tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4921855125013712802.post8189548782879242092..comments2023-04-05T04:40:48.583-07:00Comments on Just my thoughts: The Fairness Doctrine or conservatives have the moneyPvblivshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17931937272948538181noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4921855125013712802.post-77705307752812052402011-02-28T20:26:37.452-08:002011-02-28T20:26:37.452-08:00RKBentley:
The Constitution neither guarante...RKBentley:<br /><br /> The Constitution neither guarantees nor prohibits fair speech. There is, therefore, no block on legislation. But free speech and fair speech are not incompatible. Or perhaps you think that the Constitution guarantees free speech only for those who have money. I will disregard your request for an "authority" as a red herring. If someone's voice is silenced because the opposition has sufficient money and/or power, in what sense does he have free speech?Pvblivshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17931937272948538181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4921855125013712802.post-77548087240888142942011-02-28T11:51:10.902-08:002011-02-28T11:51:10.902-08:00Sigh.
You still haven't told me where the Con...Sigh.<br /><br />You still haven't told me where the Constitution guarantees fair speech. <br /><br />If I have a lot of money and can spend it all to promote my ideas, that's FREE speech. Where do you get the idea that there must be some intervention where I must give someone else who doesn't have any money equal time to promote his ideas? <br /><br />If you're going to respond, please cite some authority that guarantees fair speech. You've stated your opinion very succinctly but it's still merely your opinion. On what grounds do you base your opinion? Is it the job of the government to insure free speech or merely fair speech?RKBentleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00566375018731000081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4921855125013712802.post-82216469662433118812011-02-27T22:32:07.649-08:002011-02-27T22:32:07.649-08:00RKBentley:
The fairness doctrine does not pr...RKBentley:<br /><br /> The fairness doctrine does not prevent you, or anyone else, from saying what you wish. It does not impede free speech in any way. If effective, it prevents you from using money or power to keep the opposition from being heard. In essence, if you are using money as a megaphone, you don't get to put your opponents in a sound-proof box because they don't have money. Opponents of the fairness doctrine are not afraid that they won't be able to speak their minds or reach as many people as they want to. They can still do that; free speech is not hindered. But their opponents then also get the chance to be heard.Pvblivshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17931937272948538181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4921855125013712802.post-73192290844606960672011-02-27T16:59:41.717-08:002011-02-27T16:59:41.717-08:00That settles it then. You are indeed more interes...That settles it then. You are indeed more interested in "fair" than free. Since I don't have big money behind my blog, you and I are on equal footing. But if I had a lot of money to promote my blog, then suddenly, I have an advantage and some government control is necessary to make sure my speech remains "fair." Is that about how you see it?<br /><br />Remind me again what part of the Constitution protects "fair" speech at the expense of free speech?RKBentleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00566375018731000081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4921855125013712802.post-56175454833638341562011-02-27T07:41:41.505-08:002011-02-27T07:41:41.505-08:00RKBentley:
My blog does not have money promo...RKBentley:<br /><br /> My blog does not have money promoting it and giving it a wider (potential) audience. Your blog and mine are already on an equal footing. (Incidentally, most newspapers will print op-eds.) Plus, you do see opposing viewpoints on my blog, in the comments.<br /> I find your mention of George III to be interesting. If we pursue the analogy more accurately, the mainstream papers were the ones supported by George and only published support for George's rule. King George would have been opposed to something like the fairness doctrine.Pvblivshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17931937272948538181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4921855125013712802.post-45910808815526748942011-02-22T18:33:33.588-08:002011-02-22T18:33:33.588-08:00I've always been puzzled by this attitude of &...I've always been puzzled by this attitude of "fairness." Does the Constitution protect "fair" speech or free speech? I'm pretty sure it's free speech. Under what premise then do people believe that speech can only be permitted if it is fair and balanced? That doesn't sound very "free" to me.<br /><br />Can you imagine how this would have been received among the American colonies? What if King George III required that any paper that printed support for the revolution be required to give equal space to views in favor of England?<br /><br />What about you? Would you have free speech if you were required by law to devote 1/2 of your blog space to me? But maybe you're more interested in "fair" than "free." I think that might be one of the defining differences between liberals and conservatives.RKBentleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00566375018731000081noreply@blogger.com