Talk Radio & The Fairness Doctrine*
In August 1987 the FCC unanimously decided that
the Fairness Doctrine+ was contrary to the public interest.
“We no longer believe that the Fairness Doctrine, as a matter of policy, serves
the public interest”, the Commission concluded. “We believe that the interest of
the public in viewpoint diversity is fully served by the multiplicity of voices
in the marketplace today and that the intrusion by government into the content
of programming occasioned by the enforcement of the doctrine unnecessarily
restricts the journalistic freedom of broadcasters.” “[W]e find that the
Fairness Doctrine, in operation actually inhibits the presentation of
controversial issues of public importance to the detriment of the public and in
derogation of the editorial prerogative of broadcast journalists.”
Which brings us to talk radio. Talk radio was
invented many decades ago. Call-in talk radio emerged as early as the 1940s and
1950s. Talk radio complied with FCC community service requirements by focusing
on public interest issues and presenting all viewpoints. In the 1970s and early
1980s national and local talk show hosts such as Larry King, Patrick Buchanan,
Joel A. Spivak and Mort Sahl were popular. In 1984, the most popular talk radio
host, interestingly, was Denver-based liberal Alan Berg. In June of that year,
Berg was machine gunned to death by right-wingers claiming they were from the
Aryan nation. In one of history’s many ironies, that same month Rush Limbaugh
began his talk show at KFBK in Sacramento.
Rush Limbaugh’s show was unique among talk radio. There were no guests. It was
all Rush all the time, mixing humor with an in-your-face attitude and a
one-sided perspective. A few months after the FCC dropped the Fairness Doctrine
Limbaugh syndicated his show in unprecedented fashion, by offering it free of
charge to stations across the nation. Within weeks 56 stations had picked up the
show; within four years over 600 stations were carrying it, the fastest spread
of any talk show in history.
Others imitated Limbaugh’s format. The number of radio talk stations soared from
400 to 900 between 1987 and 1993. Rush Limbaugh’s show was
unique among talk radio. There were no guests. It was all Rush all the time,
mixing humor with an in-your-face attitude and a one-sided perspective. A few
months after the FCC dropped the Fairness Doctrine Limbaugh syndicated his show
in unprecedented fashion, by offering it free of charge to stations across the
nation. Within weeks 56 stations had picked up the show; within four years over
600 stations were carrying it, the fastest spread of any talk show in history.
Others imitated Limbaugh’s format. The number of radio talk stations soared
from 400 to 900 between 1987 and 1993
In 1993, the nation discovered the political power of this
new entity. Rush mobilized his listeners by describing the effort to revive the
Fairness Doctrine as nothing more than a Crush Rush initiative. Calls and
letters to some congressional offices ran four to one against the Fairness
Doctrine. According to National Public Radio, “privately, top aides in both the
House and Senate admit that efforts to reimpose the doctrine have been put on
hold in large part due to the talk show hosts.
What is the obligation of TV and radio networks to cover the Republican or Democratic conventions? We know that in 2004 they have no obligation. But perhaps it would be useful to rephrase the question to ask what their obligation would have been if the Fairness Doctrine were still intact. All broadcasters would not be required to carry equal amounts of coverage and invite commentators who represented all perspectives. It is also likely that if there were at least one TV or radio station available to everyone to hear gavel to gavel coverage the FCC would not have viewed network participation as important. On the other hand, if no stations covered one convention while several covered only the other one, it would certainly violate the spirit of the Fairness Doctrine. The choice not to cover the political convention would have been noted in the voluminous file used to evaluate license renewal. But would the FCC, or the courts, actively intervened to rectify that situation? The history of the enforcement of the Fairness Doctrine would suggest that the answer is no.
+In 1949, the FCC unveiled what later became known as the Fairness Doctrine. It had two broad provisions. Broadcasters had to devote “a reasonable percentage of time to coverage of public issues; and [the] coverage of these issues must be fair in the sense that it provides an opportunity for the presentation of contrasting points of view." (13 FCC 1246. 1949)
*Excerpted from "The American Voice: 2004"