"John Figliozzi" wrote in message
...
The Fairness Doctrine worked well for decades in that it held stations
to the one of the responsibilities required of them under the terms of
their licenses--to air alternative points of view. It gave alternative
points of view a right to time on the public airwaves, something sorely
lacking today. In fact, it's been an ever increasing spiral down the
tubes since the FD was repealed. What passes for public discourse on
the airwaves today--even with the expanding universe of outlets--is a
travesty. And you and I have no right to respond in kind. The FD kept
agendas from spinning out of control and kept most discourse civil and
centered.

How did the fairness doctrine keep adgendas from spinning out of control? I
mentioned Chicago's Howard Miller show. That show would frequently get as
loud and obnoxious as Limbaugh or Hannity, back when the Fairness Doctrine
was in full force. I haven't seen their shows, but I understand Joe Pyne's
and Wally George's shows were similiar. The stations would run boring
counter programming on other hours to keep the FCC happy.

It's my opinion that the current popular bombastic programming is just
another radio copycat phenonema. Success breeds imatators.



As you must know, Frank, newspapers do not require a license to operate
and the Communications Act does not designate them as a public
resource.

Let's imagine most newspapers were controlled by one sydicate. Would we be
better off if they were licensed? Justifications could be manufactured.
They use paper from trees grown on public land. They are transported on
public roads. Would newspapers serve us better if we gave the government
the right to change their ownership or shut them down?


The fact is--the FCC violates the spirit and letter of the
Act when it comes to its stewardship of licensed radio and tv stations.
And no one in Congress cares because of copious amounts of NAB money.

In short, it all stinks.

JMHO,
John Figliozzi

And I still think these are reasonably good questions:


How would the new fairness doctrine keep the political partisans and kooks
from harassing media stations with nusiance complaints? Who would define
what a nuisance complaint is?


Frank Dresser