FCC and Right-Wing Radio Helping U.S. Press Freedom Slip Away (Molly Ivins Alert)

Creators Syndicate via sltrib.com ^ | 02/03/2003 | Molly Ivins

[wayoverontheright]

To point out the obvious, broadcasters and their national advertisers have a clear stake in promoting the views of those who advocate lower taxes on the rich and on big corporations.

That's a great example of what the left fears, but wouldn't come to pass because the retailing of information would be consumer driven. If you don't give the people what they want, they will turn it off. Once again, the left OVERESTIMATES the power of business in a competitive arena.

[Sabretooth]

Its has been put to the free market, and the free market has decided that no one wants to listen to liberal talk show hosts.

I think that this is because if youre liberal you will eventually have to come out against the U.S. and people just dont want to listen to that kind of crap.

[sticker]

"Has anyone ever seen Molly Ivans and Helen Thomas at the same time?"

No one could stand it.

[YankeeReb]

Now why do you think NPR (tax-payer funded) was not mentioned in that article, or for that matter whenever the "Fairness" Docterine is brought up?

[dighton]

Molly Ivins once won a blue ribbon in the hay eating category at the Texas Fair. / Molly would only look good with an apple in her mouth, surrounded by potatoes, on top of coals in a hole in the ground.

Mmmmmmmmm, roast suckling donkey.

[CDHart]

"She's absolutely right."

Yes, she is. But you're going to get flamed anyway!

Carolyn

[mg39]

But you're going to get flamed anyway! I know. ;) Thanks for the support. Yes, Ms. Ivins is liberal, but I think we all need to remember that no side has a monopoly on the truth.

[Wallace T.]

Molly Ivins seems to grieve the fact that talk radio is predominantly conservative, but neglects to mention that the TV networks (except Fox) and the print media are lopsidely liberal. Of course, if she approvingly cites a source that would describe talk shows like Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity as "far extreme right," (what would she think of Michael Savage or Gordon Liddy, much less libertarians or conspiracy theory advocates!) she would probably view NPR as middle of the road and Jennings, Rather, Brokaw, et. al., as moderately conservative. Her use of "conservative" and "liberal" labels seems to derive from a different planet from the usage of reasonable people.

That said, Ms. Ivins may have a point with respect to business concentrations potentially squeezing out other viewpoints. The rationale for government regulation was to facilitate a diversity of opinions. However, in real life, regulation becomes a tool of those in power. Remember that the "Fairness Doctrine" was used by the Johnson Administration as a club against its conservative opposition, such as H. L. Hunt's subsidized radio shows and the ministry of Rev. Carl McIntyre, a 1960s precursor of the "Christian Right." The "Fairness Doctrine" was not used on the "Big Three" netowrks, as they did not run commentaries, but routinely reported the news from a slanted liberal perspective. From the mid-1960s to the late 1980s, there was essentially a state-sanctioned news cartel with ABC, CBS, and NBC (and, later CNN) disseminating radio and TV news and opinion from a relentlessly liberal standpoint. Opinion shows, such as "Meet the Press," were usually stacked against conservative politicians and commentators. Of course, there was also PBS, to the left of the cartel politically, but state-subsidized. Conservatives were stuck with small circulation magazines and the talents of the Great Communicator, Ronald Reagan, during this 20-plus year period.

Talk radio helped get conservative ideas discussed in places other than small circulation magazines, dinner tables, and (sometimes) the pulpits of evangelical Christian churches. Rest assured the left would like to shut it down, and clamp down on the Internet as well.

[Tamzee]

actually, I'd personally be happy to trade them CBS for a radio station :) Sounds fair...

What I don't understand is why folks haven't realized that the GROWTH of conservative radio was BECAUSE of the liberal stranglehold on mainstream media. Like the Kurds, we were simply fleeing the poison gas...

[joesbucks]

It's funny.....when dereg was proposed and the fairness doctrine was diminished and eliminated, it was conservatives and religious folks who were up in arms over over loosing it. Funny how things change.

[Timocrat]

Is the free market not supposed to encourage competition rather than lead to its disappearance

The free market is meant to reward those that provide a needed service to the public. Part of its function is to eliminate those suppliers whose products or services are not required by the public e.g. the radio shows of Mario Cuomo and Jim Hightower. It is not the function of the free market to subsidise a section of the market which is not viable.

The government has taken upon itself the (unconstitutional)duty to subsidise those views which would not otherwise be commercially viable viz PBS,NPR etc.

Get a Lone Star Molly and go back in your kennel.

[narby]

Actually, I do worry about the media being owned by too few companies.

All it takes is for one Ted Turner to buy up all the media and decide to program the useful idiots out there to follow him to the commune.

Competition is good.

[Ole Okie]

What Ms Ivins is advocating of course, is more government control of both content and entry into the market.

This is Ms Ivin's (and the left's) opening salvo in demanding the return of the Fairness Act.

It might be funny if Molly weren't so vicious.

So, a tip of the VRWC hat to Ms Ivins. And, although I abhor profanity, she can jam this column up her.....(sun don't shine?)

[The Wizard]

can you spell c-o-w

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

"She's absolutely right."--mg39

Yes, she is. But you're going to get flamed anyway!--CDHart

There IS, theoretically, some sense in partitioning the market for broadcast music--multiple stations which don't pretend to compete for the same listening tastes. And I take it that that is the point of ownership of multiple stations in a given market.

The real fallacy, of course, is the false distinction between New York Times / NPR style verbal "objective reporting" and "talk radio." Even were "objective reporting" always factual (Gore wins Florida, anyone?) there is no principled way of determining what is important; journalism finesses that problem somewhat by restricting its attention to what attention-grabbing (unusual and, typically, bad) thing happened recently. That the reporter knows of.

What is called "talk radio" is opinion, and pretends to nothing else--which is actually morally superior to journalism unless the journalist actually does know and choose to report the important--not merely the most exciting--information.

But if you think about it, history would be a lot less exciting if journalism actually told us what was important; who knows what all journalism was prattling about in the 1930s when the only really important thing was the opinion of Winston Churchill about Adolph Hitler and Josef Stalin.

[HumanaeVitae]

The U.S. now ranks 17th, below Costa Rica and Slovenia, on the worldwide index of press freedom established by the Reporters Without Borders.

Wow. I bet they're just as unbiased as Medicins Sans Frontieres... (Doctors Without Borders)

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

The government has taken upon itself the (unconstitutional)duty to subsidise those views which would not otherwise be commercially viable viz PBS,NPR etc.

But then, the government created and controls all broadcasting via the FCC. Nothing the FCC does makes any constitutional sense if applied to print.

[StopThePress]

Maybe she should get with Katrina Vanden Huevel and see if anybody else gives a damn. The renewal of the fairness doctrine is a debate from the left seen coming 3000 miles away. Besides, the liberals say that talk radio is only for those who need somebody to lean on to form their views - the left is too intellectual for talk radio - so the bottom line is - WHO CARES?

[ohioman]

Ivans is a lieing sack of Helen Thomases.

Would you rather have Liberal Talk shows all over the radio. Present day Liberals (neo-commies) do not equal the truth.

[Nick Danger]

One company, Clear Channel, owns more than 1,200 stations

And they bought them up just as satellite-based digital radio was being perfected. Their mistake.