HR 3302 - Bringing back the Fairness Doctrine

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree, this is a dumb idea.

Who gets to determine what qualifies as alternative?

If a station that broadcasts a guy who says we should kill all canadians by dropping bombs on them suddenly is forced to also broadcast a guy who says will should kill all canadians by starving them to death, I wouldn't consider that much of a difference. However, that's about the level of nuance that represents the "extreme polarization" in the US today.

[/ QUOTE ]

The real problem of course is that any station that broadcasts the opinions of one powermad buffoon who supports a giant bloated government, high taxes, restrictions of freedom, inflationary monetary policy and an interventionist foreign policy with an R behind he name must then inflict upon its audience the opinions of another powermad buffoon who supports a giant bloated government, high taxes, restrictions of freedom, inflationary monetary policy and an interventionist foreign policy with a D behind his name for an equal, and equally excruciating, amount of time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty much a short & sweet "On-the-Button" analysis of the current affairs in regards to broadcasting conglomerates today.

However, the devil is almost always in the detail.

As the mergers and acquisitions continue, our choices of hearing differing points of view are lessened.

Not for nothing, but it's akin to the constant debate in this forum regarding AC.

I do not ascribe to many AC POV's. However, unlike many others here, I do NOT wish to abridge the ability of any who do here to be able to put them forth, regardless of how many times I might think they are either repetitive or dogmatic.

In both cases, I fully support the position that all of us should do our utmost to protect an environment where dissenting views from the mainstream are allowed to be heard.

Summed up by the often used phrase....

"I heartily disagree with you Sir, but will defend to the death your right to speak your Mind".