A Dave Johnson post at “progressive” blog Hufffingtonpost is demanding that the newly elected Democrats revive the so-called “fairness doctrine” to re-establish “balance” in the media by, among other things, demanding that if a party was “attacked” they be given equal time to defend their position. While at first glance this would seem beneficial to Conservatives and Libertarians whose points of view are limited to being heard on AM radio and Fox News, the reality is that supporters of the reinstitution simply want to water down successful talk radio formulas to drive them out of business.
The “fairness doctrine” is an attempt to regulate debate in this country, to regulate the force with which one makes an argument. The various leftists supporting the doctrine often dwell on the “personal attack rule” which required stations to notify groups criticized on their broadcasts, and allow those groups equal time to respond. So an anti-Communist op-ed piece run on a talk show on Tuesday would legally require the show’s host station to go find a Communist to respond. If, as one would expect, it is too much of a hassle to find Commies to respond to every comment made by Conservatives or Libertarians, the station would find it necessary to curtail speech against Communists “in the interest of fairness” until finding a respondent willing to come balance out the broadcast. Perhaps by being given a show of their own.
None of us are stupid enough to think that the people pushing such an agenda want it fairly administered. There will be no calls to a Democrat-controlled congress to ensure that Rosie O’Donell’s comments about not fearing terrorists be answered by victims of terrorists or their families appearing on The View. I doubt Air America will be allowing time for responses to their vicious attacks on anyone to the right of them. No, supporters here are not interested in fairness at all, just unfettered propagandizing.
Johnson himself is a member of neo-Marxist think tank The Commonweal Institute where another writer wrote longingly of a government seizure of oil companies ala Chavez as an idea that must be considered for there to be a “fair” debate in this country that will help us “arrive at solutions that incorporate the best ideas from all the different perspectives.”
As to the Fairness Doctrine, the Commonweal Institute’s purpose in supporting it couldn’t be clearer than in a quote from Katherine Forrest:
“If we want to see real change, we need to have public opinion on our side.”
In other words, successful “right wing” talk radio is taking the wind out of the sails of the Revolution, so stepping up the propaganda is the only way to get society to “progress” into the bloody dictatorship of which the writers at CommonWeal dream.