MEET TALK'S EXECUTIONER: Obama's 'Fairness Doctrine' Czar Chosen, AAR Expects Benefit

The Radio Equalizer ^ | 11/6/2008 | Brian Maloney

[mak5]

Ahead of a widely-expected crackdown on free speech and political dissent by the incoming Obama administration, our Dear Leader has appointed a new FCC transition czar to oversee the process.

Henry Rivera, a longtime radical leftist, lawyer and former FCC commissioner, is expected to lead the push to dismantle commercial talk radio that is favored by a number of Democratic Party senators. Rivera will play a pivotal role in preventing Obama's critics from having a public voice during Obama's tenure in office.

Rivera, who resigned from the FCC nearly a quarter-century ago during the Reagan years, believes in a doctrine of "communications policy as a civil rights issue".

His exit during the Reagan Administration paved the way for the Fairness Doctrine's repeal when the late president appointed Patricia Diaz Dennis in 1986 to fill out the rest of Rivera's term. Had this not occurred, talk radio as we know it today would not exist.

That gives Rivera's new task a great deal of personal urgency: it's a late-career, second chance opportunity to shut down opposition voices that have been allowed to flourish since his depature from the commission.

In particular, Rivera is known for his push for more minority broadcasting ownership, but this issue has largely been rendered obsolete as former commercial broadcasting empires teeter on the brink of bankruptcy.

Rivera's first opportunity to eliminate commercial talk radio will occur in June 2009, as the term of Republican Robert McDowell expires and he can be replaced with a pro-Fairness Doctrine Democrat. That will give the commission a three-vote Democratic majority, though the final two seats must remain in Republican hands.

If they can strong-arm one of the three Republicans to leave early, this can be implemented even sooner.

One issue facing Rivera and Obama's new commissioner is how the policy will be carried out. According to data from the 1970s, when the old doctrine regulated the content of speech on the radio, the FCC was forced to utilize a great deal of its resources sifting through tens of thousands of "unfairness" complaints. The FCC's staff might have to be increased substantially to accommodate listeners looking to censor radio programming in their area.

Meanwhile, Air America Radio apparently believes liberal talk radio will benefit from the Fairness Doctrine's implementation! In an interview with a broadcast trade publication, Air America CEO Bennett Zier seems to believe that conservative stations would be forced to carry libtalk programming in order to comply with the law (but wouldn't libtalk stations also be required to run conservatives?):

RADIO INK: What do you think of all the speculation about the return of the Fairness Doctrine? Would that be a big problem for Air America?

BENNETT ZIER: If there’s a Fairness Doctrine, one would say that would be a good thing for left-of-center talk. But I think if Air America puts forth relevant, entertaining, provocative content, it’ll be a balance. People will be interested in what we want to do. We believe that we need to control our own destiny, and we’re going to do that by giving the listeners, the viewers, and the readers what they want in a lot of different technologies.

But this is delusional, as Air America's wildly unpopular talk programming will merely speed the demise of commercial radio if forced upon the industry's most-successful stations, which happen to be conservative talkers.

That could move the rest of the medium to the Internet and satellite radio, where Air America is already heard. The result would be a wipeout of a number of liberal radio executives who supported Obama.

Successful attempts by Democrats to suppress free speech will probably be cloaked, using different terminology and phony justifications. Don't be fooled: the only reason for this crusade is to wipe out every trace of political dissent.

[chimera]

It can move off shore easily enough, there’s satellite radio which the fcc can’t touch and streaming internet.

You need a license from the government to access the comm sats. The government can control those easily enough.

The Internet? My guess is that the Government will require all internet traffic in the US to flow through The Big Machine Super Server, replete with "gatekeeper" software that will scan for "subversive content" (i.e., anything critical of Lord High Master Obomba).

Offshore? The US spent a lot of money on radio jamming technology in the '50s and '60s, primarily for military applications. But that can be adapted for civilian use. You can always "modify" radio receiver technology so that it only accepts and processes "approved" transmissions. The pending switch to DTV is a template. Everything becomes "obsolete" and you can't view it unless you get an "approved", official converter box (filter).

[Yaelle]

TOUCH our first amendment rights and he’ll see a million man march, all right...

[WellyP]

All major media outlets, right and left make too much money from talk radio to allow it to be tampered with.

[WellyP]

All major media outlets, right and left make too much money from talk radio to allow it to be tampered with.

[scory]

I don’t doubt that opposition to this and to expanding “hate crime” laws and “campaign finance reform” regulations will coalesce and make a lot of noise. But remember that the leftist “main stream” media is going to support the left’s efforts to muzzle the opposition. And remember that the government that will come into power next January will be the dominated by far-left ideologues who consider the constitution to be largely irrelevant and an impediment to good governance (except when treated as a “living” document in which case it is anything they want it to be). There is much reason to believe that laws aimed at perpetuating the current majority will be enacted. These will include amnesty and citizenship for millions of illegals and laws intended to regulate and effectively muzzle political opposition. Who will stop them? The filibuster can be rendered impotent by a vote of the senate at any time. I do not see the leftists in the senate having the same qualms about a “nuclear option” that the GOP had a few years back.

I sure do hope I am wrong about all this. I really, really do.

[murron]

Got me. Unless they change it, it is only radio commentary that is being targeted.

[Adder]

I wonder just how kindly the ‘average” American will take to such moves as you describe.

Or the Supreme Court [for now].

But if you are right...oh well,,,,it was a nice thought.

[FarRightFanatic]

So then we’ll go back to XM. Time to buy stock.

[17th Miss Regt]

JOB 1-Silence your most effective critic.

If they really intend to do this, then we must play hard ball. Mr. Rivera may need to be personally and professionally destroyed. This is right out of "Rules for Radicals". Turnabout is fair play, you know.

[BubbaBasher]

You should change that to a million “gun” march.

[JerseyHighlander]

I’m not so sure the Fairness Doctrine will be implemented, and if it is, I expect the large radio networks to astroturf their required “liberal” media required time slots.

i.e. Bring in Libertarians and make them argue over the issues where libertarians and Democrats coincide on positions.

[chimera]

Individuals might try some things to resist such moves. But remember the USSC will be firmly in liberal hands in a few years with the retirements likely to come up. The courts won't protect us. And Obomba will have the whole awesome power of the federal government at his command to quash dissent. Look what they did to Joe Wurtzelbacher and the one reporter in FL who had the nerve to question Biden. And they haven't even taken over yet.

[numberonepal]

.the 1st amendment does have teeth.

It ain't no coincidence the 2nd sits right after the 1st?

[hdstmf]

One of the first things a new dictator does is grab control of communications media. Next are the the filling of jails with political dissenters. then confiscation of citizens guns. Next is ...

[TigersEye]

Bring it! They’ve never seen protest like they will if they try to take Rush off the air.

[Billthedrill]

Hmm...well, you can see how the argument runs. The fact that Rush makes millions and AAR is broke is pure economic INJUSTICE, and so to remediate (and we all want to be FAIR, don't we?) he has to give it to them. And, of course, a slot on the station lineup he's created. Oh, and not half, either - when one factors in the historical OPPRESSION he probably needs to pony up all of it.

It would be satire worthy of Orwell except that it happens to be their precise argument.

[penowa]

"The people in this country only lose their freedoms if they ALLOW it."

I hope you can call your Dem Rep without incurring any charges because otherwise you are wasting not only your time but your $. These people (including most of the Republican elected reps) didn't listen to us before this election. You'll be lucky after this blowout if any of the Dems even answer their phones anymore. We already know they don't read their e-mail.

They don't work for you; you work for them.

[piytar]

You bet. Who wants to join with me in filing a violation of civil rights under color of law charge? If a few thousand of us do, DoJ will have to take notice.

[rightwingextremist1776]

Show me where to sign! I want to be a playa’ too!

[piytar]

Talked to hard core conservative lawyer friend of mine (yes, they exist). He is researching the issue. If the un-Fairness Doctrine gets passed, he’s going to draft a complaint for people to use, and I’ll post it here, on LGF, all over the place, as will others he gives it to.