Posted by
Catmman on Friday, August 14, 2009 9:48:33 AM
“Local public broadcasters and regional and national communications
operations should be required to encourage and broadcast diverse views
and programs,” wrote Lloyd. “These programs should include coverage of
all local, state and federal government meetings, as well as daily news
and public issues programming.
If there is going to be a requirement to broadcast "
diverse views", then why add the hyperbole of "
encouragement"? "
We encourage you to do X, but you'll be required to do it anyway." Huh?
The report argued that large corporate broadcasting networks had driven
liberals off the radio, and that diversity of ownership would increase
diversity of broadcasting voices.
This has been tried, at least from a "private ownership" perspective. Remember Air America? It went bankrupt. The libs and lefties would have you believe that there simply wasn't enough money to keep things going. Nuh-uh. Air America couldn't attract listeners becasue their programs were horrible. The on-air "personalities", like such talents as Al Franken and Janeane Gerafalo, drove people away with their negativity and leftist ideology. Rush Limbaugh has been on the air nationally for over 20 years. He has never had to suffer through not getting or attracting advertising dollars. His program has been successful every single year it has been on the radio. Air America folks lasted, what, three years? And they only had their head above water for the first year?
This is a fallacy. "If only" we had more money. "If only" we had "diversity". "If only" someone else would pay for it.
"Liberal" radio has failed everywhere it has been tried. The only reason outlets such as NPR and PBS are still in business is because they get government subsidies. In a liberals mind, this is how the world should work. Let the government fund it and it will be alright. I have to listen to a few minutes of commercials on the radio when I listen to programs such as Rush. Advertisers telling me how good their products are and encouraging me to buy their stuff or at least give it a try - no guilt, no shame. Whenever I watch PBS (which isn't very often), I have to suffer through 15 minutes of begging from on-air guilt mongers (that's 15 minutes every half hour - at least it seems that way) extolling the benefits of PBS while trying to convince me that $150 dollar DVD is worth it to support such "excellent programming". Diversity?
This is the new code for the "Fairness Doctrine". It's a sight worse actually. Under this tactic, the proponents want to force private companies to fund their operations, and then the proponents will be the arbiters of the types of programming which will be provided. Does anyone really think that if this were to happen, programs such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck would have the same freedom of operation and time allotted each week they do now? Eventually they would be forced from the air completely, for the sake of diversity?
"How can we possibly give Rush 15 hours a week? We need that time for programming about the snail darter or Congolese field mouse. Why, we have 15 different shows about making cheese we need to broadcast. There is just too much out there to give Rush so much time. It wouldn't foster 'diversity'"
Chief Diversity Officer of the FCC?
Another Czar? Yet another unelected suit attempting to foist his views through fiat.
Beware the man behind the curtain...
(H/T: Hot Air Greenroom post)