Fairness Doctrine for sore losers

The people have spoken...this time. But make no mistake: the Fairness Doctrine is not dead. It is not going away. Those who have been trying to push this legislation through will try again; and again and again, if necessary.
Supporters of the legislation claim that the Fairness Doctrine does not prevent free speech, but rather allows for the expansion of speech by requiring that opposing views be heard on the air waves.
However, Article I of the U.S. Constitution, otherwise known as the First Amendment, forbids Congress from making any law “abridging” the freedom of speech. To abridge, according to Merriam-Webster online, is to “reduce in scope,” “diminish” and “condense,” or shorten by omission. So, according to the U.S. Constitution, Congress is not allowed to make any law editing the freedom of speech.
Whether the Fairness Doctrine limits or expands the freedom of speech is up for debate. But the legislation proposed to change, edit or manipulate this right is unconstitutional, per the very language within the U.S. Constitution.
Unfortunately, the Fairness Doctrine is not really about fairness at all. Rather, it’s little more than a temper tantrum thrown by the political left, which has not been able to compete very well with conservative talk radio. Proponents of the doctrine claim that it levels the playing field in an arena dominated by right-wing talk shows and their big business partner radio stations. What that really means in layman’s terms is that the left is trying to force its views on the public through government coercion.
Supporters of the Fairness Doctrine also claim that airwaves are public, and therefore, should be controlled by the government. Well, the air waves may indeed feature public access, but what travels through them is not. Much of what the air waves contain is private, copyrighted and ultimately protected by the Constitutional amendment that guarantees the right to privacy and the right to feel secure in our persons and property. The content of the Rush Limbaugh Show is private property; it is copyrighted. So are MTV, HBO, Howard Stern and even the now-defunct liberal Air America programs.
It is illegal to record these programs and re-broadcast without permission. That would be like dubbing a DVD and trying to re-sell it.
You might liken the air waves with air space. Although this is a public domain, the airlines that fly the friendly skies are private. If you aren’t happy with one airline, then you don’t fly with them anymore and you choose another airline. The government does not step in and require that all airlines be the same and please every customer. Each may offer something unique to attract and satisfy customers.
The same applies to our roads and highways. The surfaces are public, but the vehicles that use them are private. So it is with radio shows and programs using the air waves.
All private property is deeded from municipal, county, state and federal government as well. You wouldn’t want the government telling you what you can and cannot do on your own property, would you?
Lest we forget, the United States of America is a free-enterprise democracy, whose decisions are ultimately made by the people; either through petitions to the government (another Constitutional right), at the voting booth, or in the marketplace. If the people did not want conservative talk radio, then they would not tune in.
However, Rush Limbaugh consistently has 20 million or so listeners to his radio program. Michael Savage, Sean Hannity and other nationally syndicated conservative radio talk show hosts have impressive numbers that reach into the millions as well.
If the market weren’t strong for these shows, then they would not be carried by the radio stations, which are first and foremost, for-profit businesses that provide a product to the consumer in much the same way a retail store does. If a product is not selling, then the store will pull it from its shelves. But if a product is selling, then the store will continue to stock and sell it.
Conservative talk radio sells, so radio stations are stocking their shelves with it. Liberal talk radio does not sell very well, so radio stations are not stocking their shelves with it. If circumstances were reversed, then radio stations would be broadcasting liberal talk shows instead of conservative ones.
The marketplace is as much open to left-wing products as it is for the right-wing. Air America is an example of liberal efforts to try to sell its ideas. Unfortunately, much fewer people are buying this product as conservative ideas. That is why Air America sunk and conservative radio programs continue to float and thrive. It is really just as simple as that.
Besides, I really don’t see what the left has to complain about: You don’t see conservative talk shows on the major alphabet networks (ABC, NBC, CBS) or on NPR/PBS. In fact, there has been plenty of effort made by these networks over the last three or four decades to appeal to liberal, left-wing viewers and listeners. And NPR/PBS is PUBLIC broadcasting; meaning you and I pay for it whether we agree with its content or not. How fair is that?
In addition, the liberal left also has an iron grip in Hollywood, and a virtual monopoly on political expression in academia. The ranks of the entertainment industry and a vast majority of public universities and colleges are dominated with left-wing liberals, who are given free, tenured reign to express and advance their ideas/agendas on an impressionable crowd of fans, consumers and students. If this is not power, then I don’t know what is.
The bottom line here is that the liberal left does not want any competition whatsoever in the arena of ideas. It feels threatened by conservative points of view and the medium of talk radio as a forum for people to express themselves in opposition to left-wing concepts.
This sounds frighteningly reminiscent of current and past totalitarian-authoritarian efforts to suppress opposing political views through government intervention.
What the Fairness Doctrine would do is force a product on the marketplace that retailers are reluctant to sell, because they know that most consumers will not buy it. It is nothing more than left-wing propaganda being forced onto the people.
After all, why should the left compete when it can simply change the rules so it does not have to?