To Democratic senators who say that the Fairness Doctrine of 1949 should be brought back: Norm Coleman, Minnesota Republican, called the doctrine "the biggest misnomer since jumbo shrimp" today at the National Heritage Foundation.
He said, "If the transparent attempt to do in the free-speech rights of those who broadcast in America were a C.S.I. episode, there wouldn't be enough mystery to last an entire hour."
He also quoted from an editorial that ran in his Minnesota paper, the St. Paul Pioneer Press: "Fairness is beautiful, especially when it is optional."
When asked about the controversy surrounding Rush Limbaugh, Mr. Coleman said, "We should lift up and elevate the level of debate."
— Andrew Richards, intern, The Washington Times
Comments (1)
Any government program is a control tool and is relative to those in power at the time it is implemented. I could be negative feedback control in the form of oversight or positive feedback in the form of benefits. This case is definitely negative feedback control. Therefore the definition of fairness would be provided by the Democrats in the form of oversight and used to control those that speak out against them. "Rethinking the Internet" would eventually fall under the Fairness doctrine if they could get it reinstated. Regardless of who is in power, the reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine would be a constraint on the First Amendment because the definition of fairness would become a negative feedback control.
Posted by Larry Stone | October 5, 2007 9:35 AM