Feb 17 2009
Fairness?
The “Fairness” Doctrine is raising its ugly head again because the left doesn’t like descent and would prefer censorship over free speech. The issue of the public airways is simple, listenership equals advertising dollars, equals viable programming. Only the most liberal of towns like Madison, Wisconsin have a wide enough listenership to justify liberal talk. Everywhere else, conservative talk shows garner enough listenership to financially justify their existence. Ask Al Franken. To force radio stations to carry programming that will not generate enough patronage in the name of providing equal time means that radio stations will not carry either, which is the point anyway. The left wants to get rid of the opposition any way they can. The reason liberal talk shows don’t get listeners is because liberals can get their information from virtually every other media source in existence, so they don’t need to hear it too. President Obama has said that without Fox News, he would have been up at least five more points going into the election. Why is that? It’s quite simple, Fox News was the only news outlet that asked the questions that needed to be asked about Obama; questioning his associations with Wright, Ayers, Acorn, his comments about Western Pennsylvania voters and on and on. Remember, he evicted reporters from his campaign plane who questioned his projected policies instead of bowing to the one. The tolerant, compassionate left is only tolerant and compassionate when you agree. I have unposted reaponses to prove it.
So you say “the left doesn’t like decent” hmm Well, the logical fallacy’s in this posting are only rivaled by the editorial failings. As regards talk radio the “left” as you call them, are in point of fact “dissenting” from the dominant paradigm on talk radio. Furthermore the “liberal media” is a fantasy. Media company’s are owned and controlled by some of the most economically powerful individuals in the country/word, it is delusional to believe that such powerful individuals would have their editorial policy reflect “liberal” view. You have heard of editorial policy? Editorial policy has a profound effect on what gets on the airways. It is not simply a matter of “listenership”; there is an orchestration of opinion that is taking place. And the conductors of that orchestra are doing a fine job. Editorial policy of network news is commonly considered “liberal” in the US, but would be considered conservative in the rest of the world. (Smoke and mirrors) As for your comment that “left is only tolerant and compassionate when you agree. I have unposted reaponses to prove it.” Did you read what you said? You are reflecting your intolerance by admitting that you don’t allow dissenting opinions to be posted in response to your blog, you censor them. Or are you a leftist, if so maybe you have a point. Presumably this is a personal communication, because it seems that you don’t have the courage to allow your opinions to be questioned in this forum, try using a spell check before you publish it takes only a few seconds and will make your work much more readable.
You guys are all worked up over this again? You know that the only talk about the return of the fairness doctrine is on right wing blogs, right? We’ve got bigger fish to fry than muzzling the blabbermouths on talk radio.
And really, the only talk radio anyone really needs to listen to is Howard Stern. Baba Boey!
http://obamacomics.today.com
Ha the world would be a much better place if we all listened a little more to Howard Stern…
Respect for posting my comment, beaconwriter