Bad FCC / Fairness Doctrine Takes
@badfcctakes.bsky.social
If you've see your words screenshotted here, it probably means you brought up a very, very bad take on the Fairness Doctrine or other FCC regulation you didn't understand.
Repost = good take. Screenshot = bad take
Repost = good take. Screenshot = bad take
Pinned
If you believe the Fairness Doctrine did any of the following, then you may see your posts appear on this page.
The Fairness Doctrine never did anything to separate fact from propaganda, and it can't apply to non-broadcast (use of the public airwaves) content without violating the 1st Amendment.
Outside of that: great idea!
Outside of that: great idea!
November 15, 2025 at 9:14 PM
The Fairness Doctrine never did anything to separate fact from propaganda, and it can't apply to non-broadcast (use of the public airwaves) content without violating the 1st Amendment.
Outside of that: great idea!
Outside of that: great idea!
Compelled speech = "democratic ideals"?
Uh-huh.
Uh-huh.
November 15, 2025 at 6:35 PM
Compelled speech = "democratic ideals"?
Uh-huh.
Uh-huh.
In no way was "equal time" part of the Fairness Doctrine when it came to ideas and positions on policy.
November 15, 2025 at 6:33 PM
In no way was "equal time" part of the Fairness Doctrine when it came to ideas and positions on policy.
So forcing stations to platform vaccine deniers after a report on vaccine efficacy would be cutting down on misinformation?
OK. Sure.
OK. Sure.
November 15, 2025 at 6:32 PM
So forcing stations to platform vaccine deniers after a report on vaccine efficacy would be cutting down on misinformation?
OK. Sure.
OK. Sure.
This picture is wildly inaccurate....like "Paul Revere shows us the Boston Massacre" inaccurate. Stop sharing it.
November 15, 2025 at 6:31 PM
This picture is wildly inaccurate....like "Paul Revere shows us the Boston Massacre" inaccurate. Stop sharing it.
That's....not what the Fairness Doctrine did at all.
November 15, 2025 at 6:29 PM
That's....not what the Fairness Doctrine did at all.
The Fairness Doctrine didn't mandate "discussions". The "rebuttal", if you want to call it that, didn't have to be at the same time or even on the same program. Often it was aired as part of a 5:30 Sunday AM "community affairs" show.
November 15, 2025 at 6:28 PM
The Fairness Doctrine didn't mandate "discussions". The "rebuttal", if you want to call it that, didn't have to be at the same time or even on the same program. Often it was aired as part of a 5:30 Sunday AM "community affairs" show.
The Fairness Doctrine's demise has pretty much nothing to do with this.
November 15, 2025 at 6:27 PM
The Fairness Doctrine's demise has pretty much nothing to do with this.
"I don't like what some people say on the radio or TV! BAN THEM!!!!"
November 14, 2025 at 11:59 PM
"I don't like what some people say on the radio or TV! BAN THEM!!!!"
Yeah, haha....me neither.
November 14, 2025 at 11:56 PM
Yeah, haha....me neither.
Correlation =/= Causation
Oops..my bad:
CORRELATION =/= Causation
Oops..my bad:
CORRELATION =/= Causation
November 14, 2025 at 11:56 PM
Correlation =/= Causation
Oops..my bad:
CORRELATION =/= Causation
Oops..my bad:
CORRELATION =/= Causation
It required "some time" not a "fair presentation"
November 14, 2025 at 11:52 PM
It required "some time" not a "fair presentation"
I learned today that the Fairness Doctrine allowed for criminal charges.
November 14, 2025 at 12:25 PM
I learned today that the Fairness Doctrine allowed for criminal charges.
Dummy (Seal Team 6) never did respond. I am guessing the case he's thinking of here is Trust Me v. Bro (2014)
November 13, 2025 at 11:21 PM
Dummy (Seal Team 6) never did respond. I am guessing the case he's thinking of here is Trust Me v. Bro (2014)
"Fact is" 😂
November 13, 2025 at 11:17 PM
"Fact is" 😂
What, exactly, would the Fairness Doctrine do about this?
Answer--absolutely nothing.
Answer--absolutely nothing.
November 13, 2025 at 11:13 PM
What, exactly, would the Fairness Doctrine do about this?
Answer--absolutely nothing.
Answer--absolutely nothing.
This would be unconstitutional. See Red Lion v. FCC and several subsequent SCOTUS decisions.
November 13, 2025 at 11:11 PM
This would be unconstitutional. See Red Lion v. FCC and several subsequent SCOTUS decisions.
Compelled speech does indeed violate the 1st Amendment.
November 13, 2025 at 11:07 PM
Compelled speech does indeed violate the 1st Amendment.
Cable doesn't use the airwaves.
November 13, 2025 at 11:05 PM
Cable doesn't use the airwaves.
Murdoch didn't need citizenship to own a cable outlet, and Presidents don't grant citizenship: Rupert had been in the US for several years before obtaining that.
November 13, 2025 at 11:04 PM
Murdoch didn't need citizenship to own a cable outlet, and Presidents don't grant citizenship: Rupert had been in the US for several years before obtaining that.
Arrogant and dead fucking wrong remains my favorite social media trope.
November 13, 2025 at 12:41 AM
Arrogant and dead fucking wrong remains my favorite social media trope.
