In the name of "diversity" and "localism" conservative radio may be facing a challenge that would be a return of the Fairness Doctrine in all but name. Brian Jennings is writing a book about it called "Censorship: The Threat to Silence Talk Radio." If Jennings is correct (according to a WSJ article on the book, sub probably required) then the FCC is looking to promote "localism" in broadcast media:
Introduced in 2007 by, oddly enough, the Republican-controlled FCC headed by Bush-appointee Kevin Martin, the initiative would increase community involvement with broadcast stations and require them to provide "locally-oriented programming." An Obama FCC is likely to be even more avid: The president himself is on record as opposing the Fairness Doctrine but favoring media ownership caps and "opening up the airwaves . . . to as many diverse viewpoints as possible." In February, Michael Copps, a Democrat currently serving as acting chairman of the FCC, echoed Mr. Obama when he told CNSNews.com: "If markets cannot produce what society really cares about, like a media that reflects the true diversity and spirit of our country, then government has a legitimate role to play."
But the markets are producing what society really cares about. Otherwise the markets would produce something else. Do leftist think conservative radio isn't a for-profit business? The stations are conservative because that brings in listeners (you know, part of society) and that brings in ratings and that brings in revenue.
So what will "localism" require? Simply that every station of an advisory panel of local activists (read: liberal) that will advise on content:
[The] localism proposal would require stations to create "permanent advisory boards," including members of "underserved community segments" to inform management about local concerns. While this sounds innocuous enough, Mr. Jennings sees a Trojan horse. Once the panels were established, the FCC could dramatically boost their influence by giving them a role in the license-renewal process. According to Mr. Jennings, even if the advisory boards didn't have that kind of power, they would still be problematic. Radio stations succeed by identifying a segment of the audience and super-serving it around the clock. Are they supposed to alter programming to serve other segments of the community? How would that affect their business? What if a Christian station's advisory board decides that its programming should be more "inclusive"?
Or a conservative talk radio station to carry liberals. And "underserved community segments" is simply code for people who don't like what they hear on the radio, i.e., liberal activists.
Meanwhile, conservatives are complaining that a "diversity" committee at the FCC is stacked full of liberals. Fox News reports:
[C]onservatives say the committee is one-sided and made up primarily of liberal activists who have something more than diversity in mind.
"The idea that we should have a diversity of ownership implies that we would have a diversity of people on the committee," said radio host Roger Hedgecock, founder of the Free Radio Coalition.
"The committee is a totally one-dimensional group of activists," said Hedgecock, who worries that the role of the committee will expand under President Obama, particularly when the president's appointments are confirmed and Democrats gain deeper control of the five-member commission that heads the agency.
Leaders from groups like the National Urban League, the Asian American Justice Center and One World Economy sit on the committee, which lacks representatives from groups with a conservative political bent.
And could this be a "back door" route to the fairness doctrine? Some thinks so:
But conservatives worry that with the backing of a Democratic president and FCC, the committee will be able to mandate more minority ownership and involvement in the media.
"Why is it the government's job to do a bean count on who owns what? I would think the only color that matters in business is green," said Seton Motley, director of communications for the Media Research Center.
Motley and others see a back-door campaign to revive the so-called Fairness Doctrine, which mandated equal time for opposing viewpoints during radio and television broadcasts, and whose demise in 1987 led to the explosion of conservative radio networks and programming.
"The left has reached the conclusion that the political price to pay for reinstating the Fairness Doctrine is too high, so now they're looking at these new means," Motley told FOXNews.com.
'Cause if you can control who owns the media, you can control what's on the media.
While some have called this a "paranoid delusion" anyone familiar with the way the government operates should not be so sanguine about a left-leaning group in the FCC promoting "diversity." Add in "localism" and it's very likely the left will find a way to shut up conservative talk radio. All for our own good, of course.
