Last edited by Fauzilkree
Friday, May 15, 2020 | History

3 edition of The fairness doctrine and the equal opportunities doctrine in political broadcasting found in the catalog.

The fairness doctrine and the equal opportunities doctrine in political broadcasting

The fairness doctrine and the equal opportunities doctrine in political broadcasting

  • 288 Want to read
  • 27 Currently reading

Published by Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service in [Washington, DC] .
Written in English

    Subjects:
  • Fairness doctrine (Broadcasting) -- United States,
  • Equal time rule (Broadcasting)

  • Edition Notes

    StatementThomas M. Durbin
    SeriesMajor studies and issue briefs of the Congressional Research Service -- 1983-84, reel 1, fr. 0037
    ContributionsLibrary of Congress. Congressional Research Service
    The Physical Object
    FormatMicroform
    Pagination11 p.
    Number of Pages11
    ID Numbers
    Open LibraryOL15452971M

      However, the Fairness Doctrine is different from the Equal Time rule, which is still in force and requires equal time be given to legally qualified political candidates. (Equal Opportunities is a term of art in the context of the FCC's political-broadcasting rule.) the Fairness Doctrine never required equal time.

    As the lead operative later reported, the Fairness Doctrine campaign had secured more than 1, free broadcasts boosting Johnson and been highly effective at “inhibiting the political activity of these Right Wing broadcasts.” From to , the Fairness Doctrine had existed only on paper.   The FCC enforced the Fairness Doctrine right up to Ronald Reagan’s second term, but other things were happening. In , the FCC said the Fairness Doctrine .

      The fairness doctrine has nothing to do with “equal time,” which usually concerns opponents in political campaigns. It has little to do with absolute “balance” within a specific program. HASTINGS COMM/ENT L. J. ence to the Fairness Doctrine in the amendment to section of the Federal Communications Act of did not codify the Doctrine.3 This amendment, it was successfully argued, acknowledged the publicAuthor: Jerome A. Barron.


Share this book
You might also like
I Know I Can Trust You, Lord

I Know I Can Trust You, Lord

CONVERSE INC.

CONVERSE INC.

criminal must pay!

criminal must pay!

Munfiasa tako =

Munfiasa tako =

teaching of foreign languages

teaching of foreign languages

The beggars opera

The beggars opera

The west Texas frontier

The west Texas frontier

Four Victorian poets.

Four Victorian poets.

Surgery for Anesthetists

Surgery for Anesthetists

Development of techniques for the in situ observation of OH and HO₂ for studies of the impact of high-altitude supersonic aircraft on the stratosphere

Development of techniques for the in situ observation of OH and HO₂ for studies of the impact of high-altitude supersonic aircraft on the stratosphere

Second Spring

Second Spring

Directory of historic preservation organizations outside the United States

Directory of historic preservation organizations outside the United States

Proway Lan Industrial Data Highway

Proway Lan Industrial Data Highway

Beginning WordPerfect 5.1

Beginning WordPerfect 5.1

It wont happen to me

It wont happen to me

The fairness doctrine and the equal opportunities doctrine in political broadcasting Download PDF EPUB FB2

The fairness doctrine was a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) policy. The FCC believed that broadcast licenses (required for both radio and terrestrial TV stations) were a form of public trust and, as such, licensees should provide Author: Kathy Gill.

paigns and controversial issues of public importance. The Equal Op-portunities and Fairness Doctrines in broadcasting are designed to inform the electorate and, thus, to encourage our people to participate responsibly in representative democracy. The Constitutional Basis for the Equal Opportunities and Fairness Doctrines.

What is The Fairness Doctrine. Summary: The fairness doctrine was a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) policy. The FCC believed that broadcast licenses (required for both radio and terrestrial TV stations) were a form of public trust and, as such, licensees should provide balanced and fair coverage of controversial issues.

In essence, the fairness doctrine required radio and television broadcast licensees to cover important and controversial issues of interest in the community, and to provide opportunity. The efforts by Democrats in both Houses to resurrect broadcasting's "Fairness Doctrine" after a year hiatus suggests the fragility of constitutional values.

Sinclair could even put the Fairness Doctrine back in play, a rule established in to require that the networks—all three of them—air all sides of issues. The doctrine was abandoned in the s with the proliferation of cable, leaving citizens with little recourse over broadcasters that misuse the public airwaves, except to oppose the renewal of licenses.

In an effort to pre-empt such a repeal, Democratic Senator Fritz Hollings introduced the Fairness in Broadcasting Act in Marchwhich would have fully enshrined the Fairness Doctrine.

Equal-time presents a "minute for minute" type of rule to be used when presenting candidates running for election. The Fairness Doctrine asserts the "paramount right of the public to hear a reasonably balanced presentation of all responsible viewpoints on particular issues" and "the licensee's duty to operate in the public interest." In short, the Fairness Doctrine "errs" on the side of public.

The Equal Protection Clause, as presently construed in American constitutional doctrine, generally requires discriminatory intent. On the other hand, persons accused of crimes are afforded rights in the Bill of Rights that are not grounded in equality, but in fairness.

THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE Foreword With each new election year, with each new con- troversial issue, the broadcaster is confronted with new factual situations which necessitate a good faith interpretation of Section and the "fairness doctrine." Because of the ever-increas- ing importance placed on these matters by the.

the equal opportunity rule, stating that “[i]f any licensee shall permit any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any public office to use a broadcasting station, he shall afford equal opportunities to all other such candidates for that office in the use of such broadcasting station.” 47 U.S.C.

§ ().Author: Erik Ugland. As noted, the equal time rule is often confused with the now-repealed fairness doctrine. The latter, in existence from torequired broadcasters airing one side of a controversial issue to provide equal time to opposing viewpoints.

Get this from a library. The fairness doctrine and the equal opportunities doctrine in political broadcasting.

[Thomas M Durbin; Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service.]. (The Fairness Doctrine sometimes gets confused with equal-time provisions that still apply to modern broadcasting, but equal-time rules only apply to political candidates, while the Fairness.

Posted in Fairness Doctrine, Political Broadcasting, Programming Regulations, also known as "quasi-equal opportunities", has been argued in in various recent controversies, including in connection with the Swift Boat attacks on John Kerry, when Kerry supporters claimed that they should get equal time to respond should certain television.

Which governmental regulation provides candidates in the same political office equal opportunities to communicate their messages.

the right of rebuttal rule b. the equal time rule c. the fairness doctrine d. the diversity in the media doctrine. "fairness doctrine," requiring that public issues be presented by broadcasters and that each side of those issues be given fair coverage.

Here, the FCC declared that petitioner Red Lion Broadcasting Co. had failed to meet its obligation under the fairness doctrine when it carried a program which constituted a personal attack on journalist Fred. The Fairness Doctrine was a FCC rule that required station owners to broadcast “honest, equitable, and balanced programming”.

This replaced a rule called “The Mayflower Doctrine” which required broadcasters to “provide full and equal opportunity for the presentation to the public of all sides of public issues.”Author: Fred Lundgren.

The Fairness Doctrine, which mandated that broadcast networks devote time to contrasting views on issues of public importance, was meant to level the playing field. Congress backed the policy inand by the s the FCC called the doctrine the "single most important requirement of operation in the public interest — the sine qua non for.

The one aspect of the Fairness Doctrine that has never been officially abolished is the Zapple Doctrine, a rule that required that supporters of a major-party candidate be able to get time to respond to broadcasts by supporters of the opponent, effectively "quasi-equal opportunities." The doctrine was argued by supporters of John Kerry in their.

Equal Opportunities and Lowest Unit Charge 20 Charges Made for Comparable Use 22 J. Reasonable Access 26 II. The Fairness Doctrine and Political Broadcasts 29 A.

Controversial Issues in General 30 B. Political Editorializing 33 C. Quasi -Equal Opportunities (Zapple Doctrine) 34 D. Personal Attack 35 III. FCC Handling of Complaints and Inquiries.The equal-time rule should not be confused with the now-defunct FCC fairness doctrine, which dealt with presenting balanced points of view on matters of public importance.

The Zapple Doctrine (part of a specific provision of the fairness doctrine) was similar to the equal-time rule, but applied to different political campaign participants. — U.S.

Supreme Court, upholding the constitutionality of the Fairness Doctrine in Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, Most people get the Fairness Doctrine confused with the Equal .