Bring back the fairness doctrine

[still_one]

73. The airwaves are owned by the public, and the Fairness Doctrine is to

provide that a contrasting viewpoint be presented for controversial matters of public interest.

Your argument is stating that it forces networks to present extreme points of view, what's wrong with that?

The example you gave is also not right. Rachel Maddow would not be required to host a Neo-Nazi point of view on her program.

If a network is talking about a Controversial matter, such as the wall, the only thing that network would be required to provide is airtime to a contrasting point of view. There is no requirement that contrasting point of view is presented on a specific show. It could be done through news segments, public affairs shows, or editorials. The doctrine only required that a contrasting viewpoint be presented.

The removal of the fairness doctrine encouraged Sinclair Broadcasting Group to force its affiliate stations to preempt regularly scheduled programming, and air the anti-Kerry "documentary", titled "Stolen Honor", days before the election.

There is a reason that those that supported the revocation of the Fairness Doctrine were conservative republicans in contrast to progressive and Democrats.

These are public airwaves, and the public deserves to have contrasting views presented on Controversial subjects.

It is even more important since 80 to 90% of talk radio represents a conservative view point