
	Where results make sense

Topic: Fairness Doctrine

Related Topics

Federal Communications Commission

Cable TV

Talk radio

American Broadcasting Company

Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act

Common carrier

List of United States Supreme Court cases

Home Box Office

1969

	Fairness Doctrine
		The policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission that became known as the "Fairness Doctrine" is an attempt to ensure that all coverage of controversial issues by a broadcast station be balanced and fair.
		This doctrine grew out of concern that because of the large number of applications for radio station being submitted and the limited number of frequencies available, broadcasters should make sure they did not use their stations simply as advocates with a singular perspective.
		The fairness doctrine ran parallel to Section 315 of the Communications Act of 1937 which required stations to offer "equal opportunity" to all legally qualified political candidates for any office if they had allowed any person running in that office to use the station.
	www.museum.tv /archives/etv/F/htmlF/fairnessdoct/fairnessdoct.htm (1140 words)

	The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine Publication
		The appearance of fairness doctrine is a rule of law that requires government decision-makers to conduct non-court hearings and proceedings in a way that is fair and unbiased in both appearance and fact.
		Challenges based on a suspected violation of the appearance of fairness doctrine have to be raised as soon as the basis for disqualification is made known or reasonably should have been known prior to the issuance of the decision, otherwise they cannot be used to invalidate the decision.
		Anyone seeking to rely on the appearance of fairness doctrine to disqualify a member of a decision-making body from participating in a decision must raise the challenge as soon as the basis for disqualification is made known to the individual.
	www.mrsc.org /Publications/textafd.aspx (8358 words)

	Fairness Doctrine - dKosopedia
		The Fairness Doctrine was a policy enforced in the United States by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that required broadcast licensees to present controversial issues of public importance, and to present such issues in a fair and balanced manner.
		The Doctrine was enforced throughout the entire history of the FCC (and its precursor, the Federal Radio Commission) until 1987, when the FCC repealed it in the Syracuse Peace Conference decision in 1987.
		The Republican-controlled commission claimed the doctrine had grown to inhibit rather than enhance debate and suggested that, due to the many media voices in the marketplace at the time, the doctrine was probably unconstitutional.
	www.dkosopedia.com /wiki/Fairness_Doctrine (440 words)

	Fairness Doctrine, The Chilling Effect, and Television Editorials
		In August 1987 the FCC said the Fairness Doctrine inhibited the presentation of controversial issues of public importance and had a "chilling effect" on the broadcast industry.
		Using Tedford's (1985) definition of chilling effect, the effect of the Fairness Doctrine on controversial programming seems to have developed from confusion over the Fairness Doctrine, difficulty in adhering to its requirements and the imposition of unusually severe punishments, such as the loss of a license.
		Since the Fairness Doctrine has not been completely abolished, stations may be hesitant to engage in additional controversial programming until the fate of the Fairness Doctrine is determined.
	www.acs.appstate.edu /~spicelnd/fairdoc.htm (911 words)

	NOW with David Brancaccio. Politics & Economy. What Happened to Fairness? \| PBS
		In 1949, the FCC adopted the fairness doctrine, a policy that viewed station licensees as "public trustees" and, as such, responsible for addressing controversial issues of public importance.
		Some journalists considered the fairness doctrine a violation of the First Amendment rights of free speech and free press; they felt reporters should be able to make their own decisions about balancing stories.
		When the fairness doctrine came before the courts in 1987, they decided that since the doctrine was not mandated by Congress, it did not have to be enforced.
	www.pbs.org /now/politics/fairness.html (383 words)

	Broadcasting Fairness Doctrine Promised Balanced Coverage
		The Fairness Doctrine from 1949 until 1987, when it was discontinued by the Federal Communications Commission, required broadcasters, as a condition of getting their licenses from the FCC, to cover controversial issues in their community, and to do so by offering some balancing views.
		The fairness doctrine's constitutionality was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark 1969 case, Red Lion Broadcasting v.
		In 1987 a bill to place the Fairness Doctrine into federal law passed the House by 3 to 1, and the Senate by nearly 2 to 1, but it was vetoed by President Ronald Reagan.
	www.twf.org /News/Y1997/Fairness.html (1432 words)

	Fair and balanced? - Salon
		During the Fairness Doctrine debate in the 1980s, the Republican opposition seemed to flow from a general philosophy that there ought to be fewer government regulations on big business.
		When the FCC instituted the Fairness Doctrine in 1949, it considered station licensees "public trustees," obligated to give a reasonable opportunity for contrasting points of view to be heard on controversial issues of public importance.
		In 1986, the U.S. Court of Appeals' Antonin Scalia and Robert Bork ruled in a 2-1 decision that the Fairness Doctrine was not a law passed by Congress and was therefore not binding; it was merely an agency regulation, which meant Fowler's FCC had final say in the matter.
	dir.salon.com /story/news/feature/2005/02/01/fairness/index.html (1310 words)

	Andrew Olmsted dot com: The Beauty of 'Fairness'
		For those unfamiliar with the Fairness Doctrine, the basic idea was that if a station ran a broadcast deemed to advocate a particular point of view, it had to provide equal time for the other side.
		Since fairness is subjective, the fact it is [Update: it is Democrats pushing the issue, not 'the Democrats'] the Democrats who are pushing so hard for a new Fairness Doctrine suggests that, were they successful, they would change the current broadcast landscape.
		The original justification for the Fairness Doctrine included the fact spectrum is limited, so not everyone can have access to a radio or TV station, and while the spectrum is a lot larger now than it was then (or, more precisely, we can use more of it), it is still a finite resource.
	andrewolmsted.com /archives/001643.html (965 words)

	SavageStupidity.com - Fairness Doctrine (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20)
		The Fairness Doctrine was enforced from 1949 through 1987, and compliance with it was a condition that broadcast licensees were required to comply with to receive and to renew their license.
		Research demonstrates "that there was not a mass effort by broadcasters to begin or cease editorializing after the Fairness Doctrine was set aside by the FCC in 1987".
		Without the leverage of the Fairness Doctrine, opposing and alternative viewpoints, even when willing and able to pay for the airtime, can and will be excluded from the airwaves.
	www.savagestupidity.com /fairness-doctrine.html (1329 words)

	Fairness Doctrine Debate - Part II
		Also in consideration is the "Fairness Doctrine," which required broadcasters to present controversial topics in a fair and honest manner.
		The short story on the Fairness Doctrine is that Reagan got it nuked and shortly after that Rush entered the picture, which opened out on a conservative monopoly on radio, because the Democrats were still trying to figure out direct mail.
		But conservatives do not want fairness, which can be seen through their trade policy, as well as their anti-union rhetoric, which has decimated the middle class, by selling out workers for outsourcing all in the name of profit.
	www.taylormarsh.com /archives_view.php?id=25055 (1553 words)

	WorldNetDaily: Democrats long for 'Fairness Doctrine'
		It's been nearly 20 years since the Fairness Doctrine – which said broadcasters had to provide "equal time" to opponents of political views expressed on the public airwaves – ruled the radio and TV industries.
		A website dedicated to resurrecting the Fairness Doctrine is collecting signatures from Americans who support Slaughter's bill, H.R. 501, or the Fairness and Accountability in Broadcasting Act, which was introduced Feb. 1 and has 12 co-sponsors.
		Fairness Doctrine proponents are decidedly anti-broadcaster, saying the media have betrayed the public trust.
	www.worldnetdaily.com /news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=43863 (954 words)

	Fairness Doctrine - SourceWatch
		The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the Federal Communications Commission, spanning from 1949 to 1987, that required radio and television stations to air all sides of important or controversial issues, and give equal time to all candidates.
		The Supreme Court upheld the Fairness Doctrine in 1969, in Red Lion Broadcasting v.
		In 1986, a federal court of appeals ruled that the Fairness Doctrine was not law and could be overturned without Congressional approval.
	www.sourcewatch.org /index.php?title=Fairness_Doctrine (280 words)

	MyDD :: More On The Fairness Doctrine
		The Fairness Doctrine is an extremely popular idea, but when Democrats tried to pass the legislation in 1993, conservatives were able to defeat it.
		In 1987 (when he was still the host of a local show in Sacramento), a bill to inscribe the Fairness Doctrine in federal law passed the House by 3 to 1, and the Senate by nearly 2 to 1, but it was vetoed by President Ronald Reagan.
		The Fairness Doctrine doesn't require that each program be internally balanced, or mandate "equal time": It would not require that balance in the overall program line-up be anything close to 50/50.
	www.mydd.com /story/2005/1/21/13622/8346 (2221 words)

	The Fairness Doctrine
		The doctrine was abandoned in the 1980s with the proliferation of cable, leaving citizens with little recourse over broadcasters that misuse the public airwaves, except to oppose the renewal of licenses.
		One such obligation was the Fairness Doctrine, which was meant to ensure that a variety of views, beyond those of the licensees and those they favored, were heard on the airwaves.
		Fowler vowed to see the Fairness Doctrine repealed, and though he would depart the commission a few months before the goal was realized, he worked assiduously at setting the stage for the doctrine’s demise.
	www.fair.org /index.php?page=2053 (2548 words)

	Bring Back the Fairness Doctrine
		The Fairness Doctrine was an ingenious device, because it empowered the public, not the government, to monitor the fairness of the airwaves.
		In August 1987 the FCC repealed the Doctrine, claiming that it was unconstitutional, although the Supreme Court had ruled unanimously in 1969 that the Fairness Doctrine was not only constitutional but essential to democracy.
		But under the Fairness Doctrine he had convinced radio stations to give him 1/2 to 1/3 as much time as the industry had bought.
	www.sustainer.org /dhm_archive/search.php?display_article=vn209fairnessed (852 words)

	Fairness Doctrine \| TPMCafe
		There was no call to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, which would have been difficult anyway given the relatively recent decision to repeal and the court decision affirming the appeal.
		In any event, while the Fairness Doctrine sought to advance important objectives, it suffered a flaw that plagued nearly all FCC public interest obligations: it was so vague as to be almost meaningless and unenforceable.
		But it's hard to see that the Fairness Doctrine, no matter how vague, would have failed to be useful in battling, say, a radio broadcaster who had three hours of Rush Limbaugh a day, followed by Gordon Liddy and Ollie North, but refused to let opposing voices even buy advertising time on those programs.
	www.tpmcafe.com /story/2005/12/5/9243/55078 (1928 words)

	The American Voice 2004 - Ask Dr. Dave - Answer - Fairness Doctrine
		Without the Fairness Doctrine, the Court declared, a broadcaster could assert to the FCC at renewal, “I am a racist and agree only with that viewpoint, so that is all that I will present” and the agency would have to renew license, the antithesis of serving the public interest.
		The Court declared that the Fairness Doctrine “finds specific recognition in statutory form, is in part modeled on explicit statutory provisions relating to political candidates, and is approvingly reflected in legislative history…(in) adopting the new regulations the Commission was implementing congressional policy rather than embarking on a frolic of its own.”[12]
		On January 23, 1987 the Commission invited public comment as to whether “enforcement of the fairness doctrine is constitutional and whether enforcement of the doctrine is contrary to the public interest”.
	www.americanvoice2004.org /askdave/21askdave.html (4771 words)

	Whatever happened to the fairness doctrine? - By Drew Clark - Slate Magazine
		The first is the "fairness doctrine" of the Federal Communications Commission, which required broadcasters to grant reply time to those who said their views were criticized.
		The second are two corollaries of the doctrine—the "personal attack" rule and the "political editorial" rule—vestiges of the fairness doctrine that survived a while longer and then died in 2000.
		The "fairness doctrine" dates back to 1927 and was premised on the notion that electromagnetic frequencies, being "scarce," needed to be rationed through a government-granted license.
	www.slate.com /id/2108443 (868 words)

	Is Fairness Doctrine on Its Way Back? by John Berlau - HUMAN EVENTS
		The Fairness Doctrine, initiated by the Federal Communications Commission in 1949, mandated that radio and television stations “provide a reasonable opportunity for the presentation of contrasting viewpoints” on “vitally important controversial issues.” But since there are contrasting views as to what’s “fair,” broadcast stations were left with a few unpleasant options.
		The Fairness Doctrine was decried across the political spectrum—by free marketeers and by genuine free-speech liberals such as CBS News president Fred Friendly—for its chilling effects on discussion of issues.
		The Fairness Doctrine was hard to apply to disguised bias and the omission of important facts on network news.
	www.humanevents.com /article.php?id=17793 (1351 words)

	http://www.qando.net/ - Return of the "Fairness Doctrine"?
		In 1987, the FCC under Ronald Reagan abolished the doctrine by a 4-0 vote and it's abolition was upheld by DC Circuit Court of Appeals in its Syracuse Peace Council decision..
		The FCC argued the doctrine had grown to "inhibit rather than enhance debate" and suggested that, "due to the many media voices in the marketplace at the time, the doctrine was probably unconstitutional".
		I’ll grant you that resurrecting the fairness doctrine would be wrong, but referring to what radio has become a bastion of as conservative thought must be either ironic or charitable.
	www.qando.net /details.aspx?Entry=5256 (1937 words)

	The Fairness Doctrine is Alive and Well in Venezuela (I)
		The Fairness Doctrine, widely applauded by media reformists, judges and scholars yet highly criticized by broadcasters and First Amendment purists, imposed a general obligation on broadcasters to ensure that diverse ideas were presented.
		In 1987, after a series of federal cases slowly chipped away at the Fairness Doctrine[10], the Reagan-era FCC implemented its deregulatory philosophy by striking down key provisions, claiming they conflicted with the public interest and the First Amendment.
		Media reformists in the United States should be supporting this resurgence of the treasured Fairness Doctrine and movement towards democratization of media in Venezuela, especially in light of the FCC’s upsurge of deregulation and media concentration.
	www.venezuelanalysis.com /articles.php?artno=1044 (1639 words)

	The American Voice 2004 - Ask Dr. Dave - Answer - Media Fairness
		It imposed upon broadcasters a duty that came to be known as the "fairness doctrine".
		In 1974 the FCC described the Fairness Doctrine as "…the single most important requirement of operation in the public interest—the sine qua non for grant of a renewable of license".
		But in 1986 the court held that the fairness doctrine derived from the FCC's mandate to serve the public interest and was not compelled by statute.
	www.americanvoice2004.org /askdave/08askdave.html (817 words)

	Hentoff, The Fairness Doctrine vs. freedom of expression
		One famous victim of the Fairness Doctrine was Radio Station WXUR, controlled by Reverend Carl McIntire --- a fiery right-wing fundamentalist preacher --- which refused to abide by the Doctrine and lost its license in 1972.
		I was in radio under the reign of the Fairness Doctrine, at WMEX in Boston in the 1940s and early 50s.
		In addition to “preventing excessive concentration of ownership of the nation’s media outlets,” it includes the restoration of “fairness in broadcasting to foster and promote localism, diversity and competition in the media.” His press secretary tells me that the penalties this time could be as before: broadcasters losing their licenses.
	www.thepanamanews.com /pn/v_12/issue_04/opinion_07.html (2112 words)

	Fairness Now -- In These Times
		But it was the elimination of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 that created an ideological field that would, in fact, justify and celebrate this deregulation.
		The basic principle of the Fairness Doctrine—that radio and television stations have the obligation to address all sides of public controversy during the course of their broadcasting—was implied in the Communications Act of 1934, and then formalized in 1949.
		Critics argue that the Fairness Doctrine was confusing to stations and citizens alike, and that it was expensive and time-consuming to enforce.
	www.inthesetimes.com /site/main/article_rss/fairness_now (1472 words)

	The "Hush Rush" Hoax:
		The Fairness Doctrine -- in operation from 1949 until abolished in 1987 by Ronald Reagan's deregulation-oriented Federal Communications Commission --calls on broadcasters, as a condition of getting their licenses from the FCC, to cover some controversial issues in their community, and to do so by offering some balancing views.
		Reinstating the Fairness Doctrine can hardly be a "Hush Rush" plan aimed at silencing him, since it was broadly and actively supported on Capitol Hillwell before anyone in Washington had ever heard of Limbaugh.
		Indeed, the talkshow format was born, and flourished, while the doctrine was in operation.
	www.fair.org /index.php?page=1256 (845 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)