by Anthony Gainey

Created on: June 26, 2007

I'll say "Yes," only because I know what sparked this debate, which is the controversy of the so-called Fairness Doctrine. I don't like the way the question is stated, which is inherently biased. Accurately stated, the government already exercises controls over the content of radio, by means of the Federal Communications Commission regulations. I disapprove of many of the FCC's decisions and oppose censorship in general. If anything, the Fairness Doctrine is an attempt to control censorship - censoring of opposing viewpoints.

Unfortunately, the loudest critics of the thing of late only want to apply it to their own narrow perspective, and many don't know much if anything about the subject. The Fairness Doctrine isn't new; it existed from 1949 to 1987, when it was repealed under Ronald Reagan, to silence administration critics and help consolidate the neo-conservative coup of America. It's difficult, when the intent and application of the Fairness Doctrine are clearly and honestly stated, to justify opposing it. For one thing, it only applies to public policy issues, not whether or not Rosie O'Donnell should stay on The View, or whether or not professional wrestling is fake. Also, it only applies to broadcast media, such as public airwave television and radio. It is intended to curb political editorializing, and to allow those personally attacked to the detriment of their professional offices equal time to respond. In no way does the Fairness Doctrine say you can't say anything you want, it simply says you may be held accountable for it.

The whole notion of infringement of First Amendment rights is smoke and mirrors; broadcast entities are not private citizens. The Fairness Doctrine does not infringe on the freedom of speech any more than the FCC does every day as a matter of course. Rush Limbaugh and Randi Rhodes are still free to say anything they care to say as private citizens. As broadcasters, however, they must allow equal time for rebuttal if anyone cares enough about the stupid statements made by either to do so. This prevents the dissemination of misinformation by biased reportage on public airwaves. As long as it is restricted, as it always was in the past, to public policy issues, I'm fine with it.

Learn more about this author, Anthony Gainey.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.