3 ms·
New FCC chair wants to revoke broadcast licenses; First Amendment might stop him
- jballer 2y agoSetting aside the question of how we should evaluate content for being “in the public interest” and assuming the programming is as valuable as it could possibly be How many people still tune in via OTA antennae? How does the value of broadcast TV compare to other possible uses of that RF spectrum?
- thejazzman 2y agoYou can get a lot of programming, at higher quality, over an antenna than Xfinity cable, which relays the same signals - with an upcharge - and more compression artifacts and latency
- orev 2y agoOTA is more important now with so many people cancelling cable TV service. Use streaming for regular shows, and antenna for live stuff. Also very useful during local emergencies. Add an HD Homerun and you have an app-like experience along with a DVR.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Dig1t 2y agoThis is a partisan political article. >supposed anti-conservative bias. CNN and MSNBC are at all time low viewership, reported trust in the media is at a historic low. This mistrust is due to intense partisan bias in most news sources. Fox News started it and every other news source ended up copying them. Now we are in a disastrous state where journalists have mostly become partisan propagandists and nobody trusts them. It’s bad and honestly the whole system should be reworked. Some kind of fairness doctrine needs to be reintroduced. Ars pretending like they and other publications don’t have a strong bias is a huge part of the problem.
- CamperBob2 2y agoSome kind of fairness doctrine needs to be reintroduced. Ah, yes, force everyone to present "both sides" of issues with a half-dozen sides, none of them optimal. That'll work.
- throw0101b 2y ago> Some kind of fairness doctrine needs to be reintroduced. The fairness doctrine only applies to public airwaves. Fox, CNN, and MSNBC are all run on private cable infrastructure: no public resources (e.g., radio frequencies) are used in their dissemination, and so the public/government does not get to tell them what they can(not) say.
- tivert 2y ago> Ars pretending like they and other publications don’t have a strong bias is a huge part of the problem. The thing about bias is that it's always a problem with the other guy, somehow.
- happytoexplain 2y agoReporting on the bad behavior of an in-power group invites their bad behavior upon you. Irrational biases are common, but there is also no such thing as zero bias, for good reason.
- jsbisviewtiful 2y ago> Some kind of fairness doctrine needs to be reintroduced. I recall learning about The Fairness Doctrine in college and being very confused about the existence of Fox News only in the next few sentences to discover that it was *yet another* great policy dismantled by the Reagan administration... The birth of Fox News quickly followed. > CNN and MSNBC are at all time low viewership... Fox News started it and every other news source ended up copying them. I would love to read a study on this outcome for CNN and MSNBC. Folks to the left don't seem to get their information from television whereas folks to the right gobble up hundreds, if not thousands, of hours of TV news per year. Such an intriguing dichotomy.
- jfengel 2y ago
- Spivak 2y agoHeh, might. Basically code for it won't even be a speed bump but without the copium the article is too nihilistic.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- ungreased0675 2y agoA license implies permission, and permission certainly can be revoked. Why and when are the details that matter.