I believe that the 'scarcity of bandwidth' rationale is the same regulatory justification given for obscenity as it is for fairness.

I guess Liberals feel that the American people don't know whats
good for them to tune into. so they want to control what the
people tune into. We have a name for that.

The only other choice liberals have is to take afew of your own liberal
networks and hire alot of conservative hosts to draw in the people you
think your not reaching, But it still would not work, because if doing
this brought those people in, then it means they are listening more to
those conservative hosts. which means Americans don't like what liberals
are putting out. this is ironic I have to laugh out laud, I suggest that
liberals find out why the Americans as a whole, are tuning into Conservative
networks, But that would hurt their pride once they have found the Answer to
that question.

Na, Liberals would rather FORCE the American people to EAT their crap daily.
And don't try to tell me "It's not true, more Americans do not tune in to
Conservative Networks more" because then you would have to explain to me
why there is a need to create a "Fairness Act"


...

__________________
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
Thomas Jefferson

The liberals are just bitter because Air America was a magnanimous FLOP. No one listened, and they figure if they can't join 'em, shut 'em down.

__________________
"I should be calling collect from jail for the things I commit each night in my head" - D. Mustaine.

I do, and I'm in the wrong country. Least I'm fairly sure thats where the program comes from.

I guess rightwingers see nothing wrong with rightwing corporations controlling the airwaves ensuring that only rightwing slant and propaganda are broadcast on the limited frequencies available.

I've heard charges of the tyranny of government from the rightwing but when it comes to the tyranny of the private rightwing corporation, I hear nothing.

The radio bandwidth is the property of the government and as such, the people.

Learning happens best with competing ideas. Rightwing slanted/propaganda is just not good education.

You're complaining about limited bandwidth?

Well over 3/4s of the bandwidth where I live is just static.

And corporations can't force you to do anything, so how can they be tyrannical?

__________________
.

"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a 'dismal science.' But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.

--Murray Rothbard

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skinny. A liberal is just a libertarian who hasn't studied economics.

The supreme court reasoned that the scarcity of the limited bandwidth owned by the people/government and leased to private companies is justification for having such regulation.

I see nothing wrong with that.

Corporations can force you to do many different things. The reason the US anti-trust laws exist is to address the tyranny of the private monopoly. Some administrations aren't interested in enforcing anti-trust laws though.

Ownership of the broadcast media is concentrated in a few hands.

""There are five large corporations that own most news media in this country. And they are under continuous pressure to ensure that there are larger and larger profits returned to their shareholders.""

"Virginia-based Gannett Company owns 98 newspapers and 18 television stations in the United States. Clear Channel Communications, headquartered in San Antonio, Texas owns 39 television stations and more than 700 radio stations, some of which compete against one another in the same local market."

Not even a complete monopoly can force you to do something.

In addition, it isn't hard to get your own radio station. It is hard to have 700, and that's why only major corporations have that many. Complaining that "most" of the media is under corporate control isn't a complaint at all.

__________________
.

"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a 'dismal science.' But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.

--Murray Rothbard

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skinny. A liberal is just a libertarian who hasn't studied economics.

Everyone has free will and no one has to do anything they don't want to.

But when the People own the airwaves and private corporations lease those airwaves and broadcast substantially all rightwing news/slant/opinions, I just don't see the alternatives present to exercise one's right to choose b/c there really is only one game in town and not an array of choices.

So you see no problem with the concentration of media ownership in the hands of very few as 'no problem'.

I see a big problem. I saw nationally owned radio stations that chilled some expression b/c it was not of the pro-war opinion at the time.

the stations are privately owned , they should be allowed to broadcast what makes them money , period , anything different is communism

__________________
Aint but three things in this world thats worth a solitary dime,
But old dogs and children and watermelon wine.
Tom T. Hall
http://www.politicalforum.com/group.php?groupid=43