Psychologists know that if you listen to only extremists you get more extreme, if you listen to opposing views you come to the middle. Would a law mandating opposing views of opinions in the media be constitutional?
Such a law would be abused. We'd have people on TV arguing why apartheid is a great idea, or even worse.
Not all ideas deserve equal time, for there will always be idiots to espouse them and gullible fools ready to swallow them whole.
Don't have to, I lived through it and remember it well, cable killed it bcs it was felt to be a private asset, like the Internet. But I think it should be brought back.
The Fairness Doctrine and the Equal Time Rule were put in place to do just that. Abolished during the Reagan era, which is when the Australian media mogul Murdoch decided to build/expand his empire here. So, the radical right has been trying to push its message for over 40 years…
YEAH dey WUS TAUGHT 2 HATE OUT DA WOMB CENTURIES AGO. dey COULDN'T JUST APPLY DA FEDERAL SENTENCING GUIDELINES 4 trumps 34 FEDERAL CONVICTIONS BCUZ RACISM IS ALL THROUGHOUT DA judicial system, PROTECTING white privilege BEYOND A TRILLION SOLAR SYSTEMS = DESTRUCTION OF AMERICA. SMMFH.
Comments
Not all ideas deserve equal time, for there will always be idiots to espouse them and gullible fools ready to swallow them whole.
Liberals still go on and on about how MAGAs were "conned" or "tricked."
NO ONE WAS CONNED.
They know who and what he is, they always have. And they love him for it.