Law may allow preemptive, premature rescission of broadcast licenses
 |
| By Any Other Name Still Stings |
Yesterday by a whopping 87-11 vote, the Senate added as a rider to the passed DC voting rights bill the Broadcaster Freedom Act (BFA). The BFA, if also passed by the House and signed by the President, would kill once and for all the Censorship Doctrine -- also mis-known as the "Fairness" Doctrine.
Much Conservative celebration ensued. However, the revelry is misplaced and premature. It means only that the Left means to destroy Conservative and Christian talk radio by other means.
Because another rider was added via a party-line 57-41 vote. Written by Illinois Democratic Senator Dick Durbin, S.160's Purpose is "To encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership, and to ensure that the public airwaves are used in the public interest."
| This is an alternative assault on the radio industry to affect the Left’s desired ideological outcome. |
One tremendous problem with this amendment, with the Censorship Doctrine itself and in fact with virtually every aspect of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)'s broadcast licensing requirements is that they are all completely nebulous. President Barack Obama's FCC can interpret these regulations in any direction it wishes, which more than likely bodes poorly for free speech on the radio.
And the worst part of the Durbin Amendment is the possibility that Obama's FCC may now be empowered to prematurely pull the broadcast licenses of radio stations they deem as failing to meet these new "Fairness" Doctrine-esque guidelines. Several lawyers who do this for a living see this rider's wording as amorphous enough to allow for this interpretation.
This would be absolutely devastating to talk radio. Stations currently carrying Conservative and Christian talk would be perpetually under the FCC gun - never knowing when the regulatory hammer would fall and crush their businesses. They would feel tremendous pressure to change formats so as to be able to stay on the air.
And no one would be able to justify the enormous expense of getting into talk radio if their lifeline - their broadcast license - could be pulled capriciously at any time.
These licenses would then be awarded to more "diverse" owners who show a greater desire in meeting the Obama FCC's definition of the "local" and "public interest." You know, ACORN activists and MoveOn.org hosts who couldn't cut the mustard on National Public or Pacifica Radio.
This is an alternative assault on the radio industry to affect the Left's desired ideological outcome. By making it untenable for stations to conduct the business of talk radio, the liberal censors will succeed in again silencing political speech on the airwaves - just as if the "Fairness" Doctrine itself were reinstated. Thus is the new "Fairness" Doctrine born.
In the real world, the public interest is best served by what the public is interested in. Conservative and Christian talk radio survives and thrives because people listen, and Liberal talk fails because they don't.
But none of this matters in this brave new "diverse" world. Liberals never liked the free market with it's equality of opportunity. They have always preferred an equality of outcome - where shows that have listeners are forced to share the airwaves with those that don't.
The Durbin Amendment solves the Left's "Fairness" Doctrine dilemma. It gets them what they want - radio free of Conservative and Christian talk - without the political baggage of carrying the "Fairness" Doctrine name.
For them, a rose by any other name still smells as sweet if it serves to silence the opposition.
—Seton Motley is Director of Communications for the Media Research Center and Contributing Editor for NewsBusters.org.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
"To encourage and promote
February 27, 2009 - 20:00 ET by GregE"To encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership,
and to ensure that the public airwaves are used in the public interest."
Bingo, just as they think "promote the General welfare" in the Constitution means to provide everything from cradle to grave, they're going to equivate that THIS "promote" means forcing "diversity" (whatever they deem that to be).
Freakin morons. A revolt is coming over their entire agenda.
This may be the one
February 27, 2009 - 19:59 ET by 10ksnookerThe shot heard round the world, part II
PaFREAKINGthetic
February 27, 2009 - 20:02 ET by MotherI'm so beyond disgusted I've been rendered rantless [which is unusual for moi].
=O
Okay, all together now...
February 27, 2009 - 20:17 ET by R D HelmHow many of us have been saying for months (years?) that when the socialists decide its time to silence dissent (which is pretty much right now), the instrument for doing so will not be referred to as the Fairness Doctrine?
We are now probably less than 18 months away from losing our country forever, assuming we haven't already.
All I can say at this point is, thank God for the 2nd Amendment.
-Dave
Our clueless political leaders are about to drive us all over a cliff. The time to HITM is now-before we go over.
2nd Amendment
February 27, 2009 - 20:40 ET by SeftonThey'll be putting that one through the shredder too before long.
These people have a self-declared mandate; the "change" they campaigned on is changing our entire system. And they're taking the ball and running with it.
I think, though, they may be underestimating what will happen if they keep pushing like they are.
Sefton, shredding the 2nd Amendment will be easy for them
February 27, 2009 - 21:24 ET by R D HelmActually grabbing our guns?
Not so much. :-)
-Dave
Our clueless political leaders are about to drive us all over a cliff. The time to HITM is now-before we go over.
Amen to that
February 27, 2009 - 21:30 ET by SeftonCount me in on that, Dave.
Your rights have been rescinded
February 28, 2009 - 05:24 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsActually grabbing our guns?
Yes. What do you think you can do to stop the force of the entire Obama government knocking at your door? Remember Waco, Koresh? If Obama joins Mao, Pol Pot, Mussolini, Idi Amin Dada, etc. and their ilk, one or two skirmishes won't matter in the big picture. All that can stop him is if his own people turn on him.
D
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
Barry Mussolini
February 28, 2009 - 08:09 ET by Sergeant ROCKAll that can stop him is if his own people turn on him.
Hmm... that sounds like wishful thinking to me. If the community organizer follows the path you predict, our only hope will be if there are enough military commanders to resist his tyranny. I don't think he'll get much cooperation from the National Guard to enforce his nefarious plans.
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
"Obama is a radical communist, and I think it is becoming clear." - Alan Keyes
Scary stuff
February 28, 2009 - 08:37 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsJust looking at history. Many times in the past monsters (born just plain folk) have been put in power, built powerful allies within, and turned on the people. I really hope I am wrong but what I have seen since Jan. 21 doesn't look like Obama cares about the Founding Fathers ideals.
D
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
Which Founding Fathers?
February 28, 2009 - 09:32 ET by Kingfish17When you say Founding Fathers, you refer to the ones you learned about starting in grade school, probably when they used to teach respect and honor concerning our system of government and the way our country was founded.
Where did Barry learn about the United States founding and the people who created this country? Certainly not in Indonesia.
The "gotcha" questions that should have been asked in the primaries would have been simple U.S. History questions.
Bullseye!
February 28, 2009 - 10:09 ET by Mr. MikeGreat thought Kingfish17.
Barry never had his early ed in this country, not even in Hawaii. He didn't really have the "American Education" until his teens. By then whatever he learned in Indonesia was paramount.
I think Barry's mom was a curious communist hanging out with other commies in college and that's how she met his father. He never really had a true understanding of American history or what it was really like to grow up in America. Remember even in his autobiography he admits that his mother bought him books by black radicals as a way of "understanding" that side of his racial makeup.
Not properly vetting this charlatan has just permanently damaged this country!
Exactly how did Obama's
February 28, 2009 - 16:20 ET by NL207Exactly how did Obama's tramp mother ever meet Obama Sr.? She was a student at the U of Washington in Seatle. He was in Hawaii.
.
February 28, 2009 - 22:01 ET by MeowMeowIf these communist a-holes actually go ahead with this, you're right: they have grossly underestimated the American public. I'd pay $100 a month (that I don't care to part with) to listen to Rush & Hannity.
Barry Musolini indeed.
Obama: A glittering jewel of colossal ignorance. --RL
Do Democrats have no shame....?
February 27, 2009 - 20:06 ET by superconHow they can just lie like it's water off a ducks back.OF COURSE it's to silence their critics.They are giving half the country the big middle finger and laughing about it.There isn't any right or freedom that they won't step upon.
Because with a name like Obama... you know it has to be good.
Yes supercon
February 27, 2009 - 20:18 ET by jdlybrandLike I've stated before. They have no morals, therefore they have no shame. Very convenient for them, dontcha' know?
"As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord"
Seton... Thank you. I
February 27, 2009 - 20:20 ET by bigtimerSeton...
Thank you.
I posted about this yesterday as the floor speeches were going on and the side-by-side votes were going on.
You explained exactly what all of this really came down to.
For me it was one of the dirtiest of the dirtiest vile sly moves the leftists have made to stifle us..all the while bing able to say, hey, who me....why we voted for Freedom of the Broadcast Bill or Freedom of Speech, or whatever spin they want to put on this...hell, even Durbin voted for DeMint's Bill and encouraged others on the dems side to do so too...all to cover their own a$$ and hand it safely to the FCC to fulfill their agenda, while pretending with a smile as they are wiping their hands clean ...
...and for anybody that thinks for one second that O/Soros and Rahm aren't smiling while clinking their glasses...well, heck I have some beachfront property.
Not the first time this has been tried.
February 27, 2009 - 20:35 ET by upcountrywaterThe evil white farmers that ran large farms in Zimbabwe, had their property seized, the lands given to the needy abused black folk, who trashed the entire industry..
As if small companies can make talk radio work. That's the point, trash a functioning business.... zap ...no radio.
pURPLe pINKy
Obama wants to be the first
February 27, 2009 - 21:14 ET by WorriedObama wants to be the first guy to transform America forever. To silence speech. To enslave his dissenters. To put private business out of business. AM radio will fall victim to Obama and his radical agenda.
While we cling to our guns and our religion, we can cling to hope. Hope that someday we will be able to undo some of the damage Obama wants to leave as his legacy.
So this was passed?
February 27, 2009 - 22:56 ET by MaximusBraveheartThis was added onto the very Bill that is supposed to stop the Fairness Doctrine? I don't get it. What are the REPS doing at that point? Was it discussed or the DEMS snuck it on & no one knows. What kind of system is this? Thought this was to be a good bill. What???
M-B
Two bills
February 27, 2009 - 23:07 ET by slickwillie2001No no, there were two bills, or technically two riders on another bill. One blocks Fairness, and the second opens a back door to do it another way. First one passed 87-11, second one passed by dems mostly, 57-41.
anyone
February 28, 2009 - 01:32 ET by RowaneDoes anyone know who the RINOs that voted for it were? I just think their names should be trumpeted.
I've been watching everything closely for the past couple of years and it reads like early twentieth century German history. It'll be a sad day for the world if America dies at the hands of the DhimmicRATS the way Germany dies at the hands of the nazis.
Oh well, if it hits the fan there are plenty of people prepared for it.
Ayn Rand anyone?
February 28, 2009 - 01:59 ET by ApacheIPI don't know how many of you have read Atlas Shrugged, but in it, the government passed the "Equalization of Opportunity Act". The government deemed that no one should own more than one company/business. Not much difference between that fictional act from the novel, and Durbin's diversity of media ownership rider.
It is truly frightening how quickly Ayn Rand's work of fiction is becoming reality.
Our Country is Slipping Away
February 28, 2009 - 02:25 ET by richb313Our Country is Slipping Away before our very eyes. The Pablum eaters don't even realise it. The MSM doesn't even realise the very guy that they promoted will silence them if they don't bow to his will. I can only hope that our current Supreme Court, which is still a 5 to 4 majority sane, will be able to bitch slap some of these cleary unconstitutional provisions and laws that are being passed. I do not have much hope however because of the pace at which things seem to be transpiring. The next thing you know Obama will proclaim that the Crisis is so Great that he will be named President for life.
Sound familiar?
February 28, 2009 - 02:28 ET by GalvanicWhen I read the description of what the second rider could mean to radio station ownership, another unconstitutional moment came to mind.
Kelo v. New London
As many of you will recall, the US Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, upheld a lower court ruling that the city of New London, CT had the legal authority to seize private property from owners under eminent domain, and sell it or otherwise provide it to another private citizen or enterprise if that entity would provide a greater source of tax revenue.
Now, we've got the Federal government empowering itself to pull the broadcast license from one owner and give it to another in the name of ambiguously defined "diversity."
Thank you, Sturmbannfuhrer Durbin. Heil, Holder!
The FCC can shut down a
February 28, 2009 - 03:30 ET by Dan The Man 2The FCC can shut down a radio station only if the station lets them. What would happen if a number of stations refused and kept transmitting? It may be likely however improbable. Yes I used contradictory terms.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
You may be on to something
February 28, 2009 - 10:19 ET by Mr. MikeGalvanic you may be closer to the truth than you think.
I can see something like this happening while the MSM cheers it on as greatly needed to "set America right again."
Folks, we're headed for some dark days. God Bless.
The hypocrisy is overwhelming
February 28, 2009 - 12:08 ET by GalvanicOn Fox News, one of the correspondents was interviewing a Democratic proponent of the Fairness Doctrine (I think it was Schumer).
When the correspondent suggested that restoration of that doctrine would impact NPR, the Dem was very quick to dismiss the idea by explaining that NPR would not be impacted because the Fairness Doctrine only applies to commercial radio.
Aaaah! So, NPR -- heavily subsidized with tax payer dollars -- does not have to be "fair and balanced," while stations owners who bought their licenses in order to exercise their Second Amendment right, must comply or forfeit everything.
Not only is it hypocritical, but don't the Dems have is backwards?
Beware
February 28, 2009 - 09:28 ET by Tyler DurbinAny legislation with Dick Durbin’s fingerprints on it is suspect. This guy is one of the most cynical, left wing partisans in the Senate. Most people who live in Illinois are nowhere near as liberal as him. He always finds a way to conceal his socialist tendencies from voters at election time.
"Virtue is more to be feared than vice, because its excesses are not subject to the regulation of conscience."
Illinois
February 28, 2009 - 09:36 ET by Kingfish17Has there ever in the history of our country been a more corrupt place then the entire state of Illinois?
Is there a way to kick this state out of the Union?
I fixed your comment
February 28, 2009 - 16:48 ET by longway2goHas there ever in the history of our country been a more corrupt place than the Northeast corner of the state of Illinois?
Is there a way to kick this state out of the Union?
Just so happens that by concentrating about 70% of the population in Chicago, the surprisingly Conservative/Republican (and non-corrupt) rest of the state gets lumped into the same ugly mess. What Chicago says goes for the entire state. There are Illinoisans who have made real effort to split the state at about I-70 and create a state of Southern Illinois. Come to Little Egypt for a couple days and your misconception of my mostly great state would be much improved.
And The Losers Are...
February 28, 2009 - 09:58 ET by flyingmonkeyThe culprits were; Lugar (IN), Collins & Snowe (ME), Voinovich (OH), Specter (PA) and Hatch (UT). Only two Democrats voted against it; Byrd (WV) and Baucus (MT).
Voinovich
February 28, 2009 - 11:26 ET by NorthCoasterVoinovich is my Senator. I sent him a message.
Actually grabbing our
February 28, 2009 - 11:08 ET by TN MomActually grabbing our guns?
Obama will not forcefully take our guns (at first).
He will impose a very, very steep tax on gun owners, some speculate 5000% of the cost of the gun.
Illinois currently wants to impose a mandantory insurance policy on all gun owners...
Rights
February 28, 2009 - 12:03 ET by nadadhimmiHey, people excercising their constitutional rights are dangerous to our lord and savior, Lords Barack the socialist. Therefore, these "rights must be put into modern context dontcha know. Rights can't be entrusted to ANYONE. Why people may think they have the right to express an opposing opinion to "Der Fuhrer", I mean Dear leader Barack. But we know the right thing to do with these reactionaries don't we, comrades. THE CAMPS.
Durbin bill
February 28, 2009 - 13:05 ET by Fred GregoryIf the Durbin bill was separate why didn't the Rs fillibuster it. Looks like they had the votes
Chains you can believe
February 28, 2009 - 13:44 ET by wiwfChains you can believe in!
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy
→ wiwf
February 28, 2009 - 13:52 ET by Cool ArrowExcellent! You might consider making that your tagline.
We won the cold war! Why did we surrender?
Durbin Amendment
February 28, 2009 - 15:23 ET by slickwillie2001Good point Fred. What Durbin (and DeMint) did was an amendment or a rider ( I believe same thing) on a bill, S.160, which is the voting rights for DC bill. The vote on Durbin's Amendment was 57-41, no defectors from either side. So it appears filibuster-able. But just because RINOs voted party-line on the amendment, doesn't mean they would be willing to filibuster it. A filibuster requires a little more intestinal fortitude, rare in RINO-land, and is a separate process.
Also, I don't know if an amendment is in itself filibuster-able. Anyone know?
Good ref.: http://www.govtrack....
filibuster
February 28, 2009 - 16:22 ET by nadadhimmiThe Republicans didn't protest because they are chickenshit, ass kissers. As members of the Oligarchy, it's much more important to them that the media like them than their constituants. For the Republic to survive, both parties must be removed from power, as it stands now, the GOP are just complacent, junior members of the power elite. They are equally sickening.
It'll Be Challenged
February 28, 2009 - 13:51 ET by rammingspeedThis will be another "don't ask, don't tell" moment if it is pushed too far by the Dems. The FCC under Obama will still ultimately have only the authority given to it by the voters. I wouldn't want to be the one who tries telling Americans to shut their mouths for real.
You have to have faith in human nature and the freedom this country still has for voters to throw the bums out.
I see rolling radio stations on the horizon...
February 28, 2009 - 15:28 ET by Army BratJust as in WWII, when the underground had to put radio transmitters in cars or trucks and keep them mobile so the Nazis couldn't triangulate on them and kill the resistance fighters that fought using truth as their weapon.
Will we now have to tune in late at night to hear the truth? Will we have to hide our radios from the Brown shirts of Obamas "private army" he says he wants?
No, I'm not hysterical or paranoid...oh wait...maybe I am a little paranoid. But when someone is out to get you, is it paranoia?..or just good sense?
Sounds like fiction for sure, but I never thought that a Marxist/Communist anti-American like Obama would be elected as POTUS either.
I never dreamed that silencing any group[ in America would be a possibility. We let the sick minds of the Aryan Nation spew their poison. It's all about freedom of speech. It has to be for all or none, regardless of how you feel about their message.
If you can silence one group...you can silence them all with the same tool.
I look at the people with Obama Biden bumper stickers...when I get along side of them at intersections...I smile at them and shake my head..."Still happy with Obama?" I ask them... The morons still nod in the affirmative...enthusiastically.
It took me 15 minutes to get an Obama supporter to admit that Obama had lied about lobbyists in his administration. I said finally..."If I tell you that you will never see 3 dogs in my car, under any circumstances, and you look in my car and see 3 dogs, am I a liar?"...(My attempt at trying to make a comparison to Obamas claim of no lobbyists)...he said, "Maybe the dogs broke in." Incredible...
When he finally said, "Yes" to my repeated question as to whether or not Obama lied... he hung is head down and you could barely hear him.
Next time I'll discuss earmarks with him.
Would we trust a white man that attended a Church, for twenty years...TWENTY YEARS...sponsored by the KKK to be fair to Blacks and Jews? Hell no!
Why then am I supposed to believe that Obama went to that anti-American, racist hate factory of a Church run by a ranting racist anti-American for a full twenty years...and came out unaffected, and in love with America and Whites? Ludicrous...ridiculous.
How naieve and just plain ignorant would one have to be to believe such nonsense?
Happy Trails...
Radio Free America
February 28, 2009 - 15:59 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsI guess Rush, Glenn, Hannity and more will have to pool their money for Radio Free America with offshore and Canadian and Mexican stations to beam their shows into America. Maybe Castro will lease them some space.
D
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
Rush Radios
February 28, 2009 - 16:16 ET by slickwillie2001If this happens, I wonder if some manufacturers will build Rush Radios, tabletop or car radios that access the internet rather than the government's precious g-d airwaves. You can do it with a computer of course, but a Rush Radio would be optimized as a radio, much cheaper than a computer, and would have preset buttons vs a browser.
I have a feeling
February 28, 2009 - 16:22 ET by general companyThat satalite radio will become far more popular then it currently is
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
The Censorship Doctrine
February 28, 2009 - 22:22 ET by PeskyPurpleDurbin is insane, not stupid. He added this rider as a "nyahner-nyahner" to the Broadcaster Freedom bill, but the two riders would seem to cancel each other out from the looks of things. Remember that in order to currently have radio broadcast licenses, one must serve the public interest. Radio stations fulfill that by having a few hours every week (usually early Sunday mornings) in order to air any old kind of public interest garbage that they so desire.
Thus far, there has been no funding set aside for "public interest accountability boards", although it is rumoured that ACORN is going to use their recent newfound ill-gotten money to do just that. However, it's not legislated, and probably won't be. They'll be Obama's agents provocateur, leaving his hands clean on this and will be able to keep it out from under the auspices of the Supreme Court since the government is not technically cracking down on speech. Oh, he is quite clever. I will give him that.
But we as conservatives are more clever, just less deceitful. My way would be to fight fire with fire, and start harassing the major networks and any stations carrying goons like Ed Schultz or Randi Rhoads about their "diversity" and public interest. They put you in the hospital, put them in the morgue.
R.
The "voting rights act"?
March 2, 2009 - 00:46 ET by RiiightThe "voting rights act"? About time for Maryland and the Commonwealth of Virginia to demand their territory back!
As to radio stations and radios, surveillance technology has progressed beyond WWII as an F-22 to a stone-tipped spear. Radio will be jammed until the troopers storm the place, assault rifles blazing, as at the Waco pogrom.
You will be tracked, you will be watched. They already know who you are. We can't resist with the resistance technology of 70 years ago, any more than McCain could beat BO with 80's era campaign strategies, while BO created flash crowds via SMS and tweets.