-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Media Ownership Reform Act of 2005
- Thread starter nino
- Start date
T
Tom_Desmond
Guest
What I'm curious about is who the other nineteen members of the "Future of American Media" caucus of the U.S. congress are...
> What I'm curious about is who the other nineteen members of
> the "Future of American Media" caucus of the U.S. congress
> are...
What I don't like is the reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine that this would bring about. It would kill talk radio... on both sides of the aisle.<P ID="signature">______________
"Get educated. Read stuff on the web and believe all of it."
-- Phil Hendrie
http://theradioblog.blogspot.com</P>
> the "Future of American Media" caucus of the U.S. congress
> are...
What I don't like is the reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine that this would bring about. It would kill talk radio... on both sides of the aisle.<P ID="signature">______________
"Get educated. Read stuff on the web and believe all of it."
-- Phil Hendrie
http://theradioblog.blogspot.com</P>
> What I don't like is the reinstatement of the Fairness
> Doctrine that this would bring about. It would kill talk
> radio... on both sides of the aisle.
I doubt that it would survice a constitutional challenge this time around. Nor would any Republican congressman who voted for it survive thw wrate of Limbaugh.
>
> Doctrine that this would bring about. It would kill talk
> radio... on both sides of the aisle.
I doubt that it would survice a constitutional challenge this time around. Nor would any Republican congressman who voted for it survive thw wrate of Limbaugh.
>
T
Tom_Desmond
Guest
> What I don't like is the reinstatement of the Fairness
> Doctrine that this would bring about. It would kill talk
> radio... on both sides of the aisle.
Talk radio did survive back in the era of the Fairness Doctrine. in some major markets, it did very well -- note that KGO's winning streak in SF goes back a decade or so before the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine.
That said, I really don't see it coming back. And I would gladly see it stripped out of this legislation if that would make it possible for the tighter ownership limits to pass.
> Doctrine that this would bring about. It would kill talk
> radio... on both sides of the aisle.
Talk radio did survive back in the era of the Fairness Doctrine. in some major markets, it did very well -- note that KGO's winning streak in SF goes back a decade or so before the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine.
That said, I really don't see it coming back. And I would gladly see it stripped out of this legislation if that would make it possible for the tighter ownership limits to pass.
> Talk radio did survive back in the era of the Fairness
> Doctrine. in some major markets, it did very well -- note
> that KGO's winning streak in SF goes back a decade or so
> before the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine.
Yes, but that was a major market, where there was actually a sizable population who liked listening to "Garden Talk"
Frankly, though, I don't think the majority of the country today would like to see our AM talk radio format become what Canadas has.
> That said, I really don't see it coming back. And I would
> gladly see it stripped out of this legislation if that would
> make it possible for the tighter ownership limits to pass.
I agree wholeheartedly.
<P ID="signature">______________
"Get educated. Read stuff on the web and believe all of it."
-- Phil Hendrie
http://theradioblog.blogspot.com</P>
> Doctrine. in some major markets, it did very well -- note
> that KGO's winning streak in SF goes back a decade or so
> before the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine.
Yes, but that was a major market, where there was actually a sizable population who liked listening to "Garden Talk"
Frankly, though, I don't think the majority of the country today would like to see our AM talk radio format become what Canadas has.> That said, I really don't see it coming back. And I would
> gladly see it stripped out of this legislation if that would
> make it possible for the tighter ownership limits to pass.
I agree wholeheartedly.
<P ID="signature">______________
"Get educated. Read stuff on the web and believe all of it."
-- Phil Hendrie
http://theradioblog.blogspot.com</P>
Chances of even getting out of committee..slim to none. What I always take out of these "media reform" efforts is activists who believe they can force people to listen to or watch what they don't want to, or who want to remove from the airwaves personalities and programs that people dwant to listen to or watch.<P ID="signature">______________
Soon to set the world record for recieving Nigerian scam and phising e-mails!</P>
Soon to set the world record for recieving Nigerian scam and phising e-mails!</P>
A
Andy_Brown
Guest
> Chances of even getting out of committee..slim to none. What
That's for sure. As long as the GOP dominates the government, anything that takes back from big business what they have gained under many years of deregulation has no chance of happening.
> I always take out of these "media reform" efforts is
> activists who believe they can force people to listen to or
> watch what they don't want to, or who want to remove from
> the airwaves personalities and programs that people dwant to
> listen to or watch.
I think there is a larger issue. If the government defines competition as two players (which they do) there is little justification, capitalistically speaking, to return ownership limits to previous levels. As much as I'd like to see them forced to divest and downsize, the fact that the media giants control the airwaves will remain. Just a few years ago they considered letting loose on cross ownership of TV/TV and TV/newspaper limits. The government, which is after all the same as saying "big business" does not care about diversity of ownership. But if you think it's about forcing people to listen/watch competitive and contrasting programming, I think you are too absorbed by content and popularity. True, the government does not like diversity of ideas to create undercurrent and backlash, but in this networked world of today, they can't control information no matter what legislation they try to pass. Face it, half the people in this country don't care about politics or they would vote. The other half is pretty well split between the sheep and the dogs. Half the sheep and half the dogs on one side, and half the sheep and half the dogs on the other. Entercom and Viacom and Clear Channel have tons of money to lobby against their own demise. They have ruined broadcasting as a public service and revel in it. They couldn't care less about anything except their bottom line. Don't be caught up in programming because it is fleeting. The big mouths of today spew the vitriol that riles up the dogs on both sides. Tomorrow, if that doesn't work, they'll find something that does. The notion that contrasting views is bad for business is ridiculous.
<P ID="signature">______________
Electricity is really just organized lightning.
~George Carlin</P>
That's for sure. As long as the GOP dominates the government, anything that takes back from big business what they have gained under many years of deregulation has no chance of happening.
> I always take out of these "media reform" efforts is
> activists who believe they can force people to listen to or
> watch what they don't want to, or who want to remove from
> the airwaves personalities and programs that people dwant to
> listen to or watch.
I think there is a larger issue. If the government defines competition as two players (which they do) there is little justification, capitalistically speaking, to return ownership limits to previous levels. As much as I'd like to see them forced to divest and downsize, the fact that the media giants control the airwaves will remain. Just a few years ago they considered letting loose on cross ownership of TV/TV and TV/newspaper limits. The government, which is after all the same as saying "big business" does not care about diversity of ownership. But if you think it's about forcing people to listen/watch competitive and contrasting programming, I think you are too absorbed by content and popularity. True, the government does not like diversity of ideas to create undercurrent and backlash, but in this networked world of today, they can't control information no matter what legislation they try to pass. Face it, half the people in this country don't care about politics or they would vote. The other half is pretty well split between the sheep and the dogs. Half the sheep and half the dogs on one side, and half the sheep and half the dogs on the other. Entercom and Viacom and Clear Channel have tons of money to lobby against their own demise. They have ruined broadcasting as a public service and revel in it. They couldn't care less about anything except their bottom line. Don't be caught up in programming because it is fleeting. The big mouths of today spew the vitriol that riles up the dogs on both sides. Tomorrow, if that doesn't work, they'll find something that does. The notion that contrasting views is bad for business is ridiculous.
<P ID="signature">______________
Electricity is really just organized lightning.
~George Carlin</P>
The fact is, as much as you try to legistlate "public service", you can't make anyone listen to it...and for the most part, they won't I even question that we ever had "diversity of ownership". The difference was we had a bunch of insurance, tire and even parking garage "corporations" that owned radio stations. Even if you could get a law passed to force the CC's of this world to divest, it would be in court for decades. Who exactly would but 12 different radio stations in 12 different markets these days? <P ID="signature">______________
Did the Corinthians ever write back?</P>
Did the Corinthians ever write back?</P>
- Status