The White House again has declined to respond directly to a question about the fairness and constitutionality of the so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” a policy governing the expression of political opinions on broadcast outlets that was abandoned in the 1980s as unneeded and unconstitutional.
That, however, hasn’t stopped reports of its resurrection, and in fact two U.S. senators in the past week have called for the restoration of regulation on broadcast speech in the United States.
The question was raised again today by Les Kinsolving, WND’s correspondent at the White House.
“How does the president believe that the First Amendment can be
upheld if the so-called Fairness Doctrine is reinstated and applied only
to electronic media and not to any newspapers, magazines, and wire
services?” Kinsolving asked.
Responded presidential Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, “Les, I pledge to you to study up on the Fairness
Doctrine so that one day I might give you a more fulsome answer – even
after 37 questions in 40 minutes.”
The reference to 37 questions in 40 minutes was to an earlier question from Kinsolving.
He had asked: “In President Kennedy’s first press conference in 1961, he
announced 37 questions – he answered 37 questions in 40 minutes. My
question: Will President Obama study this transcript?”
The question was greeted by general laughter in the briefing room, where Kinsolving ranks as the third-most senior correspondent, having covered briefings and presidential press conferences since Richard Nixon was in office.
“Do you have a copy of it from your attendance?” Gibbs joked.
“I listened to it,” Kinsolving said.
“I would have said that if anybody would have asked that
question,” Gibbs noted. “How many – 37 questions in 40 minutes?”
“Yes.”
“You know, I can only imagine that if – Lester, if – I
can only imagine that the next day I’m sure the embattled press
secretary probably wondered – or was asked aloud at the sheer lack of
detail involved by the president’s quickly running through 37 questions
in just over 40 minutes on national television. So I’m empathetic with
many of those questions,” Gibbs said.
Kinsolving noted that during President Obama’s first major news conference as president this week, he discussed 13 questions in about an hour.
Kinsolving two weeks earlier raised a similar question about the “Fairness Doctrine” for Gibbs.
At that time, Gibbs dodged in a different direction, even though a number of Democrats have raised the issue of resurrecting the plan, and even Obama’s own White House website states there are plans to review the “obligations” of broadcasters ” who “occupy the nation’s spectrum.”
The dialogue went like this:
LES KINSOLVING, WCBM Radio: Can I follow that up?
ROBERT GIBBS, White House Press Secretary: Yes sir.
KINSOLVING: Thank you, so much. A number of Democrats in Congress want to restore the so-called Fairness Doctrine, which, before it was repealed applied only to electronic media and not to any print media-
GIBBS: Lester, I thought we were talking about DTV.
KINSOLVING: Does the president believe that-
(LAUGHTER)
MALE REPORTER: This is on the same planet, I believe.
GIBBS: I’m pretty sure I did not, I don’t think I got an answer to my question. I think we were talking about DTV and now we seem to be, somewhat, I’m going to go back to baseball [analogies], far afield on the Fairness Doctrine.
KINSOLVING: Since you mentioned it, from the field, does the president believe-
(LAUGHTER)
MALE REPORTER mockingly: Lester, far afield?
KINSOLVING: Does the president believe that this selectivity of some media and not others is fair? And if so, why?
GIBBS: I have no information on the Fairness Doctrine and I will endeavor to get some clarity on DTV.
 Barack Obama |
WND has reported worries the White House might restore the policy raised by commentators such as Paul Ibrahim of NorthStarWriters.com.
Ibrahim cited Obama’s warning to congressional Republicans that “you can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done” in suggesting the president has become the “driving force” behind a new “systematic” plan to “intimidate and demonize Obama’s opponents.”
That such a campaign was launched only days after Obama’s inauguration is “tremendously perturbing,” he wrote.
“Welcome to the politics of hope ‘n’ change. Obama’s startling attempt to hang Limbaugh’s scalp on the wall is a warning that the new ruler does not want unity – he demands it,” Ibrahim wrote.
On Obama’s agenda, according to his White House website, is the goal to “encourage diversity in media ownership.”
Obama elaborates that his aim is to “encourage diversity in the ownership of broadcast media, promote the development of new media outlets for expression of diverse viewpoints, and clarify the public interest obligations of broadcasters who occupy the nation’s spectrum.”
The plan apparently aligns with longstanding Democratic suggestions to resurrect the so-called “Fairness Doctrine.”
The policy was abandoned in 1987 under President Reagan when there were 75 radio talk shows in the U.S. Reagan opposed the policy because it required broadcast TV and radio programs to air “opposing views” on political issues, which had the practical effect of virtually eliminating opinion programs.
Since abandonment of the policy, the number of radio talk shows has risen to more than 3,000.
WND founder and editor Joseph Farah long has warned about Democrats’ plans to revive restrictions on the airwaves.
“If the Democrats and their me-too Republican allies are successful at sacking talk radio, there will be no stopping them,” Farah warned. “Broadcast will be first. Then they will go after the Internet with taxes and new regulations and hate-crimes laws. And when they succeed at muzzling dissenting voices there, they will even turn to print. Remember, we are dealing with a neo-fascist mentality here.”
Many fear the Fairness Doctrine would drive talk radio hosts – like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Michael Savage – out of business.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., affirmed her support to Human Events reporter John Gizzi for a “Fairness” policy, and Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., told radio host Jim Villanucci, “I would want this station and all stations to have to present a balanced perspective and different points of view, instead of always hammering away at one side of the political [spectrum].”
Michael G. Franc, writing on the National Review’s “The Corner” blog, noted that attorney general nominee Eric Holder also has refused to commit to opposing to the idea.
Obama’s choice to head his FCC transition team, Democrat Henry Rivera, added to fear in media circles that the so-called Fairness Doctrine might return to silence conservative talk radio.
Brian Maloney, on his blog The Radio Equalizer, said he believes Rivera will use his position to bring back the law for that very purpose.
Rivera, according to Maloney, “is expected to lead the push to dismantle commercial talk radio that is favored by a number of Democratic Party senators. Rivera will play a pivotal role in preventing critics from having a public voice during Obama’s tenure in office.”
The apocalypse of Hurricane Helene
Patrice Lewis