Free Market Radio and the (Un)Fairness Doctrine-3rd edition
Editor’s note: LK wrote and posted the first version of this piece back in August of ‘08. He then updated and re-posted it to coincide with Talkers Magazine’s (“The Bible of Talk Radio and the New Talk Media”) 2009 New Media Seminar. He’s revised it yet again to coincide with this year’s NMS, to acknowledge events that have since transpired, like the inevitable demise of Air America Radio. The piece is as timely and fresh now as it was when it was originally posted.
The Democrats make a huge mistake anytime they find themselves entertaining ideas about reinstating The Fairness Doctrine. The purpose of said doctrine is ostensibly to even out the bias of the content currently heard on the political talk airwaves. Think of it as the Dems’ attempt, through legislation rather than free market forces, to overwhelm the might of Rush, Sean, Laura, Levin, and The Salem Radio Network crew, among others. All right wing, all masters of the medium. That the right’s stars can be described and recognized using solely a given name or a surname (much like “Elvis”) is a simple and clear reflection of their overarching dominance. The left’s got no one with that kind of national penetration, with maybe Randi Rhodes, Ed Schultz, Thom Hartmann and Stephanie Miller having the chops to compete.
The criterion for getting air time and national syndication is pretty simple: attract listeners, lots of listeners. Radio’s a business. There’s nothing inherent in right wing advocacy that accounts for the overwhelming advantage of its radio representatives. They’re just better at presenting their slant in entertaining and captivating ways.
Yes, there are times that Limbaugh twists the truth like a baker making pretzels, and Levin’s abrasive act overshadows his constitutional acumen, but they, along with their compatriots, have found a groove that’s working, so there’s no reason to stop their mouth music. Their stations and syndicators care about ratings, not well reasoned, tempered position papers.
The Dem’s mistake is trying to legislate talent under the guise of legislating equal time to polarized points of view. It was the free market that killed Air America (which no one could turn around given the pool of insipid policy wonks they presented as radio hosts), much like the free market forced Microsoft to junk Vista and come up with something far more attractive and user friendly.
It’s as if the left is admitting defeat in the talk radio space and blaming it on the content rather than the presentation of the content. The 2008 Presidential, House, and Senate elections indicated that the Dems were, at least at the time, on the winning side of the policy debate. And since these days more Americans get their news from talk radio than from traditional print media, the moderate-left politicos need to see the airwaves as a meritocracy they’ve got to compete in more effectively. In this case, like it or not, the messenger is as (if not more) important than the message conveyed.
I don’t find myself agreeing consistently with Rush’s positions, but he’s a hoot to listen to. The left needs equally attractive on-air characters, not legislation that’s the air-wave equivalent of book burning.
Editor’s note: the sentence in paragraph 4 referencing the death of Air America was, in the earlier incarnations of this piece: “What they should be doing is taking Air America (which no one can turn around given the pool of insipid policy wonks the left offers as radio hosts) and treating it like Microsoft treated Vista: junk it and come up with something compelling that justifies its own existence.” LK called it again.
1 Comment
Additional comments powered by BackType
LK,
As I’ve said before, the “Dems” don’t really want this (just a few of the less intelligent ones) – this is simply the Fair and unbalanced battle cry – “The Sky Is Falling” – misdirection – don’t fall for it. The Fairness Doctrine isn’t taken seriously enough to ever make it into committee, let alone into a bill, or for that matter hit an FCC docket.
And, if in some weird chance that it did come to pass – and somehow was enforceable – would it matter? Is there enough media consumption under FCC regulation to make a difference? – especially if we had some sort of “balancing” act?
It will never happen. Rush and his buddies just fan the flames every so often. The socialist are coming! They want Grandma DEAD! No one wants government run health care! They want to take away your Medicare!