Pelosi's Fairness Doctrine push could jeopardize Net Neutrality, FCC Commissioner
EDITORIAL
Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and some of her colleagues from the Left have been talking up restoring The Fairness Doctrine recently.
For those who may not be familiar with the term, The Fairness Doctrine was nothing more than a governmental attempt to regulate the airwaves - radio and television - to make certain that the public hears or sees more than one side of an issue.
Essentially, the legislative teeth in The Fairness Doctrine said that if a radio or television station or program voiced an opinion, then that station or that program was legally obligated to air opposing points-of-view on that program or that station for a fair counter-balance of opinion.
As altruistic as that sounds, many on the right believe The Fairness Doctrine was merely a political tool sought by those from the left who wanted to silence or just reduce the impact from the growing popularity of right-leaning talkradio. The fact that left-leaning talkradio, AirAmerica, for example, failed to attract even a fraction of the kind of audience numbers that right-leaning talk did some say has been another reason for Pelosi's recent push for reinstatement of The Fairness Doctrine. After all, the right said, if the left couldn't compete, then they would try to control.
Advocates for The Fairness Doctrine say that even though major corporations and media conglomerates own most big city radio and television stations, those same companies don't own the frequencies their stations transmit on. The frequencies are owned by We the People, controlled and managed by the U.S. Government on our behalf.
Those who oppose The Fairness Doctrine cite concerns about governmental interference with our nation's Constitutional right to First Amendment Free Speech and don't believe programs like Keith Olbermann's on MSNBC television on the Left and Rush Limbaugh's radio program on the Right have a duty or an obligation or be legislatively forced to surrender their air time to an opposing point-of-view. And those stations who carry their programs across the nation should not be so penalized as well.
And from a business standpoint, air time, whether on radio, television or the Internet, has a finite inventory, only renewable every 24 hours but still maxing out at 24 x 7 week after week. And unlike any other industry, station owners cannot increase their manufacturing capacity beyond that 168 hours per week.
But more importantly, the networks and programs would not be compensated for surrendering that time.
However, what should be on the table of greatest concern is what Pelosi and friends might want to do to those who write for or post comments on the Internet - or to the hosts of those who do. FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell believes the possibility exists for The Fairness Doctrine to be extended beyond radio and television and into the Internet, a fear and concern not necessarily too far-fetched.
For all of its faults and despite those who abuse it, the Internet remains the last frontier of worlwide free thought, speech and opinion . . . a sacrosanct entity that needs to be protected from those with unchecked political motives.