Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) thinks so.

When it was law it did a couple of things: It required broadcasters to devote some of their airtime to discussing controversial matters of public interest, and to air contrasting views regarding those matters. Stations were given wide latitude as to how to provide contrasting views: It could be done through news segments, public affairs shows or editorials.

Should this really be the government’s role?  Is ensuring “balance” in political speech the same as restricting pornography?  I don’t think so.  Right now it only applies to radio (which conservatives tend to dominate), but doesn’t apply anywhere else.  Not to say that it couldn’t eventually be extended to cable and the internet.  Slippery slope.  Schumer interview below:

HT: Hot Air

2 comments
  1. Well, it’s really not that surprising. This is the same kind for free speech philosophy that the tax code had when 501c3 tax status denied if organizations tried to influence legislation prior to 1954. It’s also the same philosophy that LBJ had in mind when he re-wrote the 501c3 tax code to include his antithesis (and others) on July 2, 1954. It’s also the same philosophy that Congress had in passing the Revenue Act of 1987 to further change the language again.

    It’s a slippery slope and we’ve been sliding for a long time!

    I’d like to see them apply the “fairness doctrine” to themselves;) Not sure how you do that;^)

    In Christ,
    Noah

  2. Well, it’s really not that surprising. This is the same kind for free speech philosophy that the tax code had when 501c3 tax status denied if organizations tried to influence legislation prior to 1954. It’s also the same philosophy that LBJ had in mind when he re-wrote the 501c3 tax code to include his antithesis (and others) on July 2, 1954. It’s also the same philosophy that Congress had in passing the Revenue Act of 1987 to further change the language again.

    It’s a slippery slope and we’ve been sliding for a long time!

    I’d like to see them apply the “fairness doctrine” to themselves;) Not sure how you do that;^)

    In Christ,
    Noah

Comments are closed.

Caffeinated Thoughts provides free news and commentary on culture, current events, faith, and politics, and we are dependent upon readers like you to keep us going. Please consider becoming a monthly patron or making a one-time donation. Every little bit helps!

Get CT In Your Inbox!

Don't miss a single update.

You May Also Like

Third Accuser Says Kavanaugh Present at Party When She Was Gang-Raped

Julie Swetnick alleges that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and his friend, Mark Judge, were present during a party where she was drugged and gang-raped.

Gingrich Silences MSNBC Reporter

I’m normally don’t put up this many videos or even do this…

Governors Rejecting Stimulus

Yesterday Alaska Governor Sarah Palin announced she is rejecting 30% of the…

Globalists’ Push for Solar Tariffs Hurts the American Worker

Rick Manning: The globalists just don’t care if the American factory worker in the Midwest loses his job, so long as the foreigners don’t lose anything.