Bill Press: The Fairness Doctrine Will Let Me ‘Make Money’

Media • Views: 3,006

Leftist radio talk show host Bill Press supports the Fairness Doctrine, because it’s the only way he can make money.

I know why I’m interested in it because I get up every morning at 3:45, I do three hours of talk radio every day from six to nine, that’s my life, it’s my business, I want to make money at it, and I want to be heard.

Jump to bottom

263 comments
1 zombie  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:09:04am

They will pry this blog from my cold dead fingers.

2 Wishing  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:09:35am

He wants to be heard, but has nothing to say.
Give him a bail-out.

3 midwestgak  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:09:38am

Then provide information people are interested in. Simple.

4 Nevergiveup  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:09:44am

Well at least he is honest and knows he can't make it fairly.

5 Kragar  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:09:45am

Well, at least he is being honest about it.

6 godfrey  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:09:47am

But people don't want to hear you, Bill. Why don't you open a vegan restaurant instead?

7 Peacekeeper  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:09:50am

It's called NPR.

8 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:09:58am

No amount of "Fairness Doctrine" will force people to listen to his drivel. At the worst, stations will change their format from talk to top 40.

9 godfrey  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:10:21am

"Air America" sucked.

10 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:10:51am

As Rush likes to say, you have the right to speak. You do NOT have the right to be heard.

11 eschew_obfuscation  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:10:52am

The Constitution guarantees a free (Bill) Press, but not the right to be heard.

12 Amer-I-Can  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:10:59am

Are you familiar with Mr. Press and his blathering? He still won't make money... LOL

13 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:11:00am

I want to blog endlessly about my love of chocolate, and I want to make money at it. (Wouldn't that be yummy!)

Where's my fairness doctrine? What was that? The Unicorn's going to deliver it?

/Well then.

14 Peacekeeper  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:11:03am

Socialist radio is coming.

15 brookly red  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:11:15am

Why not just sell your soul?

16 eschew_obfuscation  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:11:17am

re: #10 doppelganglander

As Rush likes to say, you have the right to speak. You do NOT have the right to be heard.

Beat me by 1 second ;-(

17 Nevergiveup  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:11:29am

I'm sorry but A-Rod is such a phony. If your not watching it, you wouldn't believe how phony this is.

18 subsailor68  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:11:31am

Let me see. Bill Press for three hours or "Rap-24 - All Rap, All the Time"?

Think I'll take the latter.

19 Kragar  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:11:58am

Every proposed "Fairness Doctrine" seems to imply their are only 2 sides to an arguement, the left and the right. That is just absurd in my book

20 gymmom  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:12:13am

I've tried to listen to various left wing radio shows to see what they were talking about. Just can't do it. They are not interesting or entertaining. And I end up screaming at my radio.

21 DistantThunder  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:12:22am

Sounds like he wants to be on the welfare dole.

22 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:12:28am
23 Nevergiveup  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:12:32am

He knew he wasn't taking tick tacs but not steroids. I guess he thought they were vitamins?

24 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:12:33am
. . . I want to make money at it, and I want to be heard.

Sounds like a 2-year old wanting to have it MY WAY.

If he wants to be heard, maybe he should say something worth listening to?

25 notutopia  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:12:41am

Why should they be given airtime AND be paid for it, when they can NOT draw an audience now!

26 zombie  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:12:43am

The Left doesn't quite seem to grasp that they are opening a Pandora's Box of whoopass on themselves if they actually succeed in passing the "Fairness Doctrine." Because in truth 90% of media outlets are left-leaning. If they get to counter Rush Limbaugh with an equally long "anti-Rush Limbaugh" message each day, then we'll get to make our own "anti-New York Times" articles and the NYT will be forced to print them.

The sword cuts both ways, fools. Mostly your way.

27 Douchecanoe and Ryan Too  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:12:49am

You can WANT whatever, Mr. Press. That doesn't mean you can HAVE it. Maybe if you were saying something the rest of America wanted to hear, then you'd be heard... Sucks for you that you have to resort to a government gimmick to "get the message out".

/Go get a job at CNN already, fer cryin' out loud!

28 teleskiguy  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:13:11am

Air America proved that there is no market for leftist talk radio. Lefties are clouded by unconstrained visions, which means they aren't tethered to reality. Righty talk radio is tethered to reality, and it's pretty damned entertaining, unlike leftist talk radio. I get more excited picking out socks than I do listening to leftist talk radio.

29 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:13:13am

Gotta love the concept of something being done in fairness by government action is only a quota system to shove on people what they freely choose to avoid.

30 beholden  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:13:15am

"I want to make money at it, and I want to be heard."

Then...be...good...and deliver a message people want to hear, instead of socialist, progressive pablum.

31 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:13:21am

re: #16 eschew_obfuscation

Beat me by 1 second ;-(

GMTA.

32 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:13:25am
I want to be heard.

Sorry. Never heard of ya.

33 Honorary Yooper  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:13:27am

Talk radio does have fairness. We have ours, and they have federally funded NPR.

34 unreconstructed rebel  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:13:27am

Interesting.

Most of us make money by delivering on an unmet need. This bunch want to make money by legislative fiat.

35 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:13:35am
36 godfrey  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:13:43am

re: #26 zombie

I can't imagine the NYT editorial board will let that happen. They'll get such stories and "edit" them to their liking.

37 acwgusa  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:13:46am

Bill, don't pay your taxes, and you too can get an ObamaJob!

38 Unakite  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:13:49am

He needs to cheat to compete. Can't compete on a level playing field.

39 DougTheWriter  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:13:58am

Sorry bonehead thinks that if he has more air time but no listeners that he'll make more money.

40 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:14:00am

re: #22 Iron Fist

Why doesn't the fucker apply at NPR, then? We already have an official Socialist radio network. Why do they have to come back and take all of the rest of them, too?

Saw Megyn Kelly at FoxNews interviewing him - she asked about NPR, and he seemed taken aback that someone would think the Fairness Doctrine should apply at NPR.

It should apply everywhere else, though, because they are PUBLIC airwaves.

Somehow, NPR isn't public nor is it using public airwaves?

41 DistantThunder  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:14:18am

re: #19 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Every proposed "Fairness Doctrine" seems to imply their are only 2 sides to an arguement, the left and the right. That is just absurd in my book

Excellent point. To be fair we will have to broadcast the jihadi view, and the Ron Paul view, and the Ted Kazinski view, and the Rosie O'donnel view, and the PETA view, and the Earth First view.....and on and on it goes.

42 rightside  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:14:23am

Note to Bill Press:

Try saying something positive, stop lying about our country for a change. You'd be surprised who will listen.

43 Peacekeeper  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:14:37am

re: #26 zombie

The Left doesn't quite seem to grasp that they are opening a Pandora's Box of whoopass on themselves if they actually succeed in passing the "Fairness Doctrine." Because in truth 90% of media outlets are left-leaning. If they get to counter Rush Limbaugh with an equally long "anti-Rush Limbaugh" message each day, then we'll get to make our own "anti-New York Times" articles and the NYT will be forced to print them.

The sword cuts both ways, fools. Mostly your way.


Actually the way it will work is that Obama appointees will always find right wing bias and none of the other stuff.

44 godfrey  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:14:37am

re: #28 teleskiguy

Air America proved that there is no market for leftist talk radio.

Air America proved that the Left prefers to listen to NPR. They don't need another radio station.

45 Kragar  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:14:38am

re: #26 zombie

The Left doesn't quite seem to grasp that they are opening a Pandora's Box of whoopass on themselves if they actually succeed in passing the "Fairness Doctrine." Because in truth 90% of media outlets are left-leaning. If they get to counter Rush Limbaugh with an equally long "anti-Rush Limbaugh" message each day, then we'll get to make our own "anti-New York Times" articles and the NYT will be forced to print them.

The sword cuts both ways, fools. Mostly your way.

They'll be made to give a conservative viewpoint, so they'll invite Ann Coulter, Pat Buchanan and the Glenn Becks of the world.

46 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:14:44am

re: #26 zombie

The Left doesn't quite seem to grasp that they are opening a Pandora's Box of whoopass on themselves if they actually succeed in passing the "Fairness Doctrine." Because in truth 90% of media outlets are left-leaning. If they get to counter Rush Limbaugh with an equally long "anti-Rush Limbaugh" message each day, then we'll get to make our own "anti-New York Times" articles and the NYT will be forced to print them.

The sword cuts both ways, fools. Mostly your way.

They do not believe the left-leaning media outlets are left-leaning.

They really don't. They truly believe those outlets are "balanced".

47 notutopia  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:15:07am

re: #26 zombie

They only see what is placed easily in front of their face.
Not, that it has negative implications for their cause.

48 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:15:15am

re: #40 reine.de.tout

Saw Megyn Kelly at FoxNews interviewing him - she asked about NPR, and he seemed taken aback that someone would think the Fairness Doctrine should apply at NPR.

It should apply everywhere else, though, because they are PUBLIC airwaves.

Somehow, NPR isn't public nor is it using public airwaves?

That lays bare their agenda, and make no mistake this is an agenda being promulgated.

49 The Shadow Do  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:15:18am

When forced to air his hooey then let him be paid based on his value to the station. How does a minimum wage contract sound to ya Bill? A step up?

50 RaiderDan  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:15:28am

Give liberals enough rope and they'll hang themselves with the truth, eventually.

Shows you this was never about "free speech"

It was all about the Benjamins and radio-host envy.

What don't liberals repeatly refuse to admit is that left-wing talk radio will merely be duplicative of the hundreds of liberal TV, radio (NPR) and newspaper outlet already out there pumping out Obama and DNC talking points. Another platform like this is just oversaturation in a market filled to capacity.

Of course, if Democrats went to B-school vs. J-school they'd understand that.

but as we all know, they don't want equal opportunity, they want equal outcomes.

Their hatred of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity comes from simple envy. They have an audience and a multi-million dollar contract and they don't.

And keep in mind, conservative talk-radio advanced without a SINGLE DIME of taxpayer support. Just one stroke of the pen by Ronald Reagan and a media that left a yawning gap for talk radio to fill with an alternative viewpoint.

I don't listen to Rush, I'm a Michael Savage guy, but Rush said long ago the most true thing about the media and talk radio. "Some say I should be balanced with equal time. Wrong, I am equal time."

51 Killgore Trout  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:15:35am

I'm willing to bet there are conservatives who will support the Fairness Doctrine in order to push creationism. Socialism has no place in the free market of ideas.

52 HelloDare  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:15:48am

We've heard you, Bill. We reject you.

53 Dr. Shalit  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:15:51am

Truth be known, if Bill Press were his affable off air self on air he WOULD have an audience beyond his angry base. By staying angry on air he maintains his base and does NOT grow in audience beyond that. Vinegar draws few flies, honey - MUCH MORE.

-S-

54 brookly red  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:15:53am

re: #35 Iron Fist

Mine's old and used and not worth very much :-)

Well I was referring to Bill Press, but lemmie check your "blue book" value.

55 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:16:12am

re: #10 doppelganglander

As Rush likes to say, you have the right to speak. You do NOT have the right to be heard.

They don't like free markets. They think they're entitled to an audience. No one ever is.

56 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:16:16am

re: #46 reine.de.tout

They do not believe the left-leaning media outlets are left-leaning.

They really don't. They truly believe those outlets are "balanced".

And that is the standard that will be applied, left-leaning is balanced.

57 MarineVet  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:16:24am

Bill Press? hmmm well my first question is who he is? I remeber when listening to am radio was for "old people" now it is speaking the things I like! I read a couple "El Rushbo" comments and THAT is reassuring to have him speak unfettered... When "politicians" speak about "fairness" in anything THAT is the time to worry......

58 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:16:41am

re: #40 reine.de.tout

Saw Megyn Kelly at FoxNews interviewing him - she asked about NPR, and he seemed taken aback that someone would think the Fairness Doctrine should apply at NPR.

It should apply everywhere else, though, because they are PUBLIC airwaves.

Somehow, NPR isn't public nor is it using public airwaves?

Here's video of the interview at HotAir.

59 Raven1  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:16:41am

Press! Press! Pull! Nyuk,nyuk, nyuk

60 jemima  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:16:56am

Freedom and democracy? Fukkit. How does that crap compete a really cool car in the garage?

61 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:17:02am

re: #40 reine.de.tout

Saw Megyn Kelly at FoxNews interviewing him - she asked about NPR, and he seemed taken aback that someone would think the Fairness Doctrine should apply at NPR.

It should apply everywhere else, though, because they are PUBLIC airwaves.

Somehow, NPR isn't public nor is it using public airwaves?

Megyn Kelly is the last good news anchor at Fox. She is a master of the obvious question that turns out to be a "gotcha" for the thoughtless and ill-prepared.

62 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:17:07am

Stabenow's hubby is an executive VP for Air America.

63 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:17:09am

re: #56 FurryOldGuyJeans

And that is the standard that will be applied, left-leaning is balanced.

exactly.

64 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:17:14am

re: #26 zombie

The Left doesn't quite seem to grasp that they are opening a Pandora's Box of whoopass on themselves if they actually succeed in passing the "Fairness Doctrine." Because in truth 90% of media outlets are left-leaning. If they get to counter Rush Limbaugh with an equally long "anti-Rush Limbaugh" message each day, then we'll get to make our own "anti-New York Times" articles and the NYT will be forced to print them.

The sword cuts both ways, fools. Mostly your way.

CBS will have to give Charles air time.

65 Tumulus11  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:17:23am

O/T

'We didn't even know they were steroids. I was young and stupid. ...'
/ Alex Rodriguez.

. Yeah, right.

66 Bobblehead  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:17:31am

Who the h will pay big money to sponsor him. No listeners..no sponsors.

67 Peacekeeper  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:17:43am

ACORN just got 4 BILLION dollars. My guess is that there will be at least one aggrieved ACORN member in every Limbaugh market.

68 rightside  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:17:44am

re: #59 Raven1

OMG I remember that!

69 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:17:56am

I hope Rush's attorneys are working on this right now.

70 KronoGhazi  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:17:58am

OMG, that is fricken funny. Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.

71 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:18:02am
72 midwestgak  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:18:04am
73 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:18:11am

re: #51 Killgore Trout

I'm willing to bet there are conservatives who will support the Fairness Doctrine in order to push creationism. Socialism has no place in the free market of ideas.

I beg to differ, those would be FASCISTS wanting that, not conservatives.

74 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:18:19am

re: #64 Sharmuta

CBS will have to give Charles air time.

Cage-match between him and Rather? Oh, yeah.

75 DeafDog  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:18:29am

re: #19 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Every proposed "Fairness Doctrine" seems to imply their are only 2 sides to an arguement, the left and the right. That is just absurd in my book

Not so absurd. There are essentially 2 political parties.

The Democratic party is the dominant voice in most daily papers, magazines and TV stations.

The Republican party is the dominant voice in talk radio.

76 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:18:39am

I'm trapped in the corrupt and cesspool of Illinois, anyone know where I can find Radio Free Illinois on my crank up radio?

77 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:18:47am

re: #71 Iron Fist

[Prissy voice]
Well, that's not the "public" I meant. I meant the private public, as in all those icky "for profit" stations. As opposed to the public public like NPR and PBS that are there for the betterment of society.
[/Prissy voice]
Something like that...

rofl!

78 Hard Right  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:18:49am

re: #50 RaiderDan

Give liberals enough rope and they'll hang themselves with the truth, eventually.

Shows you this was never about "free speech"

It was all about the Benjamins and radio-host envy.

What don't liberals repeatly refuse to admit is that left-wing talk radio will merely be duplicative of the hundreds of liberal TV, radio (NPR) and newspaper outlet already out there pumping out Obama and DNC talking points. Another platform like this is just oversaturation in a market filled to capacity.

Of course, if Democrats went to B-school vs. J-school they'd understand that.

but as we all know, they don't want equal opportunity, they want equal outcomes.

Their hatred of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity comes from simple envy. They have an audience and a multi-million dollar contract and they don't.

And keep in mind, conservative talk-radio advanced without a SINGLE DIME of taxpayer support. Just one stroke of the pen by Ronald Reagan and a media that left a yawning gap for talk radio to fill with an alternative viewpoint.

I don't listen to Rush, I'm a Michael Savage guy, but Rush said long ago the most true thing about the media and talk radio. "Some say I should be balanced with equal time. Wrong, I am equal time."

They don't want equal outcomes, they want absolute control and domination of the airwaves. Other than that, we agree.

79 wrenchwench  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:18:54am

There is one word for "news" supported by the government: Propaganda.

80 Honorary Yooper  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:18:55am

re: #62 MandyManners

Stabenow's hubby is an executive VP for Air America.

Can you say "conflict of interest"? I knew you could.

81 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:19:05am

Ladies and Gentlemen - THE LEFT.

Punish the successful to pad the less talented or less motivated. There's money out there and I want it. It's all about who wants things more these days (and I don't mean the physical act of "wanting it more" and going out to get it. I mean the emotion of "wanting").

82 IslandLibertarian  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:19:10am

Life's not fair............
................get over it.

83 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:19:13am

re: #72 midwestgak

Carter not in favor of the Fairness Doctrine

Who knew?

Clinton certainly is in favor.

84 Bobblehead  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:19:28am

re: #69 MandyManners

I hope Rush's attorneys are working on this right now.

Rush is smart enough to see the writing on the wall. I'm sure he has several "Plan B's".

85 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:19:36am

re: #72 midwestgak

Carter not in favor of the Fairness Doctrine

Who knew?

As a matter of fact, when I was president is when we deregulated radio, television, all the communications and relationships, so I have not been in favor of perpetuating the Fairness Doctrine since I've been in politics."

I thought Reagan did that.

86 thefallingman  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:19:41am
and I want to be heard


These people won't be satisfied with killing talk radio specifically and AM in general. They don't just want to force conservatives off the air. They want to create an audience by force.

87 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:19:53am

re: #79 wrenchwench

There is one word for "news" supported by the government: Propaganda.

And if we look at NPR and PBS - maybe we can come close to accurately figuring out which way the propaganda will lean.

88 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:20:04am

re: #72 midwestgak

Carter not in favor of the Fairness Doctrine

Who knew?

I saw that earlier. This may be the first thing Carter's been right about in the history of ever.

89 Nevergiveup  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:20:08am

re: #72 midwestgak

Carter not in favor of the Fairness Doctrine

Who knew?

That's because if there was any fairness in the world, he'd never be heard from again!

90 albusteve  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:20:13am

right there by his own admission he is a communist...so what eh?

91 Silhouette  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:20:15am

"Justice" to them does not mean what it does to us.

To us, a just race is one where all the runners start on the same line. To them, it is one where all the runners finish at the same time, even if it means the fastest runners must be hobbled and the slower given advantages.

He's the slow runner, demanding a forced advantage so that he can compete with the fast.

92 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:20:34am

I WANNA BE HEARD!

wah-wah-wah-wah-

93 The Shadow Do  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:20:48am

Rodriquez only used when he was young and foolish playing in Texas. Then he grew up and became a Yankee - and quit! Lots of Yankee fans here, y'all buying that?

94 Liechtentrager  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:21:18am

re: #22 Iron Fist

Because nothing less than total viewpoint domination is acceptable.

95 brookly red  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:21:36am

re: #76 Dustyvet

I'm trapped in the corrupt and cesspool of Illinois, anyone know where I can find Radio Free Illinois on my crank up radio?

Maybe I shouldn't go there, but perhaps you can get Plains Raido...

96 lawhawk  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:21:37am
I know why I’m interested in it because I get up every morning at 3:45, I do three hours of talk radio every day from six to nine, that’s my life, it’s my business, I want to make money at it, and I want to be heard.

If you have something that people want to hear, you'll make money. If not, you wont.

I don't make money from my blog, but that doesn't mean I should shutter folks like DKos, Andy Sullivan, TMZ, Perez Hilton, Charles or Hot Air or other profitable bloggers to even the playing field.

That's precisely what Press is calling for in the radio and television marketplace and it shows that he is incapable of surviving in a marketplace of ideas without the crutch and club of the Fairness Doctrine which is inherently and fundamentally unfair and goes against the very ideals of Freedom of Speech.

Anyone can get themselves a tv or radio show, but it doesn't mean you'll be profitable at it. Just ask SiriusXM. They're in the throes of being bankrupt (saved by Liberty Media as I write). Those who can make money will survive in a marketplace of ideas; those who can't wont.

97 snowcrash  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:21:38am

I worry less about forcing equal time for alternate political opinions than I do about forcing some kinds of community fairness standards that allow citizen boards to decide what is acceptable for discussion and what is not during certain airing times.

98 thefallingman  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:21:50am

re: #72 midwestgak

Carter not in favor of the Fairness Doctrine

Who knew?


I agree with Carter? Oh, God. I need a shower.

99 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:21:56am

re: #85 MandyManners

As a matter of fact, when I was president is when we deregulated radio, television, all the communications and relationships, so I have not been in favor of perpetuating the Fairness Doctrine since I've been in politics."

I thought Reagan did that.

It was (1985). Carter is lying yet again.

100 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:22:01am

re: #61 doppelganglander

Megyn Kelly is the last good news anchor at Fox. She is a master of the obvious question that turns out to be a "gotcha" for the thoughtless and ill-prepared.

She is very very good. Smart.
And just gorgeous, too.

101 Sharmuta  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:22:19am

re: #74 MandyManners

Cage-match between him and Rather? Oh, yeah.

It would be the biggest ratings CBS nightly news has had all decade.

102 Nevergiveup  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:22:20am

re: #93 The Shadow Do

Rodriquez only used when he was young and foolish playing in Texas. Then he grew up and became a Yankee - and quit! Lots of Yankee fans here, y'all buying that?

NOPE

103 jaunte  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:22:21am

If the radio airwaves are inundated with material like the stuff produced by NPR, Pacifica, or Air America, people who don't want to listen to that stuff are going to start passing around recordings of their favorite conservative talkers in other formats. No one can be forced (yet) to listen to government affirmative action radio.

104 abaleh  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:22:35am

OT - Hamas isn't content with stealing blankets and food:

Report: Hamas stole 7 tons of unexploded ordnance

Senior UN officials were outraged Tuesday evening as they confirmed Hamas has appropriated seven tons of weaponry and ammunition stored in UN warehouses in Gaza and intended to be destroyed by sappers.

The officials demanded the ordnance stockpile be returned immediately.

105 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:22:43am

re: #98 thefallingman

I agree with Carter? Oh, God. I need a shower.

Carter is lying once again out of his ass. It was under Reagan.

106 zombie  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:22:57am

The Fairness Doctrine is fundamentally unconstitutional.

It forces media outlets to lose money by "spending" their precious airtime broadcasting messages no one wants to hear.

Media outlets are corporations. Corporations exist to make money. Each media outlet only has 24 hours in a day to broadcast content. Each media outlets tries to maximize its listenership by broadcasting the material with the most appeal. Most radio networks have realized that conservative shock jocks get far and away the most listeners. That's the way to get more advertising dollars and stay afloat.

But what if these stations were forced to spend 12 hours out of each broadcast day airing boring, whiney socialist tripe? Clickclickclick go the radios across the America as they are switched off. The Air America debacle has proven that. The "best talent" in left-wing punditry could not sustain a single station, much less stations across the country. It was torture to listen to.

The end result is that these radio stations will become unprofitable. By government decree.

Forget about the politics of the thing: the money-losing aspect is what will sink the Fairness Doctrine in the courts. I forget the exact Constitutional principle involved -- any scholars in the house? -- but it may be something like "unlawful seizure."

107 Peacekeeper  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:22:58am

re: #96 lawhawk

Sat radio is going broke?

108 thefallingman  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:23:32am

re: #105 FurryOldGuyJeans
But I still agree with his oppostition to the FD, even though we all know it was Ronaldus Magnus who scrapped.

109 eschew_obfuscation  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:23:37am

re: #26 zombie

The Left doesn't quite seem to grasp that they are opening a Pandora's Box of whoopass on themselves if they actually succeed in passing the "Fairness Doctrine." Because in truth 90% of media outlets are left-leaning. If they get to counter Rush Limbaugh with an equally long "anti-Rush Limbaugh" message each day, then we'll get to make our own "anti-New York Times" articles and the NYT will be forced to print them.

The sword cuts both ways, fools. Mostly your way.

Not sure what they'll do this time around, but the original fairness doctrine applied to non-news content only IIRC. So 'news' that was really disguised opinion got a pass.

I'd anticipate that the MSM will just classify their propaganda as 'news' thereby circumventing any requirement for giving time to an opposing view.

110 Vicious Babushka  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:23:42am

re: #104 abaleh

The officials demanded the ordnance stockpile be returned immediately.

they'll send a strongly-worded letter.

111 unreconstructed rebel  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:23:51am

re: #104 abaleh

The officials demanded the ordnance stockpile be returned immediately.

If I were Hamas, that would scare the shit out of me.

112 albusteve  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:23:55am

my senators and congressmen urge me to contact them to express my worldly opinions, they offer phone and fax and e-mail and snail mail....then they ignore me every fucking time...NM elected officials

113 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:24:01am

re: #104 abaleh

OT - Hamas isn't content with stealing blankets and food:

Report: Hamas stole 7 tons of unexploded ordnance

Demanded? Has Hamas quit laughing yet?

114 bellamags  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:24:01am
I know why I’m interested in it (oh really, do tell) because I get up every morning at 3:45, I do three hours of talk radio every day from six to nine (and you get up at 3:45?) , that’s my life, (that is sad) it’s my business (obviously not good at it and you should choose something else), I want to make money at it (yeah, and I want to make money by breathing), and I want to be heard (typical lefty crybaby BS).

The truth is dude, no one WANTS to effing hear you. That is because you suck and liberal ideas FAIL so there is nothing to TALK about. period.

115 subsailor68  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:24:06am

OT, but related (posted this on an earlier thread just as everyone was leaving):

EPA to review Bush rule on warming emissions
Environmental groups expect curbs on coal-fired power plants

From the article:

Earlier this month, the Interior Department withdrew oil and natural gas drilling leases near two national parks in Utah. It also shelved a draft plan to open much of the Atlantic and Pacific coasts to drilling.

Great. The Dow is tanking - so we'll soon be broke. And with this crap, we'll also be sitting in the dark, shivering in the cold.

It relates to the discussion on the Fairness Doctrine, because total domination of the airwaves (as Hard Right points out above) would mean that this travesty would be spun the way the Left wants, with little or no chance of rebuttal.

116 abaleh  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:24:38am

re: #110 Alouette

they'll send a strongly-worded letter.

Hamas' motive to appropriate the ordnance is unclear

Gee, I wonder what they could want with explosives.

117 Neutral President  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:24:41am

re: #72 midwestgak

Carter not in favor of the Fairness Doctrine

Who knew?

Stopped clock is right twice a day...

118 godfrey  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:24:41am

Am I understanding their basic argument correctly?

1. Airwaves are natural resources.
2. Natural resources are public property.
3. Public property should be governed by the state because only the state can ensure that public property remains public.
Therefore, the federal government (FCC) should intervene in radio broadcasting to ensure that public property like airwaves are not monopolized by private interests.

119 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:24:43am

I don't think the real leaders of the left, the media and academic elites, are serious about the fairness doctrine. This is just a bone they are throwing to the conformist masses. The last thing they want is a court test of the fairness of their own media, the so-called MSM. Such a test would follow re-imposition as surely as night follows day.

120 SasquatchOnSteroids  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:25:00am
I know why I’m interested in it because I get up every morning at 3:45, I do three hours of talk radio every day from six to nine, that’s my life, it’s my business, I want to make money at it, and I want to be heard.

Well whooptyfuckingdoo.
I get up at 4:00 AM, do 10 hrs/day, that's my life, it's my business. All the while without bitchin' about it. What I bitch about is people who won't work but want my pay. There's no bailout for us, just endless fighting to keep what we earn.

Go suck a Rosie toe, ijit.

121 J.D.  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:25:25am

re: #96 lawhawk

My son told me about the bankruptcy just this morning.

Poor Bill Press.

If he only had a clue.

122 notutopia  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:25:31am

re: #103 jaunte

YET.
The FCC controls the licensing of all the airwave moneymakers.
Very few airwave venues are left that do not require licensure.

123 The Shadow Do  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:25:32am

re: #102 Nevergiveup

NOPE

Phew! There are those that do you know.

124 Silhouette  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:25:43am

re: #97 snowcrash

I worry less about forcing equal time for alternate political opinions than I do about forcing some kinds of community fairness standards that allow citizen boards to decide what is acceptable for discussion and what is not during certain airing times.

Aye, and if 99% think one way, and 1% another, then "fair" will be 5 speakers from each side.

When the 1% is leftist, of course.

125 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:25:47am

re: #76 Dustyvet

I'm trapped in the corrupt and cesspool of Illinois, anyone know where I can find Radio Free Illinois on my crank up radio?

Maybe you can hear it on the X.

126 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:25:53am

re: #108 thefallingman

But I still agree with his oppostition to the FD, even though we all know it was Ronaldus Magnus who scrapped.

Since he can't get the truth about when it was repealed I seriously doubt that is his real opinion. Senility is showing.

127 Nevergiveup  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:25:53am

re: #123 The Shadow Do

Phew! There are those that do you know.

No One I know

128 albusteve  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:25:53am

after a time, when words and definitions become meaningless the Fairness Doctrine will prevail in one form or another....2010 is the last stand imo

129 lookingup  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:25:55am

Someone may have said this but Bill is a typical leftest. He wants equalities of results. Fairness to him is getting the same amount of money Rush gets. The spendulus bill has income redistribution in it for more equality of results. Not effort or luck or both but we should be equal financially at the end of the day. Don't tell him life sucks.

130 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:25:55am
131 brookly red  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:27:00am

re: #104 abaleh

Somethings smells wrong about that... unexploded ordinance is kinda unstable. I can't see stock piling it in a ware house, but hey I am sure the UN knows what it is doing/

132 Ringo the Gringo  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:27:09am

I heard Bill Press on television yesterday say that the the Fairness Doctrine should not apply to NPR or PBS because they're "publicly supported" and "non-profit"...In his mind, the Fairness Doctrine should only apply to companies that are trying to make money.

And now we know why.

133 CyanSnowHawk  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:27:09am

re: #107 Peacekeeper

Sat radio is going broke?

Yes it is. Their subscriptions forecasts were unrealistic to begin with, and with the downturn were even more so. The merger happened to stave off the imminent failure of one, but their business model is still proving to be 'unsatisfactory'.

134 eschew_obfuscation  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:27:11am

re: #97 snowcrash

I worry less about forcing equal time for alternate political opinions than I do about forcing some kinds of community fairness standards that allow citizen boards to decide what is acceptable for discussion and what is not during certain airing times.

If the left is successful in implementing the fairness doctrine, citizen boards won't be needed..... there won't be any A.M. talk radio to regulate as was largely the case when the original fairness doctrine was last in force.

135 Mostly sane, most of the time.  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:27:16am

One of my cousins recently posted a photo of her, me, my sister, and another cousin, and Grandma on facebook. In the photo, she and the other cousin look a little taller than my sister and I. Just a little.

My sister is 5'3', and I'm 5'5". My cousins are both 6' or close to it. (We're all women.) Grandma (5'7", originally) was in the middle, with the tall girls on one side and the short ones on the other.

Why do they look only a little taller than us? Because my sister had jokingly asked the picture taker to tilt the camera to make her look taller, and he did. You can see the window panes in the background, and they're diagonal.

The MSM has their cameras tilted. so things look either balanced or only a little unbalanced, but you can see the lines in the background. They show up in adjectives and adverbs, in choice of whether to designate parties and when, and in a million other ways. We need to let them know we can see the camera's tilt, and we aren't buying it. My sister's still 5'3" (but a lovely 5'3") and the MSM still leans left.

136 zombie  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:27:25am

re: #119 Shiplord Kirel

I don't think the real leaders of the left, the media and academic elites, are serious about the fairness doctrine. This is just a bone they are throwing to the conformist masses. The last thing they want is a court test of the fairness of their own media, the so-called MSM. Such a test would follow re-imposition as surely as night follows day.

I agree.

The Fairness Doctrine is the Birth Certificate of the left.

Something for the crazed zealots to fantasize about. But it will forever remain a fantasy.

137 subsailor68  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:27:34am

re: #107 Peacekeeper

Sat radio is going broke?

Here's a link referencing what Lawhawk was writing about:

Liberty Media deal staves off Sirius bankruptcy

138 midwestgak  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:27:59am

OB to sign The End of Prosperity in America Bill in 20 minutes. What did Colorado do to deserve this honor?/

139 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:28:08am
140 lawhawk  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:28:15am

re: #102 Nevergiveup

Nope.

141 zombie  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:28:25am

re: #135 EmmmieG

Nice metaphor!

142 J.D.  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:28:33am

re: #137 subsailor68

Here's a link referencing what Lawhawk was writing about:

Liberty Media deal staves off Sirius bankruptcy

That's good news. I had already renewed Sirius for 3 years.

143 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:28:35am

re: #118 godfrey

Am I understanding their basic argument correctly?

1. Airwaves are natural resources.
2. Natural resources are public property.
3. Public property should be governed by the state because only the state can ensure that public property remains public.
Therefore, the federal government (FCC) should intervene in radio broadcasting to ensure that public property like airwaves are not monopolized by private interests.

Here's what I don't understand.

When the FCC grants a broadcasting license, what are the licensing? What is the "license" supposed to show, that the organization has met certain criteria and makes a promise that its operations won't interfere with others?

OR, does the FCC take the position that the gov't somehow "owns" the air, and the license is permission to broadcast through the airwaves?

144 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:28:36am

re: #97 snowcrash

I worry less about forcing equal time for alternate political opinions than I do about forcing some kinds of community fairness standards that allow citizen boards to decide what is acceptable for discussion and what is not during certain airing times.

You are talking about the doctrine of localism, one of the pillars of leftist censorship activism. The idea is that each outlet would be required to have a supervising board of "concerned members of the local community" (that is, lefties) who would have veto power over programming decisions.

145 albusteve  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:28:38am

re: #119 Shiplord Kirel

I don't think the real leaders of the left, the media and academic elites, are serious about the fairness doctrine. This is just a bone they are throwing to the conformist masses. The last thing they want is a court test of the fairness of their own media, the so-called MSM. Such a test would follow re-imposition as surely as night follows day.

so your saying it's a widespread conspiracy to threaten the 1st....to keep the right quiet by intimidation?....doesnt seem likely to me

146 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:28:48am

re: #103 jaunte

If the radio airwaves are inundated with material like the stuff produced by NPR, Pacifica, or Air America, people who don't want to listen to that stuff are going to start passing around recordings of their favorite conservative talkers in other formats. No one can be forced (yet) to listen to government affirmative action radio.

I suppose Rush could pull a Christian Slater and start a pirate radio station.

147 acwgusa  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:28:49am

Bill, so will Photoshop, and a dye-sublimation printer.

148 Nevergiveup  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:28:54am

re: #140 lawhawk

Nope.

Did you see it? I thought it was so phony?

149 barry the baptist  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:28:54am

'I want to be heard and make money.'

OK. Be good at what you do and people will garner interest. Since when is it the responsibility of the govt to GET you heard and GET you paid?

Makes me want to puke.

150 Kragar  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:29:02am

re: #138 midwestgak

OB to sign The End of Prosperity in America Bill in 20 minutes. What did Colorado do to deserve this honor?/

Greek columns

151 subsailor68  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:29:38am

re: #142 J.D.

That's good news. I had already renewed Sirius for 3 years.

Yep. I've had XM in the car since I first got it. I love it. Good jazz, classical, rock, country, news....you name it.

152 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:29:47am

re: #136 zombie

I agree.

The Fairness Doctrine is the Birth Certificate of the left.

Something for the crazed zealots to fantasize about. But it will forever remain a fantasy.

I hope you're right.

153 Peacekeeper  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:29:59am

re: #139 Iron Fist

but I don't see how they can do that.
The new federal car czar can mandate no off/volume knobs on new soviet kars.

154 Cato  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:30:05am

OT


[Link: www.theonion.com...]

155 Silhouette  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:30:10am

re: #106 zombie

I forget the exact Constitutional principle involved -- any scholars in the house? -- but it may be something like "unlawful seizure."

IMHO, it fails at "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech."

If I've got 24 hours of things to say, and the Us government tells me I can only speak 12 hours and then have to pay for my opponent to speak, they are abridging.

abridge   

1. to shorten by omissions while retaining the basic contents: to abridge a reference book.
2. to reduce or lessen in duration, scope, authority, etc.; diminish; curtail.
3. to deprive; cut off.

156 opnion  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:30:33am

re: #132 Ringo the Gringo

I heard Bill Press on television yesterday say that the the Fairness Doctrine should not apply to NPR or PBS because they're "publicly supported" and "non-profit"...In his mind, the Fairness Doctrine should only apply to companies that are trying to make money.

And now we know why.

That's funny , because to me if the Fairness Doctrine had application anywhere, it would be publicly funded outlets.

157 DistantThunder  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:31:09am

re: #144 Shiplord Kirel

You are talking about the doctrine of localism, one of the pillars of leftist censorship activism. The idea is that each outlet would be required to have a supervising board of "concerned members of the local community" (that is, lefties) who would have veto power over programming decisions.

I'm sure that there is a Soviet equivalent. to the supervising board.

158 godfrey  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:31:14am

re: #143 reine.de.tout

OR, does the FCC take the position that the gov't somehow "owns" the air, and the license is permission to broadcast through the airwaves?

I don't know, but that's a serious point of weakness.

No government "owns" the air.

159 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:32:02am

re: #130 mikeymom

O and his ears do make me think of Sister Bertrille, the Flying Nun.

160 Da Coyote  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:32:06am

Earth to leftist broadcasters. Get some listeners, stupid!

161 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:32:11am

re: #153 Peacekeeper

but I don't see how they can do that.
The new federal car czar can mandate no off/volume knobs on new soviet kars.

In Car Czar world, the channel find you.

162 vxbush  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:32:32am

Not to mention: with the Internet now, we essentially have a fairness doctrine. Anyone can blog, anyone can start up streaming radio, etc. etc. Which means that this fairness doctrine is simply an excuse to put the opposition point down--meaning, conservative viewpoints.

163 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:32:37am

re: #143 reine.de.tout

Here's what I don't understand.

When the FCC grants a broadcasting license, what are the licensing? What is the "license" supposed to show, that the organization has met certain criteria and makes a promise that its operations won't interfere with others?

OR, does the FCC take the position that the gov't somehow "owns" the air, and the license is permission to broadcast through the airwaves?

Red Lion Broadcasting v. FCC.

164 DeafDog  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:32:44am

re: #136 zombie

I agree.

The Fairness Doctrine is the Birth Certificate of the left.

Something for the crazed zealots to fantasize about. But it will forever remain a fantasy.

IMO, based on what we've seen from Obama & Co over the last month it is worth taking the threat seriously.

165 notutopia  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:32:52am

re: #158 godfrey

No not the air. The transmissions, they govern and license. (with very few low wattage exceptions)

166 albusteve  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:33:08am

re: #158 godfrey

I don't know, but that's a serious point of weakness.

No government "owns" the air.

but they go to great lengths to regulate what you can put into it...same thing imo

167 zombie  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:33:10am

re: #156 opnion

That's funny , because to me if the Fairness Doctrine had application anywhere, it would be publicly funded outlets.

I 100% agree. It should only apply to NPR.

Which means: The Zombie Radio Hour! Today at 5 on NPR.

Aw-right!

168 caligal  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:33:15am

The thing is...I don't want/will not listen to Bill Press.

169 lawhawk  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:33:19am

re: #148 Nevergiveup

I didn't see it and I don't believe anything any of the baseball players say. What's he going to say that will make it better? I'm sorry wont cut it either. The numbers he posted are the numbers - asterisk or no asterisk.

This whole era will be reflecting the PED taken by so many people. He was just the best of the bad guys. The question now becomes who was the best of the clean players - those who never bit from the PED apple.

170 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:33:22am
171 CyanSnowHawk  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:33:35am

re: #138 midwestgak

OB to sign The End of Prosperity in America Bill in 20 minutes. What did Colorado do to deserve this honor?/

Perhaps we'll hear some good news, like the Yellowstone Caldera erupting first.
//////////

172 snowcrash  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:33:46am

re: #144 Shiplord Kirel
Exactly. The American Thinker has a great article discussing this.

173 Kosh's Shadow  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:33:55am

re: #98 thefallingman

I agree with Carter? Oh, God. I need a shower.

I know the kind of shower that some of the people Carter likes would send me to.
(No, I'm not calling Carter himself a Nazi, but some of the terrorists he sucks up to are pretty close)

174 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:34:09am

re: #146 doppelganglander

I suppose Rush could pull a Christian Slater and start a pirate radio station.

No. 125?

175 godfrey  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:34:22am

re: #163 MandyManners

Ahhh.... Thanks, Mandy!

176 Ward Cleaver  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:34:29am

Press is a dipshit.

177 zombie  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:34:37am

re: #170 Iron Fist

I'm not a lawyer, but what I think you are looking for is "taking without just compensation". By forcing a format onto a radio station, you are effectively confiscating their right to use that time as they see fit, while not paying them for the property you took from them. It's not really quite> that straight forward, but I can't really dig into the technical whys of it.

Yes.

I guess there's a simpler word for it:

Theft.

The Fairness Doctrine is government-enforced theft.

178 Racer X  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:34:39am

Note to Bill Press:

Talk about things Americans want to hear.

Until then, talk to the crickets.

179 Kragar  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:34:40am

re: #153 Peacekeeper

but I don't see how they can do that.
The new federal car czar can mandate no off/volume knobs on new soviet kars.

I remember the old Max Headroom show where the police broke into a "terrorist's" house. They found a TV with an off switch. "An off switch? She'll get years for that!"

180 The Shadow Do  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:34:41am

re: #127 Nevergiveup

No One I know

I've heard him being extolled for being a man and admitting it, even though he maybe didn't come completely clean it was close enough that we should just give him the benefit of the doubt. Something like that.

181 MandyManners  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:34:51am

re: #158 godfrey

I don't know, but that's a serious point of weakness.

No government "owns" the air.

The public owns the airwaves per the link in my No. 163.

182 godfrey  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:34:53am

re: #166 albusteve

Seems those attempts are happening with greater frequency...

183 caligal  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:34:54am

will the fairness doc apply to NPR?

184 tfc3rid  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:35:09am

re: #137 subsailor68

Here's a link referencing what Lawhawk was writing about:

Liberty Media deal staves off Sirius bankruptcy

I got Satellite Radio in November... I really like it... Love the commercial-free music stations...

185 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:35:13am

re: #143 reine.de.tout

Here's what I don't understand.

When the FCC grants a broadcasting license, what are the licensing? What is the "license" supposed to show, that the organization has met certain criteria and makes a promise that its operations won't interfere with others?

OR, does the FCC take the position that the gov't somehow "owns" the air, and the license is permission to broadcast through the airwaves?

The government doesn't own the airwaves, per se, they are just the go to organization for overseeing the usage. The public owns the airwaves.

Same thinking drives Socialism.

186 FurryOldGuyJeans  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:36:19am

re: #156 opnion

That's funny , because to me if the Fairness Doctrine had application anywhere, it would be publicly funded outlets.

You keep using logic...that is not how the FD would be applied.

187 J.D.  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:36:22am

re: #176 Ward Cleaver

Press is a dipshit.

WARD!

188 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:36:35am

re: #8 Alouette

No amount of "Fairness Doctrine" will force people to listen to his drivel. At the worst, stations will change their format from talk to top 40.


This, I believe, is the point. It's not to advance liberal ideas, it's for formats to change to music and to get people to stop listening to what's going on in government. The less people think about politics the more likely they will respond only to feelings.

189 Shiplord Kirel  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:36:38am

re: #145 albusteve

so your saying it's a widespread conspiracy to threaten the 1st....to keep the right quiet by intimidation?....doesnt seem likely to me

No, it's not a conspiracy as such. It is an open, obvious mass movement. Like any mass movement it has a leadership, an elite, who understand that the real situation may be different from the way the rank and file see it, and who attempt to exercise some degree of control.
My feeling is that the left will use Saul Alinsky's indirect approach to institute censorship. With the opposition diverted by noise about the fairness doctrine, they will sneak in the back door with their "localism" mandates.

190 albusteve  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:36:40am

re: #177 zombie

Yes.

I guess there's a simpler word for it:

Theft.

The Fairness Doctrine is government-enforced theft.

so is the inheritance and capital gains taxes....it's the feds...dont ever underestimate what they will do...ever

191 Rancher  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:36:58am

I saw Press debate Megyn Kelly yesterday and Rustler and I were screaming at the tube every time he said something stupid. We were pretty horse by the time it ended. He asserts that the free market supports left radio and gave some cities like Seattle as an example but other cities don't have it that want it so we need the Fairness Doctrine to force those shows (and his) on the air in those markets.

192 Honorary Yooper  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:37:06am

re: #183 caligal

will the fairness doc apply to NPR?

Are you kidding? The doctrine will apply to conservatives, classical liberals, and libertarians, but never to socialists on the left.

193 Dustyvet  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:37:14am

Afghan diplomat Mohammed Fagirad charged in all-day wife beating


[Link: www.nydailynews.com...]

194 J.D.  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:37:28am

re: #183 caligal

will the fairness doc apply to NPR?

I believe the "thinking" is that it will be exempt since it is "publicly funded".

195 dhg4  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:37:29am

Glory Days passed him by.

196 subsailor68  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:38:02am

re: #184 tfc3rid

I got Satellite Radio in November... I really like it... Love the commercial-free music stations...

So do I! The commercial backed stations (e.g., FoxNews) are a little irritating - since we're paying a fee for the service, but I can live with that.

197 gmsc  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:38:26am

It's Not Fair!

A growing number of "elites," including Bill Clinton, are calling for a return of the "fairness doctrine" to talk radio, a sure indication that Congress and the new President will soon be taking on this issue.

Supporters of the "fairness doctrine" are actually evading the only way to achieve true "fairness" in a free society: To come up with a better product. For several decades now, talented but unsuccessful left-wing broadcasters have attempted to please their audiences on the scale Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck and others have pleased theirs. It hasn't worked. Their product didn't sell. Nobody listened.

In talk radio, the product for sale is ideas. The left-wing politicians who, up to now, cannot sell their ideas, are now attempting to do the next best thing: Prevent the ideas that DO sell from being offered for sale. They know they can't openly come out for censorship, so they call for laws and regulations to require broadcasters to do the impossible: To sell what doesn't sell. In practice, this means either broadcasting what nobody will listen to (at a loss, since there will be no advertisers), or getting rid of the shows and ideas that do sell and replace them with—-you guessed it—the speeches and ideas of politicians who support the "fairness doctrine."

If a young child loses when playing a game, you'll sometimes see him throw the game pieces into the air, screaming, "Not fair!" This is the earliest known demand for a "fairness doctrine." When that child grows up and acquires the power of coercion, watch closely what's about to emerge in Congress.

As a noteworthy postscript, it will be interesting to see how far the government gets in spreading this blatantly obvious attempt at censorship, lurking behind the feel-good word "fairness." They'll probably get what they want on conventional (terrestrial) radio, unless a furious legal battle is waged--and won--by the Rush Limbaughs of the world.

Of course, now the liberal censorship fun begins: What about cable and satellite broadcasts? What about the Internet? Will government go after those too? How would that work and look in practice? Will there be a central server in Washington DC, and everything written for the Internet will have to go through some bureaucrat's office for approval?

I'd like to hear these politicians defend why it's constitutional to stifle one area of broadcast, but not another. Indeed, if they think that all forms of human association and contact are subject to government restrictions and control, they should be forced to disclose that opinion. After all, it's only fair.

198 reine.de.tout  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:38:27am

re: #163 MandyManners

Red Lion Broadcasting v. FCC.

thanks.
bookmarked.

199 caligal  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:38:48am

re: #194 J.D.

well, that just isn't "fair!"

200 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:38:54am

re: #167 zombie

I 100% agree. It should only apply to NPR.

Which means: The Zombie Radio Hour! Today at 5 on NPR.

Aw-right!

Talk like Rachel Maddow and we still won't know your gender.

201 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:39:05am
202 xenonian  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:39:14am

He wants to make money at it?

so let me get this straight..

..he cannot come up with enough of interest to talk about on his own & thereby attract enough listeners to make said money....

so - the conventional liberal rationale is that he now wants to be a parasite onto the body of conservative talk radio in order to steal airtime and make a living?

am I getting that right?

203 Fat Bastard Vegetarian  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:39:15am

re: #200 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

That wasn't nice. Sorry.

204 albusteve  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:39:26am

re: #189 Shiplord Kirel

No, it's not a conspiracy as such. It is an open, obvious mass movement. Like any mass movement it has a leadership, an elite, who understand that the real situation may be different from the way the rank and file see it, and who attempt to exercise some degree of control.
My feeling is that the left will use Saul Alinsky's indirect approach to institute censorship. With the opposition diverted by noise about the fairness doctrine, they will sneak in the back door with their "localism" mandates.

that's what I said up above...it doesnt matter what you call it or how it becomes doctrine or law...it will happen imo sooner or later unless there is a dramatic electorate turn around in two years

205 J.D.  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:39:30am

re: #193 Dustyvet

Afghan diplomat Mohammed Fagirad charged in all-day wife beating

[Link: www.nydailynews.com...]

Sick.

206 J.D.  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:40:22am

re: #199 caligal

well, that just isn't "fair!"

Yeah, well, fair isn't the goal.
Unfair advantage is.

207 caligal  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:40:40am

re: #197 gmsc

your analogy of the losing child screaming "not fair" is dead on.

208 Bloodnok  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:40:50am

re: #203 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

That wasn't nice. Sorry.

He/she could use one of those Laurie Anderson voice changer thingies. Freaky, but informative.

209 barry the baptist  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:40:56am

re: #161 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

I think the car czar can place the Comrade Channel in every car. There is no dial...you just get what the govt wants you to get. Period.

Well, I dunno maybe you can get options: CH 1 Al Franken, CH 2 Alan Colmbs, CH 3 Air America, CH 4 NPR, CH 5 Bill Press, CH 6 CNN radio, CH 7 BBC America, CH 9 MSNBC radio, CH 10 al-Arabiya, CH 11 al-Jezeera, CH 12 Kos Kids radio, CH 13 Pravda, Ch 14 NBC

There. Good variety.

210 Neutral President  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:41:19am

re: #136 zombie

I agree.

The Fairness Doctrine is the Birth Certificate of the left.

Something for the crazed zealots to fantasize about. But it will forever remain a fantasy.

Up until the last couple of weeks I felt the same way but leftist zealots in all levels of government seem to be rather brazen about turning the country into a left-wing fascist dystopia as fast as they can. Congress members are openly, without any shame or caution, discussing censorship. Their hubris is astounding. They have done more damage, both domestically and to national security, since January 20th than Bill Clinton did in 8 years. It would not surprise me if they really do push the Fairness Doctrine and hope the lengthy court battle that follows will drive AM radio out of business in the meantime or allow them time to legislate more draconian free speech restrictions which will render the FD moot anyway.

211 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:41:26am
212 Max Darkside  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:41:46am

re: #167 zombie

I 100% agree. It should only apply to NPR.

Which means: The Zombie Radio Hour! Today at 5 on NPR.
Aw-right!

And the 'Johnson Journal' on MSNBC right before Kief Oaferman.

213 eschew_obfuscation  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:41:53am

re: #191 Rancher

I saw Press debate Megyn Kelly yesterday and Rustler and I were screaming at the tube every time he said something stupid. We were pretty horse by the time it ended. He asserts that the free market supports left radio and gave some cities like Seattle as an example but other cities don't have it that want it so we need the Fairness Doctrine to force those shows (and his) on the air in those markets.

If those 'other cities' really 'wanted' it, they'd have it... without government meddling..... and it would make money.

214 jaunte  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:42:44am

re: #163 MandyManners

I'm curious about the 'scarce resource' argument:
"(e) It has not been shown that the scarcity of broadcast frequencies, which impelled governmental regulation, is entirely a thing of the past, as new uses for the frequency spectrum have kept pace with improved technology and more efficient utilization of that spectrum. Pp. 396-400."

I don't think this could be applied to the internet.

215 the_flying_pig  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:43:11am

Bill Press wanted to be a capitalist pig, obviously but his beloved Dear Leader will wanted all tax revenues as soon as Bill Press makes money. *tsk-tsk-tsk*

216 Bobblehead  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:43:11am

re: #167 zombie

I 100% agree. It should only apply to NPR.

Which means: The Zombie Radio Hour! Today at 5 on NPR.

Aw-right!

Will you use one of those voice disguising things? Will we find out just who zombie really is? Stayed tuned.

217 gmsc  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:43:27am

re: #207 caligal

your analogy of the losing child screaming "not fair" is dead on.

The author of that piece is Dr. Michael J. Hurd, so I really can't call it my analogy.

I do agree that it's a great analogy!

218 godfrey  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:43:55am

re: #201 Iron Fist

It is chilling that I know people in influential places who either do not see, or simply want to hide, their implicit preference for fascist forms of control. Did you see Michael Ledeen's recent articles? Yikes.

219 midwestgak  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:44:01am

Check out the stage upon which OB will sign that prosperity crushing Bill. Such pomp! Is anyone better able to make a funeral procession appear to be a parade?

220 Empire1  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:44:25am

re: #120 SasquatchOnSteroids

Well whooptyfuckingdoo.
I get up at 4:00 AM, do 10 hrs/day, that's my life, it's my business. All the while without bitchin' about it. What I bitch about is people who won't work but want my pay. There's no bailout for us, just endless fighting to keep what we earn.

Go suck a Rosie toe, ijit.

Wonderfully said! More power (and an upding) to you!

221 Ringo the Gringo  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:44:40am

re: #156 opnion

That's funny , because to me if the Fairness Doctrine had application anywhere, it would be publicly funded outlets.

You'd think....

222 albusteve  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:45:12am

Something for the crazed zealots to fantasize about. But it will forever remain a fantasy.

223 Pass The Moonbaticide  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:45:22am

re: #106 zombie
They want equal broadcast time ? Fine by me.
Theyv'e got the wee sma' hours between 1am - 6am for their Left content. See how many will listen then.

224 VioletTiger  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:45:27am

The left is wasting no time, ticking off their agenda items one by one.
I don't want to think about what is next.

225 albusteve  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:46:56am

re: #222 albusteve

Something for the crazed zealots to fantasize about. But it will forever remain a fantasy.

these crazed zealots own the federal govt now....think about that

226 Infidel_Jim  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:48:35am

Well, Bill,
You obviously don't have anything worthwhile to say--I never thought you did--otherwise you would have listeners.

227 [deleted]  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:53:06am
228 doppelganglander  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 11:53:53am

re: #167 zombie

I 100% agree. It should only apply to NPR.

Which means: The Zombie Radio Hour! Today at 5 on NPR.

Aw-right!

That would be cool. Would you have to use a voice disguiser to keep your secret identity safe?

229 Dr. Shalit  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 12:04:02pm

re: #84 Bobblehead

Rush is smart enough to see the writing on the wall. I'm sure he has several "Plan B's".

Bobblehead -

Plan "B" should include the purchase of Sirius/XM from the Bankruptcy Trustee.

-S-

230 looking closely  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 12:12:59pm
I know why I’m interested in it because I get up every morning at 3:45, I do three hours of talk radio every day from six to nine, that’s my life, it’s my business, I want to make money at it, and I want to be heard.


Boo flippin' hoo.

I'd like to make money starring in blockbuster Hollywood movies, yet oddly enough, I don't ask the Federal gov't to intervene on my behalf here.

You can't make a living at morning radio probably because you SUCK.

If your program were any good, you'd have an audience for it without having the Federal gov't having to subsidize you and destroy your competition.

231 Tupac23X  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 12:14:09pm

re: #229 Dr. Shalit

Bobblehead -

Plan "B" should include the purchase of Sirius/XM from the Bankruptcy Trustee.

-S-

I don't listen to Rush as much as I did years ago but it's got more to do with economy of time than anything else. However, I've absolutely been thinking about that and yes, I hope that he's been using his sizeable intellect planning for this eventuality should it come to pass.

We absolutely can't lose his voice. Not now.

232 wiffersnapper  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 12:17:02pm

Won't he get enough money anyway from the Spendulus?

233 Mr Spiffy  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 12:26:59pm

re: #111 unreconstructed rebel

If I were Hamas, that would scare the shit out of me.

you forgot the sarc tag

234 MTF  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 12:35:00pm

Could there be any more disgusting spectacle than some guy who wants to sacrifice the first amendment to his desire to make a couple of bucks. To paraphrasing Markos the commie, "Screw him!"

235 debutaunt  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 12:51:19pm

re: #67 Peacekeeper

ACORN just got 4 BILLION dollars. My guess is that there will be at least one aggrieved ACORN member in every Limbaugh market.

ACORN was the major player in causing the real estate mess and they are rewarded with 4 billion dollars. Cool.

236 justabill  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 12:54:26pm

re: #106 zombie

The Fairness Doctrine is fundamentally unconstitutional.

It forces media outlets to lose money by "spending" their precious airtime broadcasting messages no one wants to hear.

Media outlets are corporations. Corporations exist to make money. Each media outlet only has 24 hours in a day to broadcast content. Each media outlets tries to maximize its listenership by broadcasting the material with the most appeal. Most radio networks have realized that conservative shock jocks get far and away the most listeners. That's the way to get more advertising dollars and stay afloat.

But what if these stations were forced to spend 12 hours out of each broadcast day airing boring, whiney socialist tripe? Clickclickclick go the radios across the America as they are switched off. The Air America debacle has proven that. The "best talent" in left-wing punditry could not sustain a single station, much less stations across the country. It was torture to listen to.

The end result is that these radio stations will become unprofitable. By government decree.

Forget about the politics of the thing: the money-losing aspect is what will sink the Fairness Doctrine in the courts. I forget the exact Constitutional principle involved -- any scholars in the house? -- but it may be something like "unlawful seizure."

The problem is that the airwaves are, in essence, public property. Held in the public trust, supposedly for the public good. The stations essentially lease the use of a particular frequency for a period of time. They periodically must renew the lease. Complying with whatever regulations come up are conditions of the lease...

Just as you would need a permit to stage a mass demonstration on the Mall in DC or other tract of public land, you need permission to use the public airways.

Personally, I don't believe there should be any view point bias in allocating public resources(broadcast freqs), but I think it would be a very difficult case to win in court.

237 Wendya  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 1:05:09pm

There's no way this would apply to print media or television. In any event, if we allow the government to decide what constitutes "fair", you can bet your ass all left leaning media will be considered middle of the road any only conservative opinions will require rebuttal.

238 Wendya  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 1:22:50pm

re: #236 justabill

The problem is that the airwaves are, in essence, public property. Held in the public trust, supposedly for the public good. The stations essentially lease the use of a particular frequency for a period of time. They periodically must renew the lease. Complying with whatever regulations come up are conditions of the lease...

Just as you would need a permit to stage a mass demonstration on the Mall in DC or other tract of public land, you need permission to use the public airways.

Personally, I don't believe there should be any view point bias in allocating public resources(broadcast freqs), but I think it would be a very difficult case to win in court.


Actually, segments of the "public" airwaves are used every single day without any government permission. Are you familiar with FRS 2-way radios?

We the people do not "own" the public airwaves. It is impossible to claim actual ownership. What we do is allow the government to control certain parts of the spectrum to protect the interests of broadcasters. We don't exercise content control over cellphones or wireless internet yet they use the "public airwaves" as well.

239 looking closely  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 1:23:15pm

re: #118 godfrey

Am I understanding their basic argument correctly?

1. Airwaves are natural resources.
2. Natural resources are public property.
3. Public property should be governed by the state because only the state can ensure that public property remains public.
Therefore, the federal government (FCC) should intervene in radio broadcasting to ensure that public property like airwaves are not monopolized by private interests.


This might be the argument, but its utter bullcrap. Its a strawman argument.

The gov't has the right to regulate the airwaves (otherwise anyone can use up all the bandwidth), but it already does so via the FCC. The fact that the gov't can regulate the airwaves DOES NOT give it the right to dictate CONTENT on said airwaves.

Can you imagine what would happen if some doofus demanded "equal time" in EVERY newspaper in the country? Or on every television opinion show?

This "fairness doctrine" is NOT about access at all. . .any group that wants access can compete for it in the free market. . .its about CONTROLLING SPEECH.

The Federal gov't *ALREADY* subsidizes the biggest left-leaning radio network in the country, National Public (ie Proletariat) Radio.

Again, the radio airwaves are a free market, like newspapers, like the internet, etc.

Those that are successful (ie make money) stay on.

Those that cannot hold an audience (eg, like this loser who is whining that he can't make money) lose money and fold. . .like any other business.

240 Ron Shaw  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 1:25:31pm

re: #8 Alouette

No amount of "Fairness Doctrine" will force people to listen to his drivel. At the worst, stations will change their format from talk to top 40.

Totally true, but 'reality' or the 'truth' has never seemed to co-exist with liberals such as Bill Press.

If the Top 40 programming change doesn't work, an audible test pattern would probably have a larger 'listening' audience...to be fair or in an effort to exhibit a doctrine of fairness.

241 Ceemack  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 1:25:37pm
...it’s my business, I want to make money at it, and I want to be heard.


Wow. Bill Press used the "b" word and the "m" word, and in reference to himself. Astounding.

My advice, Bill: Do a better radio show.

242 looking closely  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 1:27:54pm

re: #238 Wendya

Actually, segments of the "public" airwaves are used every single day without any government permission. Are you familiar with FRS 2-way radios?

We the people do not "own" the public airwaves. It is impossible to claim actual ownership. What we do is allow the government to control certain parts of the spectrum to protect the interests of broadcasters. We don't exercise content control over cellphones or wireless internet yet they use the "public airwaves" as well.


To be clear, both wireless internet AND cellphone emissions ARE regulated by the FCC, in the sense that the machinery involved has to use certain frequencies, and be restricted to certain power constraints, etc.

Again, it HAS to be this way, otherwise some bandwidth hog with a thick wallet can just broadcast radio broad-spectrum radio emissions effectively blocking all other practical radio frequency usage in a given area. IE, Assuming I had enough resources, I could set up my own "studio" at the top of my apt building and broadcast my own programming on ALL frequencies simultaneously, jamming out everyone else.

But as you say, the gov't isn't restricting CONTENT (or at least it is exercising only minimal restraint to satisfy concerns of public decency, with respect to profanity, etc.)

This "fairness doctrine" is all about CONTENT, and that's the problem with it.

The gov't needs to butt out and let the marketplace of ideas do its work.

243 Dasher  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 1:34:16pm

Liberal radio is not viable, because there message is no different than watching the evening news on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, or MSNBC.

244 Sifty  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 1:45:59pm

Bill Press ain't got the sense God gave geese.

He has always been the antithesis of anything masculine, he knows it, and he hates everyone for it.

245 broemti  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 1:50:06pm

I wanna be heard too! I wanna get paid for it too! Geee, if I have nothing to say that people will pay for I guess I will go unheard. Free market?

246 Bill Dalasio  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 1:50:21pm

re: #8 Alouette

No amount of "Fairness Doctrine" will force people to listen to his drivel. At the worst, stations will change their format from talk to top 40.

Exactly. What Mr. Press fails to understand is that having to provide as much airtime for his product, for which there isn't a market, as for Rush Limbaugh, for whom there is a market, will not mean that his services become more valuable. Listeners will not tune in for a radio show that gives them no particular value. Because of this, advertisers will not pay to advertise on his show. Frankly, they don't much care whether its 10 minutes they're not paying to advertise on or 10 hours. Because of this, it is unlikely that the profitable talk radio shows will be able to support the overhead of playing the unprofitable. And the more time that Mr. Press and his ilk are given, the less able to support them the likes of Rush Limbaugh will be.

247 code red 21  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 2:02:32pm

Hey Bill you still won't make any money...no listens to you now and they damn sure won't listen to you if the Unfair doctrine is imposed on us.

248 code red 21  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 2:08:38pm

re: #205 J.D.

Sick.


That son of a bitch I would pay to watch someone beat that piece of shit like he beat his wife. MotherF*****

249 JustABill  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 2:08:54pm

re: #238 Wendya

I am not saying I agree with the "Public Property" arguement, I am just saying that it would probably hold up in court...

250 jdubya  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 2:13:30pm

Funny how the leftists want a piece of the pie when it is in the publics "best interests". (I do not call them liberal as I feel they are not truly liberal when they want to quash other's ideas and opinions)

Here is the reality: Most of these people could not manage a business accordingly. Most of these people do not know a business plan, do not understand markets, and do not have original "ideas". So, obviously when their current gig is running out of gas, on fire, out in the middle of nowhere, on the ocean, approaching the edge of the world, and flying spiders with monkey heads are attacking them, naturally they need a "boost".

How to get this boost? Easy. Blame the free market. "Those snarky bastards took away my customers because they are controlling the airwaves and filling everybody's heads with Republican mumbo-jumbo". TRANSLATION: "I do not have a real business plan for this market and, quite frankly really do not understand why my show fails to take of in rural America, when t does so gosh darn well in New York, Seattle, San Fran, etc. For some reason there must be a conspiracy".

Then, they get an even better idea: "Hey, Moyers has been living large on the public dime for years and he sucks! But he does get all that green, green money what in videos, speaking gigs in Vermont, fake awards ceremonies at Robert Redford's coffee and colonic events, videos, and his own suduko board game. If he can sponge then dammit so can I!" Translation: "If only there was a way to get control of other peoples money and investment, then I do not have to come up with a plan/clue/idea and any seed money, investment, whatever, I can fill in my greedy pockets. Yes!"

So now we are dealing with this crap.

But, it will not work.

The American public just watched Ducky and Barry and Harry force a gigantic stack of paper, a stack so large that a family of four could have the equivalent in toilet paper for a year. And Ducky just flew to Rome to have the pope kiss her ring. Barry just burned a bunch of carbon credits to fly to Denver to ceremoniously insult Biden publicly while signing the bill. And Harry? Well who cares.

The market is tanking. Bush is all but forgotten, unless you need to blame someone for something that happened on Clinton's watch, or pretty much anything that happened with Democrat care.

Once the leftist's minions of stupidity figure out they have been duped by the biggest charlatans of charletry (I made that word up), they will be like banshees with razor sharp claws on each other. They eat their own. They will turn on their party and politicians faster than a hooker turns tricks at an insurance convention in Cleveland (just saying).

And, as icing, once they find out that it will apply to the Internet, and who knows WHAT IS CONSERVATIVE AND LIBERAL IN MUSIC AS WELL? Would, say country and western be construed as conservative? What would be liberal? Some claptrap elevator muzak? I really have a hard time seeing anything else...well maybe Kenny G. Does this mean that a rap station would need to be placed say in nowhere-ville BF Egypt, or a country station be placed in San Fran?

251 mattm  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 2:35:16pm

Maybe because no one wants to listen to a moonbat whine at 6 AM or any time for that matter. For that all I have to do is watch the CBS Evening News.

252 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 2:54:31pm

That's all Democrats are about, -- Making money, power, fucking over the middle class, fucking over the poor.. and killing free speech.

253 stevezilla  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 2:59:59pm

Although I'm glad he wants to make money (there's a Capitalist inside of him, yearning to be free! yay!) he doesn't get it -- Government shouldn't interfere with speech, especially political speech. This is why speech is protected under the Bill of rights. We're not talking about news outlets with regard to the Fairness Doctrine, we're talking about political commentary.

Government shouldn't decide what is "fair" when the free market can do this better and faster. Liberal and progressive talk radio formats are less popular. Period. Conservative radio shows exist because the market has decided there is a need for it.

Supply and demand.
Liberals don't get it. They can't compete in the marketplace & it frightens me that they would consider trashing the Bill of Rights rather than changing the effin' radio dial.

254 FrogMarch  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 3:09:35pm

The democrats feel that free speech is a one way street, just for them.
Bill Press wants to force people to listen to him, becasue the free market cannot do that. It's just more social engineering by the left. More left-wing fascism.

255 kywrite  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 3:25:34pm

"...and I want to be heard."

Hah. So do I. But last I remember, freedom of SPEECH was enshrined in the Constitution, not freedom of MAKING PEOPLE LISTEN TO YOU. You gotta work for that part.

256 John_in_VA  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 3:34:18pm

I actually listened to this interview, and what doesn't come out on the transcript is that any time the host was speaking, Press was in the background on his mike saying, "No, no, nope, nuh-uh, no, no..."

He's all about equal time for everyone to speak, but when it's someone else's turn, he wants to continually interrupt.

257 Perplexed  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 4:31:48pm
I know why I’m interested in it because I get up every morning at 3:45, I do three hours of talk radio every day from six to nine, that’s my life, it’s my business, I want to make money at it, and I want to be heard.

I, for one will never voluntarily listen to anything you broadcast. If I mistakenly hear one of your broadcasts I will boycott all of your advertisers.

258 FlightERDoc  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 4:43:48pm

Bill! Go back to California!

In-n-Out is always looking for qualified people! And the pay is above minimum wage!

259 Steffan  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 5:07:46pm

re: #104 abaleh

OT - Hamas isn't content with stealing blankets and food:

Report: Hamas stole 7 tons of unexploded ordnance

"UN officials were outraged." Flying pig moment?

260 Muadib  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 5:22:45pm

The Fairness Doctrine should really be called the Protection of Stupidity Doctrine.

261 heartland_patriot  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 8:04:33pm

Just a few questions if you please Mr. Press.

Q: Have you considered that there will be no living to be made in talk radio on either side when stations opt out of the hassles the fairness doctrine will impose and switch en mass to a Top 40 format?

Q: Are ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC et. al. ready for the sauce being so lovingly prepared for the goose to be just as liberally applied to the gander?

Q: Does stifling debate and suppressing ideas make them go away? Or does it make them fester and erupt with all the more vigor after fermenting for a time?

Make a living indeed. If your ideas had a market value, you would already be doing so, no? Only a cripple needs a crutch.

262 Majestic  Tue, Feb 17, 2009 9:46:41pm

fairness doctrine = liberal welfare as they leach off of profitable broadcasting. It's about propping up the liberal lame-stream media that is wobbling towards bankruptcy.

263 Sensible Remnant  Wed, Feb 18, 2009 6:48:01am

You want to be heard, Press? Stop spouting b.s. and other nonsense.
It says something about your product that you have to make mommy and daddy government force your views on the public that's turned it's back on you.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Why Did More Than 1,000 People Die After Police Subdued Them With Force That Isn’t Meant to Kill? An investigation led by The Associated Press has found that, over a decade, more than 1,000 people died after police subdued them through physical holds, stun guns, body blows and other force not intended to be lethal. More: Why ...
Cheechako
Yesterday
Views: 42 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
A Closer Look at the Eastman State Bar DecisionTaking a few minutes away from work things to read through the Eastman decision. As I'm sure many of you know, Eastman was my law school con law professor. I knew him pretty well because I was also running in ...
KGxvi
Yesterday
Views: 97 • Comments: 1 • Rating: 1