Posted on 11/12/2008 9:05:45 AM PST by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
Obama can’t possibly support Net Neutrality and the Fairness Doctrine at the same time.
How about these thoughts....
( an essay in progress)
There is currently under way an effort to return the Fairness Doctrine that will in effect limit free speech on the public airways. The Federal Communications Commission can reinstate the rule with no action by the US Congress or the President. The thought is that utterances on the radio must be fair and that a second view must be given equal time.
The public airways are actually a spectrum that has been divided into numerous specific frequency ranges that are corridors along which a radio wave carrying information is transmitted. These discrete licensed spectra are in actuality corridors along which information is carried. This proposed action regulating the information carried is a Federal matter since the airways are considered to be part of interstate commerce and require a Federal license. The states have no say in the matter.
The purpose of this essay is to develop a logical thought pattern that will permit the various States to gain some control of intra state transmission of information. That would be particularly true of my State, Tennessee.
Within the State of Tennessee information is transmitted and transferred by several methods but in this piece consideration will be restricted to two, printed publications and cable TV.
All printed material be it newspapers manufactured within the state borders or magazines, CD’s, DVD’s, recorded tapes or other similar publications from numerous sources are transported on the Tennessee public streets, roads and highways. These transportation corridors are in every respect similar to the spectral corridors regulated by the FCC except the roadways are regulated by the state of Tennessee. It is there fore a very logical step to conclude that based on the logic of information flow regulation by the FCC over federally regulated corridors, a similar regulatory body can be established by the State to assure that fairness is achieved in information carried or transported on the state regulated corridors and roadways. Printed publications must be fair to be transported over public ways.
In a similar vein, the state of Tennessee should be able to regulate the use of rights of way that are actually part of the same streets, roads and highways noted above. These rights of way are heavily used for various purposes including the physical presence of fiber optic and coaxial cable that are in fact information corridors similar to the FCC regulated corridors that are the public airways. The cable companies transporting on the public rights of way should be subject to the same fairness regulations governing the printed media transported on the adjacent roadways. Cable information must be fair to be transported over public rights of way.
There is no difference. Printed media and cable TV information are both transported along public ways .There is no difference between printed medis transported over public roads and voice utterances transmitted over radio waves. Thoughts are transmitted over public ways.
Then there is the question of the first amendment and free speech. It can be argued that such regulation is a violation of the First Ammendment to the Constitution. That is obviously not the case or the FCC would not be able to impose the Fairness Doctrine. There is no action in the regulation preventing the free exercise of the right to say what ever the writer or publisher or news commentator desires. They can say what ever they want with no fear of any retribution by the State of Tennessee. If they desire to propagate the speech using the public ways, then they are subject to fairness regulation. The precedent for the State regulatory authority is the FCC regulated Federal authority.
If the public ways are restricted, then how can the speech material be propagated? The answer is quite simple. If the speaker wants to sell his material, he can set up a place of business where the public can come and buy what ever is for sale. The speaker can also go into an out of door site and speak whatever comes to mind to all within earshot. His rights of free speech are not restricted by regulations of the transport of the medium packets. It is the transport of those information packets on public ways that is regulated.
They were representatives from all the colonies. If you bloody yanks hadn’t set about overthrowing your lawful King, George III, we wouldn’t be in this mess.
Fairness Doctrine could be a lifesaver for them.
please, no racist slurs about our new prez
< /sarc>
Better yet - call the present circumstances the “Freedom Doctrine” and ask why the DEmocrats want to repeal it!
But, but, he SAYS he is the dictator, I mean President of all of us.
But the toon was very much their elder brother and wayshower.
when does the WAR start?
Just askin’ is all.
But it better be after he's got his personal army...AND confiscated the guns of the citizens of the U.S.A.
MOLON LABE
ping
It was protection. It protected the 'Rats from any sort of public scrutiny.
Unless one of the conservatives gets ill and dies within the next four years.
If an O person sees negativity in any way here, it will happen. Wouldn't be surprised to find that is why FR had serious problems twice since the election. And the guy isn't even President yet.
Even in communist countries the government is having a hard time controlling the flow of information. They can try and slow down the free flow of information but I think that with the advent of the internet, cell phones, etc. it’s going to be tough to stop.
will it impose the TV where it is all liberal and impose all the newspapers too?
who would oversea that the media is being fair?
As right now the left enjoys TV, newspapers and Hollywood films (can’t turn over channels now without seeing homo’s in movies, can’t watch a historian movie without PC and diversity in it) being biased for them while we only have talk radio which the liberals could not compete with in the market place as no one wants to hear a bunch of moaning girlie men like colmes or angry bitter elitist bigoted women moaning.
i.e. the left want so silence free speech when it opposes them.
the likes of RUSH would destroy any liberal in this country as liberals do not want to hear or be questioned
If they impose this,
every conservative should cancel every bit of media that they are paying for.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.