One of the positive legacies of the Reagan Administration was its scuttling of the Fairness Doctrine. The law gave federal bureaucrats the power to determine whether broadcast media outlets met subjective criteria such as fairness and equal time. Alas, Diane Feinstein's conception of fairness is a lot different than mine. The senator added her voice Sunday to the growing number of legislators interested in reviving this bad law.

"I think there ought to be an opportunity to present the other side," Senator Diane Feinstein stated on Fox News. "And unfortunately, talk radio is overwhelmingly one way." Indeed, it is. But so is network news. So are the Washington Post, Boston Globe, and New York Times. So is, most outrageously, the government-supported National Public Radio.

Private entities are entitled to be unfair. It bothers me that the Boston Globe maintains the pretense of objectivity when it pursues a radical social agenda. My solution isn't to muzzle the Globe through legislation. Liberals face a similar problem in talk radio, but it's not the same. In contrast to print reporters and news anchors, talk radio hosts don't shield their political views. They are open. They tell everyone how conservative they are, even ones that are not very conservative at all do so. In contrast to the sometimes counterproductive but essentially benign complaints about the media from conservatives, liberals wish to illiberally shut up those who disagree with them.

Talk radio is overwhelmingly conservative because conservatives are overwhelmingly underrepresented in national magazines, major newspapers, and on television news. It's popular because it fills a vacuum. It caters to an audience that other mediums insult. It's also the case that the United States is a conservative country, a reality that liberals, especially ones living in the deep-blue urban reservations and college towns, are loathe to admit. The market determines success or failure in talk radio. Audiences just don't care for liberal talk radio.

Why have liberals failed so miserably in talk radio? My sense is that this relates to liberal embarrassment at the term "liberal," stubborn contentions that they're not liberals but centrists, and penchant for nuance when black-and-white does the trick. Talk-radio listeners like hosts loud and proud. Talk-radio listeners think middle-of-the-road is for rotting animal carcasses. Talk-radio listeners want it straight, not circuitous.

"Talk radio tends to be one-sided," Feinstein complains. "It also tends to be dwelling in hyperbole. It's explosive. It pushes people to, I think, extreme views without a lot of information." The Fairness Doctrine violates the First Amendment of the Constitution. How did Feinstein arrive at her "extreme view"?

William F. Buckley famously quipped that he'd rather be governed by the first few thousand names in the Boston phonebook than by the faculty of Harvard University. I'd take the constitutional wisdom of any random group of 535 talk-radio listeners over Feinstein and company in the Congress.

The liberals have tried to have their own talk radio programs. It's not conservatives' fault that they tanked. They were aweful.

I can't imagine that the current SC would allow such a law to stand.

I was not politically aware when the fairness doctrine was in effect. How was it enforced? This sounds almost Orwellian to me. Who decides which opinions need to be counterbalanced? If it is reinstated, will Rush Limbaugh be able to give rebuttals on NPR ?

I think it started during the Truman administration, and ended during the Reagan administration, and that an FCC board oversaw it. Talk radio exploded after the Fairness Doctrine got sacked.

Can you say "censorship"? The elistist pols really DO think we're dumb!

And speaking of liberal bias in the media, interesting puff piece in The Times about El Presidente Jorge Bush which starts out with how Midland TX. is now overwhelmingly Mexican but even when it wasn't, when Georgie was a young hard drinking oil man, how fair and compassionate he was to the Mexicans there.

So, now that he's towing the liberal agenda line that illegal immigration is a good thing, he's not a rich, irresponsible wild drunken frat boy, he's a compassionate and caring hard drinking business man.

What are we paying these people for? Good hair?

"Pushes people to...extreme views?"

Sounds like she's trying to revive the claim that Rush Limbaugh was responsible for Oklahoma City.

He, or rather his success, is responsible for pushing her to the "extreme view" that certain people need to be silenced.

It's probably the best possible thing that could happen, though. It would be nice for the rest of the country to see what facists these people really are.

I break from my usual nuanced mode and say I've rarely met a liberal who understands the word. "Bushitler"? Oh yeah, the subtlety and insight of it is just breath-taking. Are there nuances between Bush and Hitler? Not that the liberals want to notice. Hitler this, Nazi that. Real nuancees, these people.

Has anybody heard about tyranny of the majority? I know I haven't. Aristotle never mentioned it in his Politics--oh wait, yeah he did.

The party currently controlling the House and Senate support infanticide (as a means of crime prevention, in some cases), eugenics (see the first point and the RIGHT to murder your baby if it's got some sort of "defect"), Euthenasia, seeks to silcene its oppenents through various means (see the article I'm responding too), and forces all sorts of ideology-driven BS down our throats to force a cultural change (see global warming).

But they don't seem to hate gay people or Jews (most of the time), so I guess I can't make the comparison.

The left controls:

George Stefanopolis, Tim Russert, Chris Mathews,
Katie Couric,Brian Williams,Charley Rose, Matt Lauer, Merideth Viera,3/4 of "The View",David Letterman, John Stewart, Steven Colbert,Jerry Springer,Geraldo Rivera,The New York Times, L.A. Times,Etc.,Time, Newsweek,Wall Street Journal(Except for the Op Ed page.) Rolling Stone, Spin,MTV, VH1, BET,CNN,MSNBC,NPR, the RINO's and Most Of Academia.Even Google and Yahoo will steer you to the liberal websites first.

We have:

A large % of Fox News and talk radio.

The left doesn't want fainess; They want a monopoly.

C'mon Ross,

You know it's double-plus good!

King,

Orwellian indeed!

I must say,
you have the coolest moniker on this site!

Me, I can't even spell "Fairness" right.

I'm not worthy!!!!!!!!!!