Dems Push, Yet Deny Radio Censorship Effort

DOUBLESPEAK

Still Focused On Talk's Elimination, Dems Play Mind Games





*** TALK RADIO JUMPS ON JUDD GREGG'S WITHDRAWAL ***


Given his outspoken criticism of the medium and habit of citing its hosts by name, Obama has made it clear he's targeted conservative talk radio for extinction. With its long history of changing the political landscape, particularly during periods of Democratic Party rule in Washington, Barack fears its demonstrated track record of effectiveness.

That's why an increasing number of Senate and House Democrats (including Speaker Nancy Pelosi, seen below) have come out in favor of reenacting the former Fairness Doctrine, which would effectively censor the conservative talk format by forcing unpopular liberal programming into their schedules. The resulting ratings destabilization would also undercut revenues, bringing a likely overall end to the medium.

In supporting the Fairness Doctrine, elected Democrats are even joined by liberal talk show hosts and their syndicators, who feel its reimposition could result in major-market affiliate gains. Other left-wing activists have expressed similar support.

In addition, there are stealth techniques now being devised to achieve the same result with less potential public outcry. One method that has generated almost no publicity is Obama's opposition to a new, high-tech ratings system that has so far noted substantially higher ratings for conservative talk than achieved under the old, diary-based method. Because a larger audience means greater ad sales, fighting this approach weakens the medium at a difficult time for broadcasting overall.


At the same time, however, the left is engaged in a game of doublespeak, as they repeatedly attack conservatives for "making up" the controversy. It will never happen, they claim, so why are those on the right so worked up about it?

Though they claim Obama himself is against the forced elimination of conservative talk radio, we don't have him on the record saying that directly. Instead, a spokesperson made that claim on one occasion during last year's campaign. Since taking office, the question has been ducked during press conferences.


Despite this very real threat, the false premise that talk radio censorship exists only in the minds of paranoid conservatives has been accepted in far too many places. In today's Washington Post, for example, Marc Fisher falls for this even as he rightly criticizes libtalker Bill Press for his openly-conspiratorial Op-Ed piece that ran in Sunday's edition:

So, do Press and like-minded listeners really want a return to the Fairness Doctrine, or are they just jealous that Limbaugh and a couple of other conservative talkers continue to draw strong ratings even as most of the old media lose audience to newfangled communications streams?

Perhaps Press is merely frustrated by the low ratings numbers he and his colleagues draw. Nobody wants to go back to the days when the FCC mandated how and when "opposing voices" might get their moment on the air ("Yes, sir, we'd be glad to put that on the air; would you prefer 4 a.m. on Sunday, or 3 a.m. on Monday?") And nobody wants to return to the bland tripe that aired on most talk stations before the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine opened the airwaves to all voices.

But in the end, the main reason there will be no new Fairness Doctrine is that time and technology have left the old concept of talk radio in the dust. On the Internet, a cacophony of voices ring out, most of them reaching hardly anyone, and nearly all of them being heard only by like-minded people. The real information problem our society faces has nothing to do with one perspective being drowned out by another; rather, our deepening media problem is that we are cleaving into two societies, each with its own, separate version of the truth, each startlingly segregated from the other.

Unfortunately, this premise is fundamentally flawed: many people support the suppression of talk radio and have said so in public settings. They aren't trying to hide this view from anyone. So how can anyone say that "nobody" wants the Fairness Doctrine?

It just isn't true and the rest of us must call attention to this fallacy every time it is encountered.


FOR New England regional talk radio updates, see our other site.

CLASSIC Franken image: Pete at IHillary


Amazon orders originating with clicks here benefit The Radio Equalizer's ongoing operations.

Your PayPal contributions keep this site humming along. Thanks!