3 ms·

Maybe we should bring back the FCC fairness doctrine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine

by moonka 8y ago

repolfx 8y ago
I don't think that would help. The UK has such a regulation still, for TV broadcasters only. It also has the BBC which is committed to such fairness and neutrality in its charter. In practice it is not enforced. For example the senior management of Channel 4 news have routinely made tweets that indicate they hate the Conservative party. And I mean really hate. Their head of output retweeted a message that said, "Writing from America & I can assure you that conservatives will absolutely keep needed medicine out of the hands of those who require it, if you let them" One of their most famous and senior journalists (Jon Snow) went to a music festival, someone who partied with him claimed he shouted "fuck the Tories" and "I'm supposed to be neutral". He claims he can't remember if he said it or not. The chief editor of C4 News liked a tweet that said simply, "Boris Johnson is a cunt". Johnson is one of the most well known conservative politicians in the UK and was a cabinet minister until he resigned quite recently over a policy dispute. You can see a pattern - journalists who are supposed to be neutral by law have no problem with broadcasting to the whole world personal insults against conservative politicians on Twitter. They get away with it because the regulator stands by and does nothing. The FCC fairness doctrine is unlikely to work out much differently. The USA is right to avoid it.
- michaelmrose 8y ago
  Even if news programs report the news in an unbiased fashion people are bound to have personal opinions and express them on their own time. In response to "Writing from America & I can assure you that conservatives will absolutely keep needed medicine out of the hands of those who require it, if you let them" Wouldn't it be a greater crime to ignore this? It seems as if the only reason you don't want a fairness doctrine is not because its a terrible idea but because it wouldn't be effective enough at distorting reality to the peasants.
  - repolfx 8y ago
    I'm not sure what you're getting at there to be honest, especially not with the last comment about peasants? I don't want a fairness doctrine because it clearly is pointless and wouldn't be enforced, thus making it at best a waste of legislative time and at worst a selectively enforced rule; the classic weapon of tyrants everywhere. In theory journalists should be able to separate their personal opinions from their work. Many other professions do, most notably defence lawyers. You sound like you don't believe it's possible, which should put you in agreement with me that a fairness doctrine is a silly thing to have. As for your final comments: do you really believe conservatives - all those hundreds of millions of them around the world - are Disney villains who hate the sick and will block medicine shipments just for the sheer hell of it? That quote is obviously extremist nonsense. People refuse to sell each other medicine all the time for all sorts of reasons but it's never to do with just a blind hatred of the sick, as that quote implies. The fact that the head of a major news operation apparently believes such a statement is worthy of being repeated says everything one needs to know about the state of modern journalism.
    - michaelmrose 8y ago
      I believe that the conservatives will collectively support people that are in fact acting much like Disney villains because they believe the Disney villains will do the best job of protecting their privileged position in society and their wealth or in the case of poor conservatives the wealth and privilege they imagine they will someday earn.
michaelmrose 8y ago
Maybe you should start your own search engine. The fairness doctrine makes no coherent sense in context. How many sides are there in every multidimensional issue. Who decides which sides should be represented and how? Do we force every piece of content in the universe to have an unmoderated comments section filled with racist invectives and conspiracy theories? How "fair" will it be when nobody reads it. Implementation aside the internet is already as fair as can be expected. It has never been cheaper to set up a site and have your voice heard. This of course merely guarantees that you can be heard not that you will have an audience. Edit: US inventors never did show such results you are mistaken or misleading
- fortomorrow 8y ago
  Judt an fyi because you'll never see the reply on the actual thread flagged by HN. The search term was and is "US inventors" it was not a typo and done in incognito on two separate machines but thanks for the down vote

Maybe we should bring back the FCC fairness doctrine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine

by moonka 8y ago

Maybe we should bring back the FCC fairness doctrine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine

repolfx 8y ago

I don't think that would help. The UK has such a regulation still, for TV broadcasters only. It also has the BBC which is committed to such fairness and neutrality in its charter. In practice it is not enforced. For example the senior management of Channel 4 news have routinely made tweets that indicate they hate the Conservative party. And I mean really hate. Their head of output retweeted a message that said, "Writing from America & I can assure you that conservatives will absolutely keep needed medicine out of the hands of those who require it, if you let them" One of their most famous and senior journalists (Jon Snow) went to a music festival, someone who partied with him claimed he shouted "fuck the Tories" and "I'm supposed to be neutral". He claims he can't remember if he said it or not. The chief editor of C4 News liked a tweet that said simply, "Boris Johnson is a cunt". Johnson is one of the most well known conservative politicians in the UK and was a cabinet minister until he resigned quite recently over a policy dispute. You can see a pattern - journalists who are supposed to be neutral by law have no problem with broadcasting to the whole world personal insults against conservative politicians on Twitter. They get away with it because the regulator stands by and does nothing. The FCC fairness doctrine is unlikely to work out much differently. The USA is right to avoid it.

michaelmrose 8y ago
Even if news programs report the news in an unbiased fashion people are bound to have personal opinions and express them on their own time. In response to "Writing from America & I can assure you that conservatives will absolutely keep needed medicine out of the hands of those who require it, if you let them" Wouldn't it be a greater crime to ignore this? It seems as if the only reason you don't want a fairness doctrine is not because its a terrible idea but because it wouldn't be effective enough at distorting reality to the peasants.
- repolfx 8y ago
  I'm not sure what you're getting at there to be honest, especially not with the last comment about peasants? I don't want a fairness doctrine because it clearly is pointless and wouldn't be enforced, thus making it at best a waste of legislative time and at worst a selectively enforced rule; the classic weapon of tyrants everywhere. In theory journalists should be able to separate their personal opinions from their work. Many other professions do, most notably defence lawyers. You sound like you don't believe it's possible, which should put you in agreement with me that a fairness doctrine is a silly thing to have. As for your final comments: do you really believe conservatives - all those hundreds of millions of them around the world - are Disney villains who hate the sick and will block medicine shipments just for the sheer hell of it? That quote is obviously extremist nonsense. People refuse to sell each other medicine all the time for all sorts of reasons but it's never to do with just a blind hatred of the sick, as that quote implies. The fact that the head of a major news operation apparently believes such a statement is worthy of being repeated says everything one needs to know about the state of modern journalism.
  - michaelmrose 8y ago
    I believe that the conservatives will collectively support people that are in fact acting much like Disney villains because they believe the Disney villains will do the best job of protecting their privileged position in society and their wealth or in the case of poor conservatives the wealth and privilege they imagine they will someday earn.

michaelmrose 8y ago

Maybe you should start your own search engine. The fairness doctrine makes no coherent sense in context. How many sides are there in every multidimensional issue. Who decides which sides should be represented and how? Do we force every piece of content in the universe to have an unmoderated comments section filled with racist invectives and conspiracy theories? How "fair" will it be when nobody reads it. Implementation aside the internet is already as fair as can be expected. It has never been cheaper to set up a site and have your voice heard. This of course merely guarantees that you can be heard not that you will have an audience. Edit: US inventors never did show such results you are mistaken or misleading

fortomorrow 8y ago
Judt an fyi because you'll never see the reply on the actual thread flagged by HN. The search term was and is "US inventors" it was not a typo and done in incognito on two separate machines but thanks for the down vote