FAIRNESS DOCTINE: 47% Favor Government Mandated Political Balance on Radio, TVNearly half of Americans (47%) believe the government should require all radio and television stations to offer equal amounts of conservative and liberal political commentary, but they draw the line at imposing that same requirement on the Internet. Thirty-nine percent (39%) say leave radio and TV alone, too.
At the same time, 71% say it is already possible for just about any political view to be heard in today's media, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Twenty percent (20%) do not agree.
Fifty-seven percent (57%) say the government should not require websites and blog sites that offer political commentary to present opposing viewpoints. But 31% believe the Internet sites should be forced to balance their commentary
The democrats are going to DO this.
The web will be next.
Believe it.
Epaminondas,
ReplyDeleteThe scariest thing is that you may be right. I doubt that they will do the same for newspapers who all still dominated by the left. Yeah, I wonder how we could explain that double standard.
SCREW THAT,
ReplyDeleteTHE DAMN DAY, THEY TELL A FEMINIST THAT SHE HAS TO ALLOW MISOGYNIST CRAP ON HER BLOG
IS THE DAY THEY CAN GO FUCK THEMSELVES
this is Just another attempt in controlling what people say or to control it in a way where the POWER overrules the MINORITY voice,
in other words, so that they can do more to perpetuate a power hegemony, and the thing is, PEOPLE SEE THROUGH IT,
oh Pelosi can go barf in a bag, screw Her.
ITS CALLED
CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE--the day they do that, is the day I GO TO PRINT,
you know, seriously, screw that noise...hell the internet wasn't always around, and its NOT THE ONLY WAY TO GET THE WORD OUT,
not by a long shot--
THE MORE THEY CENSOR THE SMARTER WE'LL GET.!!!!!!!! THEY CAN SHOVE THEIR GODDAMN PC
oh, one more thing, its not THE DEMS WHO ARE DOING THIS--
ReplyDeleteITS THE ASSHOLES WHO'VE TAKEN OVER THE DEMS--THE MSM, THE MISOGYNISTS, THE OBAMA CULT
BELIEVE ME, THERE IS A LOT OF DEMS THAT ARE DIE HARD OPPOSED TO THE
'FAIRNESS DOCTRINE'
IT WREAKS OF STALINISM AND BIG BROTHER
BAD ENOUGH WITH MEN AND MEDIA TELLING US WHAT TO SAY AND WHAT NOT TO SAY
SCREW THAT--WE SAY WHAT WE WANT--LORD KNOWS WE'VE HEARD THEIR NOISE FOR DECADES...
FAIRNESS DOCTRINE = ZIEG HEIL
and to that, we true liberals say
BITE ME
[to them not you]
LOL if I have to I'll embroidery SPEECH on little quilt blocks and send them out by snail mail or
ReplyDeleteride a damn horse and hand them out by person--
if they want an opposing view--LET THEM EMBROIDERY IT--
LOL LOL LOL
idiots, whats Next--
opposing ART WORK ON ONE CANVAS--
frickin MORONS
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNatasha,
ReplyDeleteYou said,
------------------------------------
this is Just another attempt in controlling what people say or to control it in a way where the POWER overrules the MINORITY voice,
in other words, so that they can do more to perpetuate a power hegemony, and the thing is, PEOPLE SEE THROUGH IT,
oh Pelosi can go barf in a bag, screw Her
------------------------------------
I have to agree with you here. The really disturbing thing is this could work. What makes it so insidious is that it is an attempt to muzzle free speech in the guise of supporting it. Instead of openly calling for censorship, they are trying to con us out of our right to free speech.
Let me explain what I mean. If this new fairness doctrine passes, companies who run any program with controversial views will stop doing so because of the tremendous cost of always having to find someone who disagrees. It will eliminate the profitability of conservative talk radio for example. This is simple economics. Soon people who have opinions that aren't really controversial might be silenced as well, for fear they might be deemed controversial by the establishment, because what is controversial? Everywhere that there is disagreement there is controversy. This is censorship parading as anti censorship, and it looks like too many Americans are falling for the ruse.
Natashe...smart money says ... "snail mail ", being a federal and public conveyance would be subject to the same law.
ReplyDeleteThe democrats understand PERFECTLY that allowing the people to express their opinions as they please is a threat to them
They use the chimera of a stupid public which 'needs' their idea of balance to enforce prior restraint on market forces
Could someone set up an offshore shortwave transmitter and get feed from onshore and bypass the Fairness Doc? Radio Free America? It's pretty sad to see a once free nation walking slowly into the darkness.
ReplyDeleteDamien Said
ReplyDeleteIf this new fairness doctrine passes, companies who run any program with controversial views will stop doing so because of the tremendous cost of always having to find someone who disagrees.
If that is so, then, every time, every single time, there is whitewash of Islamism, there will have to be the opinion of someone who disagrees, there will have to be fairness doctrine in schoolbooks (to tell the reason why crusades were launched, for a start).
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteIf they were being logically consistence, yes there would. But the real agenda of the fairness doctrine is not fairness. It is to silence your critics without openly supporting censorship.
Yea but here's where it will get Really hypocritical,
ReplyDeletedo you think, for one minute, the largest industry that uses the Freedom of Speech clause to hide behind, the Porn industry,
will for one minute, be told that on every single gang rape video they'll have to portray the victim of that rape and other feminists having a segment on why its a human right crime?
Hell no, and Why? MONEY, BIG MONEY,
there will be SO MANY LOOPHOLES for those with POWER AND MONEY, to avoid the fairness doctrine,
while, average joe and susy will be censored beyond belief,
and, yea, you are right, the snail mail, YOU ARE RIGHT---
IT WILL BE JUST LIKE IN THE DAYS OF STALIN, where they checked the mail and all papers and books and literature and music and poems to look for
'subversions against the STATE, or, to the FAIRNESS DOCTRINE'.
And its not just a matter of freedom of speech, This is about THOUGHT CONTROL,
by using the argument of balance to eventually 'mold thought' into this numb incapability to be critical.
They've been doing it in colleges for years,
what I call, 'strictly controlled radicalism',
in other words, they'll teach revolution, Fanon, but not Bakunin,
IF, IF, you dare challenge, even from the most radical left point of view--if it falls out of their 'domain of control'--they'll shut you down in a heartbeat,
thats too 'out there' they'll say,
it doesn't fit into the indoctrination that we have set forth.
And it Is a very clever utility of indoctrination.
I remember when the scandal hit the universities over Horowitz, and ironically some of those same principles the left feared, not just radical left but moderate leftists,
there was a real fear that if any student turned in a professor, that was it,
and to be frank, I was against some of the rhetoric then just as much as I'm against the Fairness Doctrine--balance is good, sure, but,
here's the clincher on that whole balance thing,
is, Who has the power to control what They define as 'balance'?
Once thoughts and speech can become 'policed' by all, similar to how it was in the days of Stalin, because thats exactly how that worked,
a Russian told me once, that during the day, if, lets say, one was on a train, and said a joke about Stalin,
and another heard, two things,
If that person turned that joke in, the one who told the joke was sent to the gulag, and possibly even the person who snitched because they'd be deemed disloyal
OR
If that person Didn't turn that one who said the joke in, another could have been sitting there, Spying on both, and would have turned them both in,
one for telling the joke, the other for not reporting the crime of degrading ole god Stalin.
It was a no win situation and this cult of fear, did just that,
no one said Anything, for dare they be tried as an enemy of the state.
Even the most Clever of ruses, were penalized once their objections were founded, whether it was a note in music that was Western or an artwork that wasn't in the form of Socialist Realism or
a poem that had nationalist tendencies,
all speech and art, had to eventually praise and conform to the STATE and actually, give Praise to Stalin,
to save Loved ones, from the gulags and execution.
And I see that happening here as we speak, well, to be truthful, its been happening for a very long time, but its been very subtle,
as one man said to me, they don't call it creeping fascism for nothing.
Folks, I hate to say this, I'd love to deny it, I'd love nothing more than to look forward to years with no fear and pretend all of this wasn't real,
but I know better, its going to come down to, either we stay true to our convictions,
or we cave in, and it will be a matter of life and death, one day,
and I think for us, for those in the free [or relatively free or formally free] world, who KNOW what that freedom of movement is, are going to revolt,
with all thats in us, eventually, I would think...BUT, as one of you said,
their using 'fairness' and 'balance' to mislead AND to overtime, mold the consciousness to that point of
rendering incapable of decision,
a line I borrow from the movie "Golden Compass" because that one line, has so much powerful meaning in So many ways...a weight of truth in it for sure,
IF THERE EVER WAS A TIME, FOR CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE,
IT IS NOW.
I've not been big on tattoos,
but, seriously, I think, a big
NO SHARIA
would be a Really awesome tattoo, what ya think?
:)Cuzz the more I read about the creeping fascism, the more subversive I feel,
and I am going to read Civil Disobedience tonight,
before they ban it. Memorize entire pages,
well, I wish, my memory isn't that good, but you know, in Russia thats exactly what they did,
remembered entire pages. And those pages, many were published later...
as for snail mail, you know thats why there is Ezines--anarchists have been fighting government crack downs on underground publishing for Years,
and some of the first bloggers to be shut down in this country were anarchists in fact--contrary to what many think, these aren't crazed individuals, by no means,
[well you get crazies in every bunch] but as a generalization,
there is a segment of society that has been warning of these things for a very long time, and few took them seriously--now we are seeing it,
and the Fairness Doctrine is just the tip of the iceberg.
IF you don't know the art of subversion, it wouldn't be a bad time to START.
Well, well... And how did Russia end up with its magnificent censorship?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
ReplyDeleteYou asked,
-------------------------------------
Well, well... And how did Russia end up with its magnificent censorship?
-------------------------------------
The tzars and the Bolsheviks and Putin simply outlawed criticism of the state. They practiced censorship and called it censorship.
Thank you, Damien.
ReplyDelete