by Aharon Hacohen

Created on: January 18, 2009

The concept of a free press' has always been considered one of the pillars of American democracy. Since the authors of the First Amendment to the Constitution wrote that "congress shall make no lawabridging the freedom of speech, or of the press", it has been generally understood that the press must be allowed to operate freely and provide information to the public without restriction by the government. While there were occasional legal battles over the interpretation and application of this concept in regards to newspapers, it was with the spread of radio and then television in the 20th

century that this notion was really challenged. From 1949 to 1987, the Federal Communications Commission the arm of the government charged with regulating broadcast media employed a policy which became known as the Fairness Doctrine. The policy required the holders of radio and television broadcast licenses to "devote adequate time to controversial issues of public importance and [To] do so fairly by affording reasonable opportunity for the opposing viewpoint"[1]. It was this latter part which became extremely contentious with broadcasters who objected to government intervention in their station's choice of content, and saw it as a violation of the freedom of the press'. In his 1975 book The Good Guys, The Bad Guys, and the First Amendment", Fred W. Friendly records the history of the evolution of the Fairness Doctrine and the various legal battles over its application. What Friendly did not know at the time of the book's writing was that the Doctrine would ultimately be abolished, and in my view this was a wise move. The regulations of the FCC rose out of a need to control the use of public airwaves with limited space, but in the age of cable television, satellite radio, and virtually limitless internet space these regulations are totally unnecessary. The Fairness Doctrine was intended to ensure the free expression of contrasting views over the airwaves, but its consequence was actually the opposite a stifling of the free press. True freedom and fairness lies in the public's ability to change the channel or switch websites, in a marketplace of ideas which provides more viewpoints than the Fairness Doctrine could ever provide.

[1] Fred W. Friendly, The Good Guys, the Bad Guys and the First Amendment: Free Speech vs. Fairness in Broadcasting (Random House, 1975), 13

Learn more about this author, Aharon Hacohen.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.