Of course, I don't want The Ministry of Truth over the media. However, we do need guardrails, so every crackpot with a camera and billionaire funding can't brainwash Americans. Funny, the only organizations I found that detest the Fairness Doctrine were Conservative or Libertarian think tanks. 🤔
"We don't need a ministry of truth, we just need a ministry of truth!" Yeah, right. The FD never prevented "brainwashing" or "billionaires". It did very little, and constitutionally, would do even less today. It cannot apply to not OTA media. It can't "be updated" w/out amending the Constitution.
What it did do was require broadcast stations to give *some* time to issues of public concern, and to, over the course of all programming -- not 'per show' or 'the news' -- allow for some airing of differing PoVs. It did not require equal time, debate, or fact-checking in any way.
And if you think there was EVER a time when "billionaires" (adjust for inflation) didn't control the media and lie to America, I've got three words for you: Remember the Maine!
Yes, I am familiar. But its a little bit different when its people reading an occasional newspaper than when they are being brainwashed 24/7 by an Australian billionaire.
Yes, because people watch TV 24/7 now. And Fox only gets 2-3 million viewers. Under your proposed regime, will people be tied down, ala Clockwork Orange, and forced to watch counterpoints? Does this cut both ways? Are you going to make me watch 1 minute of OANN for each minute of Colbert I view?
Yep, thats my goal... you figured me out. 🙄
Then what IS your solution? The original purpose of the FD was to provide diversity of information at a time when a region might have 2-3, or even 1, broadcaster, who was more likely to use that monopoly to control debate on *local* issues such as tax changes than to sway national opinion.
Today, however, we have 1000s, 10s of 1000s, of information sources, from every conceivable (and some inconceivable ) PoV. It's all there, all trivially accessible at whim. As you correctly note, every crank, kook, and loony now has access to a global audience.
Your problem isn't that there are no alternatives to Fox, OANN, etc. There are plenty and you know it. Your problem is, given the choice, some people do not choose as you prefer. And solving the "problem" of people making the "wrong" choices by means of government control is called "fascism".
PS: "Reading the occasional newspaper". Wow. You have NO IDEA what media consumption was like in the past, do you? Perhaps you need to see fewer memes and read more history?
She’s a fool.
So what are these "guardrails" you want? And who do you propose enforces them? If it's the govt how is that not a "Ministry of Truth over the media"?
Those noted conservatives Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather were among those against the Fairness Doctrine, with the former testifying before Congress against it.
One of those “resist” accounts that pretends they care about facts while getting all their education from shitty blogs and memes.