Personal tools
 
Views

Debate: Fairness Doctrine

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 21:14, 12 November 2008 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
(Background and Context of Debate:)
← Previous diff
Revision as of 21:19, 12 November 2008 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
(No)
Next diff →
Line 35: Line 35:
====No==== ====No====
-''Click on the pencil icon and research and write arguments here''+ 
 +*'''Widespread modern media makes Fairness Doctrine unnecessary.''' [http://www.heritage.org/research/regulation/em368.cfm Adam Thierer. "Why the Fairness Doctrine is Anything But Fair". Heritage Foundation. 29 Oct. 1993] - "The doctrine's supporters seem not to appreciate just how much the broadcast world has changed since 1949. With the proliferation of informational resources and technology, the number of broadcast outlets available to the public has increased steadily. In such an environment, it is hard to understand why the federal government must police the airwaves to ensure that differing views are heard."
 + 
 +*'''Fairness Doctrine would decrease, not increase, free speech.''' [http://www.heritage.org/research/regulation/em368.cfm Adam Thierer. "Why the Fairness Doctrine is Anything But Fair". Heritage Foundation. 29 Oct. 1993] - "The result of a reinstituted fairness doctrine would not be fair at all. In practice, much controversial speech heard today would be stifled as the threat of random investigations and warnings discouraged broadcasters from airing what FCC bureaucrats might refer to as 'unbalanced' views."
 + 
 + 
|- |-
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|

Revision as of 21:19, 12 November 2008

Should the Fairness Doctrine be Reinstated?

Contents

Background and Context of Debate:

Legislation currently is before Congress that would reinstate a federal communications policy known as the "fairness doctrine." The legislation, entitled the "Fairness in Broadcasting Act of 1993," is sponsored in the Senate (S. 333) by Ernest Hollings, the South Carolina Democrat, and in the House (H.R. 1985) by Bill Hefner, the North Carolina Democrat. It would codify a 1949 Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulation that once required broadcasters to "afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views of public importance." The fairness doctrine was overturned by the FCC in 1987.

Does the Fairness Doctrine breach the First Amendment?

Yes

Click on the pencil icon and research and write arguments here

No

  • Widespread modern media makes Fairness Doctrine unnecessary. Adam Thierer. "Why the Fairness Doctrine is Anything But Fair". Heritage Foundation. 29 Oct. 1993 - "The doctrine's supporters seem not to appreciate just how much the broadcast world has changed since 1949. With the proliferation of informational resources and technology, the number of broadcast outlets available to the public has increased steadily. In such an environment, it is hard to understand why the federal government must police the airwaves to ensure that differing views are heard."


Write Subquestion here...

Yes

Click on the pencil icon and research and write arguments here

No

Click on the pencil icon and research and write arguments here

Write Subquestion here...

Yes


No


References:

Related pages on Debatepedia:

External links and resources:

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.