FCC's new 'Diversity Czar' revives Fairness Doctrine fears

August 17, 4:38 PMConservative Politics ExaminerKathy Shaidle

Previous Next

15 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Conservative Politics Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

Conservative talk radio fans have new reason to fear for the future of their favorite shows.

For years, these loyal listeners have worried that one day, a Democratic Congress and White House would revive the Fairness Doctrine, which was abolished by President Reagan in 1987.

That longstanding FCC policy obliged broadcasters to offer "balanced" commentary on "controversial issues of public importance."

The Fairness Doctrine sounds noble, but, as noted by Val E. Limburg with the Museum of Broadcast Communications:

The doctrine, nevertheless, disturbed many journalists, who considered it a violation of First Amendment rights of free speech/free press which should allow reporters to make their own decisions about balancing stories. Fairness, in this view, should not be forced by the FCC. In order to avoid the requirement to go out and find contrasting viewpoints on every issue raised in a story, some journalists [and radio producers/programmers] simply avoided any coverage of some controversial issues. This "chilling effect" was just the opposite of what the FCC intended.

The abolition of the Fairness Doctrine led directly to the phenomenal growth of conservative talk radio as we know it today: a multi-million dollar industry boasting hugely popular, opinionated, controversial (and politically powerful) hosts like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.

Now some observers believe one of Obama's new FCC appointments indicates another "chill" on the horizon.

Last month, Mark Lloyd was granted the rather Orwellian title of "Chief Diversity Officer" at the FCC. In his 2006 book Prologue to a Farce: Communications and Democracy in America (University of Illinois Press), Lloyd recommended that private broadcasters be forced to, in effect, heavily subsidize their competition: those public broadcasters that already receive millions in taxpayer dollars each year.

This financially onerous combination of fines and fees -- amounting to an estimated  $100-million and $250-million each and every year -- would essentially force many private broadcasters out of business. It's hard for some cynics not to wonder if that might not be the whole idea.

Lloyd has repeatedly stated that he opposes the reintstatement of the Fairness Doctrine, but that's only because he's come up with other ways to castrate conservative talk radio. Naturally, these strategies all come complete with the usual, harmless-sounding calls for "diversity" and "community."

Seton Motley, of the conservative Media Research Center, said Lloyd "laid out a battle plan" in a 2007 report for the George Soros-funded progressive think tank, Center for American Progress.

According to Motley, Lloyd wanted "the FCC to threaten stations' licenses with whom they do not agree with politically, and now he's at the FCC waiting to take their calls. This is not about serving the local interest, it's about political opposition."

In response to such concerns, today Senator Chuck Grassley sent a letter to FCC chairman Julius Genachowski, expressing his concerns about the Lloyd appointment. Grassley wrote, in part:

I do not believe that more regulation, more taxes or fines, or increased government intervention in the commercial radio market will serve the public interest or further the goals of diversifying the marketplace. I am concerned that despite his statements that the Fairness Doctrine is unnecessary, Mr. Lloyd supports a backdoor method of furthering the goals of the Fairness Doctrine by other means. Accordingly, I ask that you clarify and reaffirm your commitment to me to oppose any reincarnation of the Fairness Doctrine. Further, I ask you to affirmatively state that you will not pursue an agenda that includes any new restrictions, fines, fees, or licensing requirements on commercial radio that would effectively create a backdoor Fairness Doctrine.