From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Fairness Doctrine was a regulation of the United States' Federal Communications Commission which required broadcast licensees to present controversial issues of public importance, and to present such issues in what was deemed an honest, equal and balanced manner. It has since been repealed by the FCC and aspects of it have been questioned by courts.^[1]

Contents 1 Overview 2 Supreme Court Decision 3 References 4 External links 5 See also

The doctrine was enforced throughout the entire history of the FCC (and its precursor, the Federal Radio Commission) until 1987. Critics of the Fairness Doctrine believed that it was primarily used to deny a forum for political opposition.

In Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, 395 U.S. 367 (1969), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Fairness Doctrine, under challenges that it violated the First Amendment. Although similar laws had been deemed unconstitutional when applied to newspapers, the Court ruled that radio stations could be regulated in this way because of the limited nature of the public airwave spectrum.^[2]

Through its lifetime, the Fairness Doctrine sometimes appeared in local and state elections. In the early 1970s, Lost Angeles resident and actor George Takei ran for a seat on the city council. Takei was well known for his portrayal of Mr. Sulu on "Star Trek". His opponent cited the Fairness Doctrine, and demanded that LA television stations either provide him with free advertising, or remove "Star Trek" from the air. His claim was quickly dismissed by LA courts, and "Star Trek" remained on the air.

Under Mark S. Fowler the FCC began to repeal parts of the Fairness Doctrine, announcing in 1985 that the doctrine hurt the public interest and violated the First Amendment.

In 1986 the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld a loose interpretation by the Reagan administration influenced FCC of an aspect of the Fairness Doctrine, ruling that Congress had "never made the doctrine a binding requirement." In August 1987, the Commission abolished the doctrine by a 4-0 vote, in its Syracuse Peace Council decision. The FCC insisted that the doctrine had grown to inhibit rather than enhance debate and suggested that, due to the many media voices in the marketplace at the time, the doctrine was perceived to be unconstitutional.

In the spring of 1987 Congress attempted to contest the FCC vote and restore the Doctrine (S. 742, 100th Cong., 1st Sess. (1987)), but the legislation was vetoed by President Reagan. Another attempt to resurrect the doctrine in 1991 ran out of steam when President George H.W. Bush threatened another veto.^[3]

Two corollary rules of the doctrine, the "personal attack" rule and the "political editorial" rule, remained in practice until 2000. The "personal attack" rule was pertinent whenever a person or small group was subject to a character attack during a broadcast. Stations had to notify such persons or groups within a week of the attack, send them transcripts of what was said, and offer the opportunity to respond on the air. The "political editorial" rule applied when a station broadcasts editorials endorsing or opposing candidates for public office, and stipulated that the candidates not endorsed be notified and allowed a reasonable opportunity to respond.

The U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, ordered the FCC to justify these corollary rules in light of the decision to repeal the Fairness Doctrine. The FCC did not provide prompt justification, and ultimately ordered their repeal in 2000.

As of early 2007, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), along with Representatives Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), and Louise Slaughter (D-NY) have announced their support of legislation which would reverse the 1987 FCC decision and restore the Fairness Doctrine.^[4]

It has been routinely criticized by conservatives in the media as a means of keeping their views from being expressed or of deliberately cutting their available air time in half. Because of this, it has been nicknamed the "Hush Rush" Act, referring to conservative AM radio political talk show host Rush Limbaugh.

• "A license permits broadcasting, but the licensee has no constitutional right to be the one who holds the license or to monopolize a... frequency to the exclusion of his fellow citizens. There is nothing in the First Amendment which prevents the Government from requiring a licensee to share his frequency with others.... It is the right of the viewers and listeners, not the right of the broadcasters, which is paramount."

U.S. Supreme Court, upholding the constitutionality of the Fairness Doctrine in Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, 1969.^[5]

1. ^ Clark, Drew (20 October 2004) "How Fair Is Sinclair's Doctrine?" Slate
2. ^ Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC 395 U.S. 367 (1969)
3. ^ http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/F/htmlF/fairnessdoct/fairnessdoct.htm Fairness Doctrine Vetoed by both Ronald Reagan and G.H.W. Bush]
4. ^ Hinckley, David (17 January 2007) "Liberals seek to restore Fairness on the air" New York Daily News
5. ^ The Good Guys, The Bad Guys and The First Amendment: Free speech vs. fairness in broadcasting by Fred W. Friendly (Random House; 1976) (ISBN 0-394-49725-2) A history of the Red Lion case and the fairness doctrine.

• Fairness Doctrine from the Museum of Broadcast Communications
• Fairness Doctrine from NOW on PBS
• The Fairness Doctrine: How We Lost it, and Why We Need it Back
• Media Groups Unveil Web Site to Support Slaughter's Fairness Doctrine Bill - Alt Press Online
• Ending the Talk A View of the Doctrine's chances in the near future.

• Equal-time rule
• Free speech
• Prior restraint