# Fairness Doctrine (again). **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [May 7, 2020, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fairness-doctrine-again/853368 "2020-05-07T23:57:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2020, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fairness-doctrine-again/853368/21 "2020-05-10T23:32:08Z")
> [@RioRico](#): > > Note that satellite signals occupy “broadcast spectrum”. Anything beamed down is in the FCC’s bailiwick. > > The FCC is mandated to regulate all wired and wireless communications as I cited upthread. Just how regulation occurs is a statutory matter, and laws are changed. A future US Congress could easily grant FCC authority over ANY electric communication. Signal flags, smoke signals, carrier pigeons, and tin-can phones likely are exempt. 😃 Satellite and cable broadcasts are not broadcast over the public airwaves. They are broadcast on privately owned satellite and cable systems. > **[Can the FCC crack down on cable?](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2004/02/can-the-fcc-crack-down-on-cable.html)** > > Calling Janet Jackson's exposed breast "a new low for prime-time television," FCC Chairman Michael K. Powell has promised Congress that he'll do his... > [@](#): > > Not really, although it can try to use its clout to browbeat cable channels into better self-policing. The FCC’s regulatory powers extend only to over-the-air broadcasters, who transmit their programs via the publicly owned spectrum. In order to obtain the FCC’s permission to use slivers of that spectrum, broadcasters agree to abide by the commission’s rules, which include indecency standards. Cable, on the other hand, travels to American homes via privately built and maintained hardware. (The same goes for satellite services like the DISH Network, whose orbiting hardware is privately launched.) So, cable channels needn’t strike a bargain with the FCC in order to operate. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2020, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fairness-doctrine-again/853368/22 "2020-05-11T13:50:01Z")
> [@RioRico](#): > > Those commercial networks are run by capitalist corporations; their purpose is to grab eyeballs to sell to advertisers. Follow the money. Fewer eyeballs are grabbed by right wing media sources because fewer Americans are right-wingers. That’s why GOPs can’t win free and fair elections - they’re detested by most Americans and only survive politically by gerrymandering and voter suppression. This is a simplistic and largely inaccurate view. A [recent study](http://hiddentribes.us) found that while only 6% of Americans identified as far-right, just 8% saw themselves as “progressive activist”/far left. So you could as easily say that most Americans (the “exhausted majority”, 67% in this study) “detest” a sizable proportion of this message board. 🙂 The U.S. voting population has long been considered [“center-right”](http://gallup.com/poll/275792/remained-center-right-ideologically-2019.aspx), though that doesn’t mean Republicans hold sway (they arguably would win more elections if they could keep from being dominated by their more committed rightist elements). The Left would benefit if it was less obsessed with the Evils of Fox (which is more of a symptom than the disease) and ceased dreaming of a renewed Fairness Doctrine, which never worked all that well and is outmoded now due to the multiplicity of news outlets which don’t depend on the public airwaves, so that anyone can readily find a biased source that they like. Many (most?) people, despite their claims, don’t really want an even-handed, “fair” news media. They want to hear their views reinforced. Despite the defects of “capitalist” news media, it’s infinitely preferable to state-run news media. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2020, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fairness-doctrine-again/853368/23 "2020-05-11T14:53:25Z")
FCC regulates all telecoms with regards to the \*technical operational \*aspects. Don’t interfere with other signals, leave this channel open to responders, don’t have a beam so powerful you cook birds flying by at 100 yards. \*Content \*OTOH is only regulated on the open-air broadcasters. And the legal precedents supports it being that way. Before there were radio and TV, newspapers were (and continue to be) absolutely free to have a completely partisan editorial line. Of course, they then were responsible for what they printed, if someone had the resources to sue. Which is why there has been a question for decades if first ISPs and later online venues are carriers, aggregators, or publishers, since that can affect to what extent you are to be responsible for the content – I’ll readily admit many online outfits want to have it both ways. > [@BigT](#): > > No, the Fairness Doctrine doesn’t need to push left-wing or right-wing anything. The idea is about news, not about political opinion. All that requires is a neutral statement of facts. Neutral statements of fact do not sell ads. They figured that out way back. > [@Jackmannii](#): > > The Left would benefit if it was less obsessed with the Evils of Fox (which is more of a symptom than the disease) and ceased dreaming of a renewed Fairness Doctrine, which never worked all that well and is outmoded now due to the multiplicity of news outlets which don’t depend on the public airwaves, so that anyone can readily find a biased source that they like. > > Many (most?) people, despite their claims, don’t really want an even-handed, “fair” news media. They want to hear their views reinforced. > > Despite the defects of “capitalist” news media, it’s infinitely preferable to state-run news media. We are seeing a bit of a rise in “fairness” concerns from the right when it comes to private capitalist venues like Facebook/Twitter etc. deciding whether or not to fact-check and YouTube demonetizing channels that _YouTube_ deems controversial (or that get too many complaints for YouTube’s patience). So yeah, the whole construct seems entirely subject to who’s goring whose ox. ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2020, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fairness-doctrine-again/853368/24 "2020-05-12T03:36:44Z")
> [@RioRico](#): > > Note that satellite signals occupy “broadcast spectrum”. Anything beamed down is in the FCC’s bailiwick. > > The FCC is mandated to regulate all wired and wireless communications as I cited upthread. Just how regulation occurs is a statutory matter, and laws are changed. A future US Congress could easily grant FCC authority over ANY electric communication. Signal flags, smoke signals, carrier pigeons, and tin-can phones likely are exempt. 😃 What you say iis true, but would not be defensible, under the basic principle of regulation, which is defensible’ [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fairness-doctrine-again/853368.md?page=1)