Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
Carr continued: "The purpose of the rule is to avoid exactly this type of biased and partisan conduct — a licensed broadcaster using the public airwaves to exert its influence for one candidate on the eve of an election. Unless the broadcaster offered Equal Time to other qualifying campaigns."
Waiting for Fox News to be called out...
doesn’t apply to cable.
Why not? What's the difference at this point? These rules were made before the Internet existed
Because the FCC's authority over content is contingent on its authority to license portions of the electromagnetic spectrum for broadcast.
Doesn’t FCC still regulate cable? Just they have different regulations regarding network broadcast tv. (Hence Fox News would not get called out for this.)
Due to technical reasons, it is possible to have many, many more cable or satellite channels than over the air broadcast channels.
The FCC is allowed to put "reasonable" restrictions on the content if the over the air channels because of that scarcity.
The default position in the US is that both cable and broadcast have a 1st amendment right to say whatever they want. The FCC is only allowed to infringe on that right for the broadcasters, because they are consuming a scarce public resource.
I'll preface this by saying, I'm not arguing this is how it should be, this is just how it is.
Freedom of speech/press takes precedence unless there is a very compelling reason to make an exception. The only reason the FCC has any power over political content on the electromagnetic spectrum is because it's a limited resource. Therefore to keep it fair, there is an exception to freedom of speech that allows the government to regulate it.
Those spectrum limitations do not exist on cable, therefore freedom of speech takes precedence. If Fox News wants to give trump more time than Harris (how they choose to operate their business according to freedom of speech), plenty of other channels exist on cable to give Harris time as well.
Fox owns and operates broadcast channels just like NBC.
Yes, it would apply to the actual Fox channel, but not Fox News as the top comment said.
My patience for this election is also a limited resource, but the FCC has done fuck-all to protect that.
/s
Reagan killed the equal time rule in 1985. Surprised they don't know this.
https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/topic-guide/fairness-doctrine
"Fowler began rolling the application of the doctrine back during Reagan's second term - despite complaints from some in the Administration that it was all that kept broadcast journalists from thoroughly lambasting Reagan's policies on air. In 1987, the FCC panel, under new chairman Dennis Patrick, repealed the Fairness Doctrine altogether with a 4-0 vote
The FCC vote was opposed by members of Congress who said the FCC had tried to "flout the will of Congress" and the decision was "wrongheaded, misguided and illogical." The decision drew political fire and tangling, where cooperation with Congress was at issue. In June 1987, Congress attempted to preempt the FCC decision and codify the Fairness Doctrine, (Fairness in Broadcasting Act of 1987 S. 742).
The bill passed but the legislation was vetoed by President Ronald Reagan. Congress was unable to muster enough votes to overturn the President’s veto."
To clarify, Reagan and his appointees killed the Fairness Doctrine, which was an FCC policy that required broadcasters to provide equal coverage of political issues. The Equal Time Rule, on the other hand, only stipulates that broadcasters can't deny equal access to some candidates that it gives to others, with the notable caveat that it doesn't need to offer equal access to all candidates - they only need to provide it if asked. That rule (ETR) is still in effect, but it only means NBC needs to allow Trump equivalent time if he asks for it. So this trump-appointed FCC stooge is mischaracterizing his own agencies policy to cry "corruption". What a pos.
The fairness doctrine is not the same as the equal time rule. Equal time rule still exists.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-time_rule
The equal-time rule should not be confused with the now-defunct FCC fairness doctrine, which dealt with presenting balanced points of view on matters of public importance.
As Trump’s GOP simultaneously decries FCC overreach, any form of oversight at all, and has - many times - sworn to abolish the FCC altogether…
Their response "Fuck off Nazi shit stain!" or something like that.
Never heard of this rule can someone help explain it?
Lester Fabian Brathwaite does an excellent job of explaining it in his article for Entertainment Weekly here: https://ew.com/fcc-responds-to-commissioner-claim-regarding-kamala-harris-snl-appearance-8738897
Fair is fair. Put him on the air and let him answer questions from a real audience. Also the cast gets to fact check him live.
WTAF? Equal time? That's been gone for decades. That's the entire reason for bullshit things like Faux and hate radio.