• Jaysyn@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Fairness Doctrine only covered public airwaves.

      Currently, it’d get rid of AM talk radio bullshit, but that’s it.

        • chaos@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The Fairness Doctrine only survived the 1st Amendment because the airwaves are a public resource: each area only has one electromagnetic spectrum, and the sections of it that are useful for broadcasting are limited enough that not everyone can have a useful slice of the pie. As such, if you’re lucky enough to get a slice, the government gets to have a lot more control than they normally do over how you use it. You’re using something that belongs to all of us but only a few people get permission to use, so you have to do your part to serve the public good in addition to the programming you want to broadcast.

          Cable has none of that scarcity, since we can have effectively as many cables in an area as we want, and each cable can be stuffed with more signal than the airwaves can, since you don’t have to worry about whether any given frequency can pass through walls or buildings, just copper. Without that, the government can no longer justify dictating content.

          • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The fairness doctrine was introduced to stop the mistake made in print media, where newspapers were nothing more than political party mouth pieces.

            The political parties hated that.

            And them getting it revoked was a return to the shit “news” of the pre-doctrine days.

            The first amendment was written to protect individuals, it has been used as a method to shield organisations and allow disinformation to flourish in the USA.

  • AbstractifyBot@beehaw.orgB
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    In case you’re in a hurry here’s the jist of the linked article


    The article criticizes the media for its ongoing coverage of Donald Trump despite his criminal indictments and anti-democratic behavior. It argues the press ignores Trump’s calls for violence and fails to consistently mention his fraud charges and impeachments. While Biden made progress with labor unions, the media focused more on an outlier poll favoring Trump. The author claims both political parties and the press lack courage and fail to hold Trump fully accountable for his lies and attempts to overturn the 2020 election.

    Unless the facts about Trump’s legal troubles and history of falsehoods are prominently addressed in all reporting, the media is not doing its job of informing the public, the article contends.


    This comment was generated by a bot. Send comments and complaints via private message.

  • Murdified@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    For fucking real? The salon? Against the media?? Fuck off. (I hate him too, I hate pandering bs as well)