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
"Let’s have that litigation w this Supreme Court and get them on the record."
SCOTUS rules government can regulate cable and other non broadcast content--shuts down outlets who are mean to Trump (or future Republican leaders).
"NOT LIKE THAT!!!!!!!!"
SCOTUS rules government can regulate cable and other non broadcast content--shuts down outlets who are mean to Trump (or future Republican leaders).
"NOT LIKE THAT!!!!!!!!"
November 15, 2025 at 12:45 AM
"Let’s have that litigation w this Supreme Court and get them on the record."
SCOTUS rules government can regulate cable and other non broadcast content--shuts down outlets who are mean to Trump (or future Republican leaders).
"NOT LIKE THAT!!!!!!!!"
SCOTUS rules government can regulate cable and other non broadcast content--shuts down outlets who are mean to Trump (or future Republican leaders).
"NOT LIKE THAT!!!!!!!!"
Brandenburg?? For cable content?
a pixel art of a dog running through a field of grass
ALT: a pixel art of a dog running through a field of grass
media.tenor.com
November 15, 2025 at 12:42 AM
Brandenburg?? For cable content?
DID YOU KNOW:
That under the fairness doctrine, a station could broadcast partisan opinions all week and comply with the regulation by airing a 60-120 minute "Community Affairs" program at 5:30 Sunday AM?
It never mandated "fair presentation", only "some time".
That under the fairness doctrine, a station could broadcast partisan opinions all week and comply with the regulation by airing a 60-120 minute "Community Affairs" program at 5:30 Sunday AM?
It never mandated "fair presentation", only "some time".
November 14, 2025 at 11:53 PM
DID YOU KNOW:
That under the fairness doctrine, a station could broadcast partisan opinions all week and comply with the regulation by airing a 60-120 minute "Community Affairs" program at 5:30 Sunday AM?
It never mandated "fair presentation", only "some time".
That under the fairness doctrine, a station could broadcast partisan opinions all week and comply with the regulation by airing a 60-120 minute "Community Affairs" program at 5:30 Sunday AM?
It never mandated "fair presentation", only "some time".
With that in mind, how would things be "drastically different" if it hadn't ended in 87?
I'll hang up and listen.
I'll hang up and listen.
November 14, 2025 at 9:02 PM
With that in mind, how would things be "drastically different" if it hadn't ended in 87?
I'll hang up and listen.
I'll hang up and listen.
Show how the last sentence is true factoring in these 3 facts:
1) The FD wasn't enforced post-69 when it was ruled narrowly Constitutional in Red Lion v. FCC
2) It constitutionally can only apply to radio or TV.
3) Compliance was easy: 2 hours of "public affairs" @ 5:30 Sunday AM does it.
1) The FD wasn't enforced post-69 when it was ruled narrowly Constitutional in Red Lion v. FCC
2) It constitutionally can only apply to radio or TV.
3) Compliance was easy: 2 hours of "public affairs" @ 5:30 Sunday AM does it.
November 14, 2025 at 9:01 PM
Show how the last sentence is true factoring in these 3 facts:
1) The FD wasn't enforced post-69 when it was ruled narrowly Constitutional in Red Lion v. FCC
2) It constitutionally can only apply to radio or TV.
3) Compliance was easy: 2 hours of "public affairs" @ 5:30 Sunday AM does it.
1) The FD wasn't enforced post-69 when it was ruled narrowly Constitutional in Red Lion v. FCC
2) It constitutionally can only apply to radio or TV.
3) Compliance was easy: 2 hours of "public affairs" @ 5:30 Sunday AM does it.
Yes, there are lots of wrong people writing bad pieces on the internet.
Glad you're finding all of these we've seen numerous times. If you had actual knowledge, you'd understand why these pieces are mostly bullshit, but you don't.
Glad you're finding all of these we've seen numerous times. If you had actual knowledge, you'd understand why these pieces are mostly bullshit, but you don't.
November 14, 2025 at 8:59 PM
Yes, there are lots of wrong people writing bad pieces on the internet.
Glad you're finding all of these we've seen numerous times. If you had actual knowledge, you'd understand why these pieces are mostly bullshit, but you don't.
Glad you're finding all of these we've seen numerous times. If you had actual knowledge, you'd understand why these pieces are mostly bullshit, but you don't.
Yeah, never seen that MO before.
November 13, 2025 at 11:42 PM
Yeah, never seen that MO before.
It didn't require those stations to broadcast the other side on the same show--most complied* via 60-120 minute "community affairs" programs aired at 5:30 Sunday morning.
*and that's when the FD was being enforced: from 1969 to it's eventual official end, it wasn't.
*and that's when the FD was being enforced: from 1969 to it's eventual official end, it wasn't.
November 13, 2025 at 11:19 PM
It didn't require those stations to broadcast the other side on the same show--most complied* via 60-120 minute "community affairs" programs aired at 5:30 Sunday morning.
*and that's when the FD was being enforced: from 1969 to it's eventual official end, it wasn't.
*and that's when the FD was being enforced: from 1969 to it's eventual official end, it wasn't.
Your definition of "fact" sure is fascinating.
November 13, 2025 at 11:16 PM
Your definition of "fact" sure is fascinating.
Tip of the hat to Snake for not immediately reacting with "NUH UH!!!!!!!!" like so many others.
November 13, 2025 at 11:14 PM
Tip of the hat to Snake for not immediately reacting with "NUH UH!!!!!!!!" like so many others.
No.
FD had nothing to do with ownership. And it didn't mandate equal time. A station could air conservative talk all day and comply with the Fairness Doctrine simply by airing a "community affairs" program from 5:30-7 AM on Sunday AM.
FD had nothing to do with ownership. And it didn't mandate equal time. A station could air conservative talk all day and comply with the Fairness Doctrine simply by airing a "community affairs" program from 5:30-7 AM on Sunday AM.
November 13, 2025 at 11:09 PM
No.
FD had nothing to do with ownership. And it didn't mandate equal time. A station could air conservative talk all day and comply with the Fairness Doctrine simply by airing a "community affairs" program from 5:30-7 AM on Sunday AM.
FD had nothing to do with ownership. And it didn't mandate equal time. A station could air conservative talk all day and comply with the Fairness Doctrine simply by airing a "community affairs" program from 5:30-7 AM on Sunday AM.
It's just that you....again...don't know what you're talking about.
November 13, 2025 at 11:06 PM
It's just that you....again...don't know what you're talking about.