It looks like the Fairness Doctrine is back in the news. People are predicting that if Obama is elected, combined with a Democrat-controlled Congress, they will attempt to use the Fairness Doctrine to silence any opposition. To be fair the Obama campaign is already well known from trying to shut down and silence anyone that criticizes them.
Signs of what the new environment will be like for the right are already evident:
• When the National Rifle Association recently released television and radio ads in Pennsylvania targeting Obama\’s history of anti-gun votes, the Obama campaign\’s general counsel fired off bullying letters to stations that ran the spots, implying that they may have violated public-interest obligations.
• When the 527 group, the American Issues Project, came out with a commercial linking Obama to former Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers, the campaign (unsuccessfully) complained to the Department of Justice that AIP had broken campaign finance laws, and managed to spook some stations away from the ad.
• When two different conservative writers looking into Obama\’s background appeared on Chicago\’s WGN-AM Radio, the campaign\’s \”action wire\” energized its activists to bombard the station with rage-filled phone calls and e-mails, making the program more difficult to conduct.
So with Obama as President and the Democrats holding a potential super majority in Congress is it possible for the Fairness Doctrine to return and silence any critics? As with any controversial issue, there are people on both sides of the issue, and there are lots of peripheral issues on this one.
I tend to agree with Glenn Reynolds that this could also backfire on Democrats.
If they bring back the Fairness Doctrine, I think I\’ll start an organization to flood the FCC with complaints whenever there\’s media bias from any of the big networks. Then we\’ll follow up and see how they respond . . . Given the way the news has been reported this year, the Fairness Doctrine could easily backfire on the Dems.
You wouldn\’t even need an official organization. A distributed network of people connected by something as simply as a wiki or a forum would be easily capable of overwhelming number of complaints. And as Glenn points out, given the typical coverage it would not be difficult to find plenty of legitimate complaints.
Of course, there are others, such as Vodkapundit, that feel that exactly this sort of online organization is at risk as well.
If (when?) Obama is elected, by my estimation there’s an at least even chance that the newly-reconstructed FCC will reverse course and attempt to apply the New Fairness Doctrine to blogs.
Although I think Glenn\’s viewpoint applies here as well. This type of standard could be applied to the Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Democratic Underground, etc. And it wouldn\’t even require much organization to make that happen as well.
Plus I question the ability of the FCC to accomplish what Vodkapundit suggests. The very nature of the Internet prevents it and any attempts to do so would quickly resemble the Great Firewall of China. Sure sites like EckerNet.Com would currently be vulnerable, since my server is located in the US. However, it would not be a huge effort to host it outside the US. As porn, hacking and software pirating sites have demonstrated, this makes shutting them down, or even censoring them extremely difficult.
And given the increasing popularity of online news sites, aggregators, blogs, etc the public backlash is likely to be worse than the effect of the online content to begin with.
There are plenty of reasons to be nervous about an Obama Presidency, I\’m not sure this is one of them.
[Crossposted at True North]