Difference between revisions of "Fairness Doctrine"
(shuffling around sentences and restoring "abandoned" sentence - but article still has no "flow") |
(Opposition to mandated fairness came from journalists) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | The '''fairness doctrine''' was a policy of the U. S. Federal Communications Commission from 1949 until 1987. | + | The '''fairness doctrine''' was a policy of the U. S. Federal Communications Commission from 1949 until 1987. |
| − | |||
The doctrine required broadcasters who aired material on controversial issues to provide reasonable time for the expression of opposing views. | The doctrine required broadcasters who aired material on controversial issues to provide reasonable time for the expression of opposing views. | ||
| + | ==Opposition to mandated fairness== | ||
One recurring criticism of this requirement was that it had the [[de facto]] effect of limiting broadcast-media treatment of certain controversial subjects. <ref>Doris Garber argues that "the media frequently shy away from programs dealing with controversial public issues to avoid demands to air opposing views in place of revenue-producing programs.'' </ref> | One recurring criticism of this requirement was that it had the [[de facto]] effect of limiting broadcast-media treatment of certain controversial subjects. <ref>Doris Garber argues that "the media frequently shy away from programs dealing with controversial public issues to avoid demands to air opposing views in place of revenue-producing programs.'' </ref> | ||
Revision as of 13:03, May 16, 2007
The fairness doctrine was a policy of the U. S. Federal Communications Commission from 1949 until 1987. The doctrine required broadcasters who aired material on controversial issues to provide reasonable time for the expression of opposing views.
Opposition to mandated fairness
One recurring criticism of this requirement was that it had the de facto effect of limiting broadcast-media treatment of certain controversial subjects. [1]
Under FCC regulations, however, the media could avoid the problem of furnishing additional air-time for opposing views if they included opposing views on the issues in their regular news programming. The courts tended to side with radio and television media if they can bring forth reasonably good evidence of "fairness" in the coverage.
One effect of its demise was to open the doors to today's political "talk radio," previously inhibited by stations' concerns that they would be required to give time to opposing views.
It was abandoned during the Reagan administration.[2]
References
Doris A. Garber, "Mass Media and American Politics" (Washington: Congressional Quarterly Press, 1980), p. 93
- ↑ Doris Garber argues that "the media frequently shy away from programs dealing with controversial public issues to avoid demands to air opposing views in place of revenue-producing programs.
- ↑ The Fairness Doctrine, Museum of Broadcast Communication]