|
|
Topic started on 19-2-2009 @ 11:17 PM by Frankidealist35
|
White House: Obama Opposes 'Fairness Doctrine' Revival
www.foxnews.com
 President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine, a spokesman told FOXNews.com Wednesday.
The statement is the first definitive stance the administration has taken since an aide told an industry publication last summer that Obama opposes
the doctrine -- a long-abolished policy that would require broadcasters to provide opposing viewpoints on controversial issues.
"As the president stated during the campaign, he does not believe the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated," White House spokesman Ben LaBolt told
FOXNews.com.
That was after both senior adviser David Axelrod and White House press secretary Robert Gibbs left open the door on whether Obama would support
reinstating the doctrine.
"I'm going to leave that issue to Julius Genachowski, our new head of the FCC ... and the president to discuss. So I don't have an answer for you
now," Axelrod told FOX News Sunday over the weekend when asked about the president's position.
The debate over the so-called Fairness Doctrine has heated up in recent days as prominent Democratic senators have called for the policies to be
reinstated. Conservative talk show hosts, who see the doctrine as an attempt to impose liberal viewpoints on their shows, largely oppose any move to
bring it back. (visit the link for the full news article)
|
copyright & usage
|
Click here for more Breaking Political News topics
Hot Topics
|
Top Topics
|
This Week
|
Subscribe
|
Home
|
reply posted on 19-2-2009 @ 11:17 PM by Frankidealist35
|
Finally.
So Obama actually isn't going to limit free speech, one of the last thing, that these reporters have left. I think reporters should be allowed to put
their bias into the news because it's what you would do when you talk about politics, and, I think that it's only natural for news broadcasters to put
their bias in the news. I think that while the news should be objective-- and while-- I tend to stay away from partisan based news groups and news
agencies I think that the fairness doctrine really isn't fair at all because it would prevent news journalists from saying what their opinion about an
issue is. People who are concerned with knowing other views out there could just look for some other media pundit who's talking about the same
subject to find out about something. But I think that the fairness doctrine would just be one more push of legislation against free speech. I feel
this is important because this has been the issue of much discussion on ATS... I'm glad that he isn't stupid enough to bring the fairness doctrine
back.
www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 19-2-2009 @ 11:22 PM by Vitchilo
|
Yeah. Wait and see, it wouldn't be the first thing he ``changed`` opinion about.
Or some of the big propagandists on Fox News or Limbaugh will say something outrageous and Obama will change his stance. Or when congress pass it, he
will call it ``the will of the people``.
Just watch.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 19-2-2009 @ 11:27 PM by Frankidealist35
|
reply to post by Vitchilo
Do you have a problem with people stating their opinions on the news or something? People should know that if they're watching the news that people
are going to be biased when they give commentary about the issues.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 19-2-2009 @ 11:36 PM by jdub297
|
reply to post by Vitchilo
Obama has already made it clear he has no problem regulating content as long as Congress and the FCC do not call it "Fairness Doctrine."
Get ready for "The Free Speech and Internet Access" doctrine, or some other such blather that actually limits free speech and internet access.
1984 is coming, about 25 years late!
What will happen to ATS when "free access" to opposing opinions is MANDATED by the regs.? T & C is gone, or any other restriction!
It is coming and you won't even see that until it is over.
Deny Ignorance!
jw
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 19-2-2009 @ 11:49 PM by jdub297
|
Originally posted by Frankidealist35
reply to post by Vitchilo
Do you have a problem with people stating their opinions on the news or something? People should know that if they're watching the news that people
are going to be biased when they give commentary about the issues.
Yes, I certainly do. And you should, too!
"News" is an objective reporting of FACTS. "News" is not an opinion.
Opinions are "Commentary." Opinions are NOT-facts; they are interpretations and 'comments' on FACTS. That's why it's called "Commentary!"
The fact that most of the MSM and the audience have blurred the distinction or no longer give a damn is the main reason the MSM have no credibility
among those who care about the distinction.
Some viewers believe "The Daily Show" is 'News.'
Some Reporters and Editors believe the "News" calls for opinion.
This couldn't be more screwed up if you tried.
Is it any wonder that you can buy a share of NYT stock for less than the cost of "The New York Times?"
deny ignorance
jw
[edit on 19-2-2009 by jdub297]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 19-2-2009 @ 11:49 PM by Irish M1ck
|
reply to post by Vitchilo
This is unbelievable. Wow, just wow. Every time a new piece of information comes out, whether something good or bad, you guys still manage to
criticize it.
"Oh - My - God! An aide told us that Obama wants to take Limbaugh off the air with the Fairness Doctrine. We better talk about this for months and
months like we know its a fact and it's the end of the world!"
"Oh - My - God! Obama said he doesn't want to do that. I should be happy, since I was upset about it in the first place, but instead, I'm just
going to say he flip-flopped and he lied about it!"
Just more proof that he cant win no matter what.
[edit on 2/19/2009 by Irish M1ck]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 19-2-2009 @ 11:58 PM by mental modulator
|
Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by Vitchilo
This is unbelievable. Wow, just wow. Every time a new piece of information comes out, whether something good or bad, you guys still manage to
criticize it.
"Oh - My - God! An aide told us that Obama wants to take Limbaugh off the air with the Fairness Doctrine. We better talk about this for months and
months like we know its a fact and it's the end of the world!"
"Oh - My - God! Obama said he doesn't want to do that. I should be happy, since I was upset about it in the first place, but instead, I'm just
going to say he flip-flopped and he lied about it!"
Just more proof that he cant win no matter what.
[edit on 2/19/2009 by Irish M1ck]
It's great MICK, ain't it???
I love it!!!
I couldn't be more out of it if I shot up Bleach and drank a cat $#@$@ smoothy.
Welcome to four years of THE ANTI LOGIC HYPOC EXPRESS ...
Go on blood pressure medicine now! IM
cheers
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 26-2-2009 @ 10:03 PM by Bejing
|
The new fairness doctrine is in an amendment today.
pressuring radio media owners to get conservative off air through "Diversity"
Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin also won approval for an alternate amendment that would order the Federal Communications Commission to encourage radio
ownership "diversity."
A DeMint aide said Durbin's measure will "impose the Fairness Doctrine through the back door by trying to break up radio ownership."
The aide called the Durbin proposal "an attempt to break up companies like Clear Channel and hurt their syndications and therefore putting many local
radio stations out of business that depend on those syndicated shows for revenue."
The measure passed by a vote of 57-to-41.
The media control doctrine is a policy created decades ago but abolished in the late 1980s that required broadcasters to provide opposing views on
controversial issues of public importance.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
