media reform bill may prevent possible 'fascist' takeover

Sounds like a good bill, but is probably too late to do much good. The damage has already been done.

Butrflynet, there is a stranglehold for sure. Could be impossible to break up.

Is that the reason why Hugo Chavez is shutting down opposition media in Venezuela, to prevent a fascist takeover?

You people would be funny if you weren't dangerous.

I don't care what the motives are, there is damage being done to one of the few guardians of the peoples' voice. That's all voices, okie.

Censorship plain and simple.

Re: media reform bill may prevent possible 'fascist' takeove

If there is a fascist takeover of American media (which I don't think there is), will it be prevented because Rush Limbaugh switches to a Hannity & Colmes format? A format where a dominant rightwinger and a feeble, idiotic left-winger deliver "both sides of the issue"? I doubt it, yet such a farce would satisfy the media reform bill.

From what I glean from your article, this bill is a botched solution to a non-problem.

Re: media reform bill may prevent possible 'fascist' takeove


Thomas, it is an attempt to shut up talk radio, because liberal talk radio falls on its face here. Liberals don't listen, so advertising falls flat, and the programs go broke, plain and simple. Liberal thinking is emotionally based rather than fact based, so it does not lend itself to talk radio analysis.

The government forcing a balance here is akin to the government demanding equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans in government, which is ridiculous. This is supposed to be a free country, which would include the right of people to listen to whatever they choose to listen to, and those programs that are listened to stay on the air because those are the shows that interest people and therefore advertisers are willing to pay to advertise on programs that have good listenership. Nobody wants to waste money advertising on shows that nobody is going to hear, and stations do not like losing money.

I think the legislation is aimed at situations like this than anything else, "Clear Channel: the Media Mammoth that Stole the Airwaves". http://www.21stcenturyradio.com/articles/02/1125148.html

How emotional of you, blueflame.

Again, how would "Hannity and Colmes" conflict with the letter of the bill? I think it wouldn't. And if you believe Rush Limbaugh is problematic, what would the improvement be if he changed his show into a "Hannity and Colmes" format? I don't think there would be any. Not for any sufficiently weak liberal in the Colmes role. Because there is no legal test for weakness of talk show host arguments, I don't think a reintroduction of the fairness doctrine would serve its stated purpose.