BMI’s Gainor: Fairness Doctrine? More Like Censorship Doctrine

By Nathan Burchfiel (Bio | Archive)
November 10, 2008 - 11:00 ET

The term “Fairness Doctrine” – applied to liberals’ efforts to require talk radio to offer balanced views – harkens to Soviet propaganda, according to Business & Media Institute Vice President Dan Gainor.

“It’s one of the great misnomers of our time. It’s, you know, ‘Fairness Doctrine,’ almost like a Soviet term,” Gainor said on “Fox & Friends Weekend” Nov. 9. “It should be Censorship Doctrine. That’s what they’re trying to do.”

“They’re trying to clamp down on radio because the left and the media control every other facet of where we get our information: entertainment media, print media, you know you’ve got TV, you’ve got NPR, you’ve got Air America,” Gainor said. “The one thing they don’t control, the one way Americans get their information is talk radio.”

Several high-profile Democrats in Congress have expressed interest in revisiting the so-called Fairness Doctrine – although President-elect Obama has said he opposes it.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Gainor also discussed reports showing a clear media slant in favor of Obama during the presidential campaign. He said studies such as one from Washington Post Obudsman Deborah Howell were evidence of a “ridiculous” and “corrupt” media approach to covering politics.

“This is ridiculous. It’s corrupt. It shows just, the mainstream media, how far, overwhelmingly far they are out of bounds with America,” Gainor said. “They picked a president and the First Amendment’s just not designed for that.”

He said competition with bloggers and alternative media sources is driving mainstream outlets toward a more “European model, where they’re more aligned with political parties or political thought.”

“But you look at some of the numbers here: the American people know this election was fixed by the media,” Gainor said. “By 8 to 1 they believe that the media were favoring Obama over McCain. The previous record ratio was 3 to 1, so that’s 1996. That shows just how much, how skewed this is.”


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Ridiculous is right...

November 10, 2008 - 11:10 ET by unkeeaf

I wrote about just this type of bias and what it did to the Bush presidency on my own blog:

www.usaconservative....

This has to be stopped.  It is destroying the fabric of the country.

 

MSM = PR firm for the Democrat Party

Censorship Doctrine

November 10, 2008 - 12:54 ET by allanf

Gainor is onto something. Conservatives must be unremiting in calling this the "Censorship Doctrine".   The left knows labels matter, that's why the moniker "fairness" is attached.

Conservatives must use the tactics of the left and scream out "censorship doctrine" everywhere the issue is discussed.

A President with an ego as big as President Obama's will not let talk radio go unchallenged.   Count on it.

Just waiting for one of our

November 10, 2008 - 11:38 ET by Newsbusterbrown

Just waiting for one of our resident liberals to tell us they have no problem with it.

“There are no easy answers' but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right.” - Ronald Reagan (1964 Republican Convention)

I think right wing programs

November 10, 2008 - 11:49 ET by balboa

I think right wing programs would find a way to deal with it.

Deal with it

November 10, 2008 - 12:02 ET by moderncommentaries83

Yes. The Fairness Doctrine *is* explicitly un-Constiutional and a violation of the First Amendment.

For now, we can take it to SCOTUS feeling pretty confident they'd rule in our favor.  Obama appointed judges, on the other hand, may not.  After all, the Constitution is (to them) a "living breathing document" which is codespeak for "we can interpret it whatever way we damn well please."

First it will be talk radio.  Then Internet and the blogs.  They'll figure out a way to go after Fox News and satelite radio as well...because once they get rid of conservative voice, Obama will be elected to a 2nd (perhaps even 3rd and 4th term) without problems.

Gotta love that slippery

November 10, 2008 - 12:30 ET by balboa

Gotta love that slippery slope.

I think this is a lot of fear over nothing. Obama has said he's not in favor. Sure, he could change his mind. But Rush would live on.

He's a politician

November 10, 2008 - 12:49 ET by CobraMan

"Obama has said he's not in favor."

And you're point is, what?  Obama has said a lot of thing during his two year campaign.  It remains to be seen if he actually lives up to his campaign rhetoric.

Obama: My job is above my pay grade

I believe my point was

November 10, 2008 - 12:58 ET by balboa

I believe my point was "Rush would live on."

Whew. That's good. We were

November 10, 2008 - 13:30 ET by Chris Norman

Whew. That's good. We were afraid he would be facing the firing squad. We have your assurance on this, right?

Oh come on Chris - Rush has a basement & a Morse code

November 10, 2008 - 20:24 ET by Dee Bunk

machine - what are we complaining about? We'll always have something.  Balboa doesn't care if it's fair - as long as we're allowed to grab the crumbs off the floor after the libs dogs are done with em.  It's only a small step down from the pre-dog slobber crumbs we were allowed before. 

They'll make sure there's enough crumbs so that we don't die - we need to quit complaining and get on board this change train.  Woo Hooo!  Full steam ahead - can't wait for my dog slobbered crumbs.  

that's a good minion - keep

November 10, 2008 - 12:51 ET by TruthMonger

that's a good minion - keep up the great work

any progress on ped marriage yet? any rally's going? chop chop bal time's awaistin:)

MC83... What makes you

November 10, 2008 - 17:01 ET by Tim the Enchanter

MC83...

What makes you think that this country would survive after a 2nd Obama term (or even a first)?

This could be challenged as

November 10, 2008 - 17:57 ET by Tailgunner

This could be challenged as unfair restraint of trade under the Commerce Clause.

Radio stations forced to carry unpopular but required alternate programming would lose huge sums of money. As we know they'd be forced eventually to drop all politically controversial programming, losing even larger amounts of revenue and perhaps even going out of business.

Unless 'big radio' receives a bailout (yeah, right) the Fairness (Censorship) Doctrine would drive them out of business.

 

 

NOLI PUGNARE ME OCCIDERE

In the name of Fairness

November 10, 2008 - 12:12 ET by Chad

I think NB should run some test trials.  Require all of the liberal NB posters to have to have to also post a counter point to all their posts or lose their posting privileges. It would be as equally ridiculous.

~Chad

Cincinnati, OH

I think the "doctrine" is unneeded

November 10, 2008 - 12:45 ET by CobraMan

"I think right wing programs would find a way to deal with it."

 

I think the "doctrine" is unneeded.  If "right-wing radio can figure out how to "deal" with the "Fairness Doctrine" as you claim, then "left-wing" radio SHOULD be able figure out how to "deal" without the "doctrine," correct.

There's no need for this "doctrine," is there?  Why should any expressive venue be FORCED to "offer" something by government mandate?  That's antithetical to Freedom of Speech.  

Obama: My job is above my pay grade

Funny, how they can't practice what they preach

November 10, 2008 - 12:19 ET by Paul Atreides

and just turn off the radio if they cannot stand what they hear.

 

Does anyone actually think that the left would have stood for The View being comprised of three conservative women bashing an Obama supporter and talking down to her five mornings per week?

they're supposedly all about

November 10, 2008 - 12:38 ET by TruthMonger

they're supposedly all about free speech - it's just promo literature

they may be pure evil but they sure as hell ain't stupid 

honestly people - they only preach WHATEVER GETS THEM ELECTED

does anyone here really think they don't realize the blatant hypocracy of their own rhetoric?? behind closed doors they must relish the hilarious hell out of watching suckers actually buy into it in droves. It's obviously to the point now where they're trying to see how far they can go before the public gets a friggin clue. So now they actually admit their a DNC promo wing and STILL MOST AMERICANS COULDN'T GIVE LESS OF A F*CK

really, why don't they just come out and say WE ARE GOING TO LITERALLY MASS EXTERMINATE ALL CONSERVATIVES AND EVANGELICALS - STILL WILL NOT REGISTER WITH THE BALBOA AMERICAN IDOL GENERATION I GARAN-DAM-TEE IT...

and in the astronomically unprobable event it would ever actually become a potential problem (and with total marketing incompetents like us on the "conservative" side (great marketing term there btw) that seems unlikely to ever happen) the MSM easily covers it

Literally. Mass.

November 10, 2008 - 15:26 ET by balboa

Literally. Mass. Exterminate.

Hitler reference in 3...2...

  3.2.1. This is an idea

November 10, 2008 - 17:49 ET by Tailgunner

  3.2.1. This is an idea worthy of Hitler. (Stick it in your ear, Balboa.)

That anyone in this country (including McCain) believes that government should forcibly silence unpopular political free speech is monstrous. No doubt in 1939-era Germany, then a relatively civilized country, citizens couldn't comprehend the danger Hitler presented to their system of government and individual freedom.

The 'Fairness Doctrine' is the equivalent of dropping a nuclear bomb on the Constitution. If they can 'nuke' the First Amendment, the rest of them will inevitably follow.

Why do they want to silence conservative talk radio? Because the Democratic Socialists have much more in store for us. Without conservative opposition, there will be very little to stop them from instutionalizing socialism and maintaining their grasp on power practically indefinitely. 

NOLI PUGNARE ME OCCIDERE

The Fairness Doctrine does

November 10, 2008 - 18:01 ET by balboa

The Fairness Doctrine does not seek to silence unpopular political free speech. That CAN be a side effect. It does not "nuke" the first amendment.

depends...

November 11, 2008 - 13:42 ET by andophiroxia

On who determines what is "fair".

And yes it does:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

“You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.” ~ Winston Churchill

What's interesting about the poll

November 10, 2008 - 11:44 ET by KC Mulville

Let's assume that Americans agreed that the press favored Obama by an 8-to-1 margin. But they voted Obama in with a seven or eight point victory anyway. Apparently the public agreed that the media was in the tank, but they didn't particularly mind it this year. There was no backlash against the media for their interference.

  • Is it because we all take it so much for granted?
  • Was the media bias just pouring on, since we were going to vote against McCain anyway?

I admit, I don't know.

 

KC- it's what the media knew

November 10, 2008 - 17:06 ET by Tim the Enchanter

KC- it's what the media knew and DIDN'T report that's the key here- the supression of information that would have been damaging to The One.  People only saw or heard what the media wanted people to see or hear.  They didn't report the truth.  Lies of omission are still lies.

I'm assuming, if implemented,

November 10, 2008 - 12:13 ET by Paul Atreides

then Elisabeth Hasselback will have two partners to counter the spitting harridan liberal co-hostesses on The View.

that Keith Oldandmundane will be countered with an opposing view

that someone will be on Hardball, with a fresh roll of paper towels in case Obama's name is mentioned, to counter Tingle-Leg Matthews.

Paul, you silly boy. It

November 10, 2008 - 14:00 ET by Newsbusterbrown

Paul, you silly boy. It never works that way.

“There are no easy answers' but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right.” - Ronald Reagan (1964 Republican Convention)

Repeating

November 10, 2008 - 12:35 ET by cvgbuckeye

Like I have said on other times about TFD: Go ahead, congress, make my day; Do you feel lucky punks? Well, do ya?

Standing by...

November 10, 2008 - 13:02 ET by avenar

With my pitch fork!

Separation and Division...Obama's priorities!

November 10, 2008 - 15:06 ET by MNotaro

Obama sure has a long road ahead of him...I think a lot of the public will be disappointed in the months and years to come after they realize the separation and the division that Obama and the elite socialist illuminati will bring into our country.

Obama censorship already started! Did I miss this discussion?

November 10, 2008 - 20:10 ET by Dee Bunk

I didn't watch Obama's first News Confrence but just came accross this piece that listed who all was allowed to ask a question.  FOX was excluded.  All the other networks were represented.  ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN as well as newspapers.

Isn't this outrageous?  Trying to shut out FOX - & shut down talk radio already - change we can believe in.  

Obama shuts out FOX

Comrade Obama is living up

November 10, 2008 - 20:14 ET by Clear thinker

Comrade Obama is living up to our expectations.

Sarah - Our Next President?

 

 Making Fun of AGW http://giovanniworld.wordpress.com/  

Dee and Ct... ....and we

November 10, 2008 - 20:18 ET by bigtimer

Dee and Ct...

....and we ain't seen nothing yet!

"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh

BT - had you seen this before? I was shocked

November 10, 2008 - 20:23 ET by Dee Bunk

how blatant!  I didn't watch the Press conf and I won't watch him, but has anyone been talking about this?

Dee... I heard/read that

November 10, 2008 - 20:31 ET by bigtimer

Dee...

I heard/read that he didn't ask any questions from Fox not long after his so-called press conference...and posted about it somewhere that day...which by the way, he was late for, very late...remind you of any other self-important President?

But heck the press doesn't mind one bit when it is a leftist...now if Pres. Bush had done either situation not asking anyone in the press who represents the other alphabet networks...or being that late?

"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh

Yeah Clear - he's RULING already

November 10, 2008 - 20:21 ET by Dee Bunk

Can you imagine if Bush only let FOX & conservative columnists ask questions?