to someone who has an opposing view point. It means if we talk about pro-life, we’ll also have to talk about abortion. If we talk about what the Bible says about homosexuality, we’ll also have to present someone on the air who supports it.
I’m taking a shot in the dark here, but if this happens, beware. You can expect to see Hate Speech Ligislation come out of Washington.
Basically our free speech rights will continue to evaporate, even more than they already have.
You can do something about it, though. Contact your congressman or congresswomen to make sure the bill goes before the house before January.
August 5, 2008 at 11:36 pm |
You can be certain Obama is not supporting this fairness Doctrine. I am a Democrat myself and you can rest assured that Barack isn’t going to support any measure that will restrict Christian networks to have to conform to other viewpoints. It would violate freedom of Speech. It is a misconception that all Democrats want to combat Christian viewpoints. No candidate the Democrats have had has bent over backwards to accomodate people of faith than Mr Obama.
You can rest easy that he is not a supporter of this doctrine.
August 5, 2008 at 11:46 pm |
It would be unconstitutional as well to support the doctrine. There is no place for the fairness doctrine to censor radio stations just as though there is no place for the government to do illegal wiretaps.
August 5, 2008 at 11:52 pm |
Here is proof that Obama doesn’t support the fairness doctrine:
As stated in http://www.broadcastingcable.com it says Obama Does Not Support Return of Fairness Doctrine
There may be some Democrats talking about reimposing the Fairness Doctrine, but one very important one does not Barack Obama.
“Sen. Obama does not support reimposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters,” press secretary Michael Ortiz said in an e-mail to B&C late Wednesday.
“He considers this debate to be a distraction from the conversation we should be having about opening up the airwaves and modern communications to as many diverse viewpoints as possible,” Ortiz added. “That is why Sen. Obama supports media-ownership caps, network neutrality, public broadcasting, as well as increasing minority ownership of broadcasting and print outlets.”
August 9, 2008 at 10:27 pm |
Perhaps — although I don’t know what to believe from Obama. He changes his mind I just about every issue that’s controversial.
A few things are for certain, though. Obama does favor higher taxes. He will allow the Bush tax cuts to expire, meaning everyone will see their taxes increase. He believes in redistribution of wealth. He wants to take profits from corporations and send it to the poor. That’s socialism at it’s best. He wants national health care, which will require added taxes to pay for it. He also believes that we don’t need to drill for more oil — he says if we all inflate our tires, that’ll take care of the high gas prices.
I wish I could understand how someone who has a little over 100 days of experience in the U-S Senate is qualified to be president of the most powerful nation in the world? It’s amazing to me that many in the U-S are blind to his incredible inexperience. He hasn’t run a corporation, he hasn’t been an executive of anything. He was a community organizer. What is that anyway?
August 14, 2008 at 3:25 pm |
Obama has only slightly less experience than JFK and FDR did before becoming president. I cannot understand the Conservative Christian obsession with protecting America’s very very rich. We as a people are suffering from 50 million uninsured Americans, a war that we never should have gotten into the first place. I don’t really believe Jesus would really take political sides if he was around today, and clearly both parties are imperfect and have serious flaws.
I am not saying that Obama is my ideal leader, but I look at where we have been the past 7 years, and the profits Exon MObil and so many other companies have made, and I look at our gang wars in America, and crime going way up. 1 in every 100 people is incarcerated. I believe that if we have another Bush term in the white house, that 4 years from now we will still be waging a war 9 years after mission accomplished. When a man says “mission accomplished” I take him at his word. Say what you want about Obama’s social policies but war is not a family value I would be proud of.
August 14, 2008 at 3:33 pm |
Obama actually has the equivalent of 1300 days in office not 100. That is just slightly less time JFK Had before entering the White house.
Being a community organizer is a very honorable job to have. The neighborhoods throughout south Chicago, are some of the poorest and most crime filled communties in the Country. As a white male in a small town I can’t even imagine what it is like to try to create funding for churches, and protecting kids from gangs and drugs. Being a community organizer may sound like a liberal job title, however they exist all over the country.
As for defense, I am not at all worried, because foreign policy shouldn’t be a subject of bi partisan debate as it has the past 7 years. Our debates should be over health care, taxes, and our economy. There are just too many people in America who are waging partisan wars and we need to show some compassion for once. It is sad what our nation is coming to.
August 14, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
That’s simply not true. Obama has been running for president for nearly two years. Obama hasn’t even been on the Senate floor because of his campaigning. To say he has 1300 days of experience is proof you haven’t though this through.
JFK and FDR both had a boat-load more experience than Obama. FDR was not only a State Senator, but he was assistant Secretary of the Navy. Then governor. He had a ton of executive leadership before he ran for president. JFK was in the navy. His PT boat was rammed by the Japanese and he led many to safety. Then he won a congressional seat — then the senate. Are you kidding — these men had the SAME experience at Obama. That’s nothing short of a lie.
Obama less than an ideal leader? He’s not fit to run for the office. He wavers on foreign policy issues. He thinks Iran and Venezuela are small countries that mean little to the U-S and can’t fight for any issue that isn’t popular.
War isn’t a family value. War is bad. But, war is reality. Hiding our heads in the sand hoping terrorism goes away won’t make it go away. Many of you democrats, for what ever reason, want us to lose this war in Iraq and Afghanistan. I don’t understand it. Why would you want that? Even if you didn’t agree with why we went in there…we’re there. Let’s win it and get out of there. Can’t we at least agree on that?
If you want to talk about family values, let’s look at the issues. Obama is for killing families — babies specifically. He’s pro-abortion — even favoring killing babies the survive abortions. He’s for higher taxes, which takes money AWAY from families. He’s for taking money away from companies making money and giving it those who may or may not deserve it. Taking profits from a company and redistributing that money is nothing short of Marxist Socialism. Doing so would put companies out of business, creating more joblessness, which ALSO isn’t good for our families. The only thing Obama is for is more government, making families more dependent on the state to help them survive.
I’m not for that. I’m for empowering people to help themselves out of poverty.
We have a lot of community organizers around the world. I’m sure it’s honorable, but they shouldn’t be running for president unless they have the credentials to go with it. I sure wouldn’t hire a community organizer to run a multi-billion dollar company. And, I don’t think someone with those credentials should be running a multi-trillion dollar country.
What’s sad is that people won’t use their brain to get beyond the politics and use their brain to figure out who’s qualified and who isn’t. Take the Democrat and Republic title off the candidates and Obama has nothing but pretty words — no substance, no experience, and no convictions to be the next commander in chief.
August 14, 2008 at 6:53 pm |
Legally Obama has been serving as a US senator for over 3 years, and the 4 years before that he was a state politician. Well to sum it all up, I think if it wasn’t for going into Iraq right from the beginning and neither was Barack; that means more to me than years of experience. Eisenhower had never been elected to political office before and he got to be president. I know that lack of experience could hurt Obama, but he speaks from his heart which I admire. I have to at least say anyone who can catch a crowd’s attention and speak from hi and Time will tell if Obama will win the white house, and honestly I am not too confident because I think too many Americans vote on the wrong issues and the media which many say is too liberal I think misleads people and focuses on ridiculous issues. I mean Mccain is not that conservative on many social issues and did not support Bush’s ban on gay mairraige, and a lot of voters will assume that just because he is a Republican he is truly pro-choice. What bothers me about our country is if you belong to a specific political party you automatically have to be pro-life or pro-choice, and that just shouldn’t be. Gov. Pataki, Arlen Spector, and Rudi Guilliani are all pro choice, and Senator Casey from PA is pro-life.
But I look around at the world around me and see a country that has increased it’s national debt tremendously under the Bush administration. Christian philosophy should be opposed to borrowing money like we have, in order to help finance the war in Iraq.
August 14, 2008 at 7:06 pm |
I never said I was opposed to Afghanistan, and I still believe we need to keep troops over there and elliminate the Taliban and their followers for good. Obama and myself do not believe in cutting and running and we need to fight terrorism at any cost. I do think if our intelligence was a great as the President has said it is, that we would have caught Osama Bin Ladin by now. Nobody has benefited more from the war in Iraq than Osama in a way because Iraq kept us focused away from the real target.
I know that I am set in my ways and it sounds like you are to, but I do not believe that our infrastructure is something I am too proud of. Fema was a nightmare,after Katrina and the response to that disaster totally showed the reality of poverty in this country. The money didn’t even get to so many of the needy people, and many people were supplied with trailers that had toxins in them. That is not a country I can be truly proud of. I look at injustice in our court systems, and I never hear Christian conservatives stand up against the immorality of a system that has convicted many people, later found not to be guilty. It is not what I believe nor what my church believes and I have lived long enough to think about these things carefully. It is a sad state of affairs.
August 14, 2008 at 9:06 pm |
Well, I was for going to Iraq. Every intelligence report indicated Sadam has WMD. President Clinton even indicated such. Senator Clinton even said as much and voted for the war in Iraq. Kerry voted FOR Iraq — ‘before he voted against it.’ The U-N had multiple resolutions condemning Iraq for violate previous resolutions dating back to the first gulf war. We can have all the debate we want about we shouldn’t have gone in or we should have gone in. Right now, it doesn’t matter. WE’RE THERE. YOU LOST THE VOTE. GET OVER IT. LET’S WIN AND LET’S GET OUT OF THERE LEAVING BEHIND A DEMOCRACY THAT CAN PROTECT ITSELF.
There are many people who have been great public speakers and spoke from ‘their heart.’ I’ll name some of them: Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Vladimer Lenin, Benito Mussolini, need I go on? The interesting thing about Obama, he doesn’t say anything. The only thing he says it ‘change, change, change,’ but he never outlines the change, other than raising taxes, stealing from the rich and giving to the poor, and inflate your tires and tune up your car as his energy policy. That is ‘change’ but it’s not change I want.
I only wish President Clinton had taken Sudan up on their offer to turn Bin Ladin over to the U-S. He flat our rejected that offer. Had he accepted it, perhaps we wouldn’t be in the situation we’re in right now.
Christians are pro-life because Scripture talks about the unborn. Psalm 139 is just one example:
13 For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother’s womb.
14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful,
I know that full well.
To say people have the ‘right’ to kill a baby is just beyond my comprehension. If a baby is born prematurely (at six months), it’s considered a baby. But, if the baby is unborn (at six months) it has no rights. How, in an age when we have so much knowledge we choose to reject fact. IT A BABY whether it’s born or unborn.
Christians aren’t perfect. I’m sure not. Dont’ profess to be. I have no hope of being perfect. But, I do know that MANY Christians have been outspoken about the Republicans overspending while in control of the legislature. Dr. James Dobson was one of MANY Christians critical of the Bush administration and the Republican led Congress. The Republicans blew it. They deserved the defeat the last two elections. They abandoned their roots. They sold themselves out. They got lazy and forgot who and what message got them there. It was a Ronald Reagan message of less taxes, less government, less regulation — empowering the American people to work hard and pull themselves out of the trouble we were in. It was a wonderful message and Americans rallied around it. It was a message that was ALSO of empowerment. I don’t hear that message from Obama — it’s just a message of change with no particulars.
August 15, 2008 at 9:28 am |
I wish I had the money to leave this country for good. People make all the wrong decisions when it comes to running for office, and too many voters are just too stupid. I wish I had a lot of money like Johnny Depp and could move to Paris or some place like that.
August 15, 2008 at 9:37 am |
WHAT??! WHY? Despite our problems, we’re still the best country in the world. I’ve been all over the world and I always thank God he allows me to live in the U-S-A. We’ve got more freedoms than any other country. We have the best form of government, we have the greatest people (friendly and generous), we have the best water — by far. Why would you want to leave?
August 15, 2008 at 9:55 am |
I don’t really have a choice but to stay here, but if I did I would. The culture wars and corporations thinking they own America bother me, and I have been to other developed countries whose cities don’t have the poverty, the crime, the racial hatred and the lack of democracy we have. No Capital punishment, no waging of pre-emptive wars, and yes, better border security. California releases their prisoners who have committed unspeakable acts, because they are overcrowded. That is not a Government that works.
I think perhaps the reason Europe doesn’t have the church attendance both among Catholics and protestants that they are disillusioned by it’s corrupting power it had in Europe for centuries. They see the problems that religion has created in America and want n o part of it, many of them. In Europe religon was a source of many wars for centuries, and it is becoming that way here, with so many poor people listening to what their preacher says, rather than focusing on getting food on the table for their family, and their jobs being outsourced to foreign entities. That just isn’t right.
August 15, 2008 at 10:10 am |
You obviously haven’t been to a church that uses the Bible has it’s guide. That’s not what Christianity is about. In fact, I hate using that word. A relationship with God is more than religion — it’s a way of life. Loving people. It’s a daily struggle. I have trouble swallowing my words and think to myself, ‘Self — how should I have really responded?” I get the impression that you blame all the ills of the U-S on it’s ‘Christian’ culture. Perhaps you’re right. We’ve abandoned what it is to be a true follower of Christ and made up a post-modern ‘christianity’ that’s neither biblical or Godly. However, I would like you to name one city in Europe that doesn’t have poverty, corporate selfishness, and religious intolerance? I can’t think of one.
August 15, 2008 at 1:15 pm |
I am proud of my church; it is not a liberal denomination or a Conservative denomination and I go every week. It is a church that shares the gospel rather than preaches it, and shows Christ’s love, not mankind’s judgement on others. I know I am judgemental in expressing my views, but I try my best to be fair, but when I have a gut feeling about certain issues, I can’t help not to express myself.
My church is not political at all, and does not get into the issues. Watch the debate faciliated by Rick Warren this weekend between Obama and Mccain. I think a lot of the truth about the candidates philosophy can be put to the test.
Getting back to the fairness doctrine, I am still opposed to censorship unless there is obscene language on the radio or something. I read in a poll that nearly half of Americans favor the fairness doctrine. I wrote to my Congress person who supported it to change his mind; It is clearly censorship and it would not be to not let people’s voices be heard. Here is what I dug up though.
Nearly half of Americans (47%) believe the government should require all radio and television stations to offer equal amounts of conservative and liberal political commentary