THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE CONTINUED
by
Ken Eliasberg
Last week week we opened a discussion of the “Fairness Doctrine,” noting in the course of doing so the essential unfairness of the doctrine and the reasons for the left’s seeking to restore its viability, i.e., their inability to offer arguments that are competitive with conservative thinking. And I suggested that the doctrine was incompatible with notions of free speech. Also, that since there are now almost unlimited media vehicles to access diverse points of view, scarcity was no longer a reason to justify the doctrine’s being resurrected (assuming that it was in the first place).
And this is an extremely, indeed critical, reason to why the doctrine is not only no longer necessary (again, assuming that it ever was), but would clearly constitute a first amendment violation. There are tons of other media outlets that deal extensively in political matters—e.g. television, newspapers, the internet, etc.—and all of them are predominantly liberal. As previously noted, talk radio is the only media vehicle that is dominated by conservatives.
And this is just unacceptable to lefties who not only want, but require, a monopoly of information outlets which the public should be able to access. And, as also noted, they premise their attack on the notion that you are so weak, stupid, and impressionable that you are led, contrary to your better judgment, down the path of conservatism. It is just impossible for them to realize that intelligent people can have a view contrary to their transcendent wisdom. This despite, as also noted, Talk Radio’s having a more intelligent audience than your average audience. Of course, they are projecting—as they usually do—that because their audience blindly buys their garbage, and because everyone knows that liberals are just smarter than your average bear, any audience that appreciates conservative thinking must be composed of nincompoops.
Alan Sears, after noting that Speaker Pelosi has reportedly promised to