Comments on: Obama, Waxman to Square Off on Free Speech

By: autodidact

autodidact — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 09:29:20 +0000

Senator Tom Harkin is not retracting his support for the Fairness Doctrine.

http://www.radioiowa.com/gestalt/go.cfm?objecti...

I'm sure he's not alone.

By: autodidact

autodidact — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 05:29:20 +0000

Senator Tom Harkin is not retracting his support for the Fairness Doctrine.

http://www.radioiowa.com/gestalt/go.cfm?objecti...

I'm sure he's not alone.

By: autodidact

autodidact — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 04:29:20 +0000

Senator Tom Harkin is not retracting his support for the Fairness Doctrine.

http://www.radioiowa.com/gestalt/go.cfm?objecti...

I'm sure he's not alone.

By: dm

dm — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 23:59:22 +0000

Gosh. I see now that I've just linked to the original Fox News report with which you begin your tirade. An earlier Fox report (the first thing Google turns up when asked about "henry waxman fairness doctrine") goes into greater detail about the denial, saying:

The committee vigorously denied the report. A spokesperson called the account "fictitious" in a statement to FOX News.

"The American Spectator report is false and was written without any documentation or attribution," the statement said.

FCC spokesman David Fiske also disputed the claims in the piece, saying, "We're not sure that it's an accurate article."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/17/fair...

You may want to look at that article, since it more directly addresses your thesis.

By: dm

dm — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 23:35:54 +0000

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/20...

Which states, "Both the FCC and Waxman's office denied the report."

When it was in place, the Fairness Doctrine was a fine concept --- the cost of renting the airwaves from the public was to give the public access to the airwaves. Far from being counter free speech, it was a means of fostering it (recall the old Anatole France comment that "Freedom of the Press only applies to those with a press" --- the Fairness Doctrine gave us all a means to use the press.

As you've argued, it's not necessary now, because the public now has lots of alternative means to spread the word far and wide.

By: cordblomquist

cordblomquist — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 21:55:48 +0000

Can we get a link to either denial?

If the reports are indeed false, that only means that Mr. Waxman isn't targeting the Internet for his politically motivated censorship regime. That's comforting, but it still means that the 1st Amendment is under attack when it comes to the airwaves.

Regardless of the extent of Waxman's ambitions for the Fairness Doctrine, it's still a horrid concept.

By: mwendy

mwendy — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 21:50:14 +0000

In Cord's defense – Waxman's telecom counsel came from the Free Press. I think we've already seen some of his work in the Stimulus – in the “Net Neutrality” provisions that were absent, and then reappeared, in the Conference Report/Agreement.

By: dm

dm — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 21:22:23 +0000

You might want to note that both Waxman's office and the FCC deny the American Spectator's report, and, frankly, to avoid embarassing yourself, I wouldn't base a report on something I read in The American Spectator.