• agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    If only we had some kind of Doctrine which mandated that broadcast media must give equal time to opposite sides of an issue for the sake of Fairness. We could call it “The Equality Mandate”, or something like that.

    • chaogomu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      Srew equality doctrine. It never really had much effect anyway and can be abused to force even more right-wing content.

      No, what we need is actual media consolidation and antitrust rules.

      Maybe some journalism grants to keep smaller news organizations afloat.

    • aaa999@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      government can control broadcasts because airwaves are public property, youtube is private, cable is private, facebook is private, etc, fairness doctrine was destined to become irrelevant (short of nationalizing facebook or big investment into public internet access, which, you know, good, but require at least mild progressives to win elections)

      • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        The neat thing about the state in a democracy is that it’s just us. The not so neat thing about the state being just us is that a lot of us are high key kinda dumb, and a good portion of the rest are apathetic.

        • MrNobody@quokk.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          That would be wonderful if it were true.

          The state is the collection of the most rich and powerful, exerting their control over the people. No where is a real democracy, where people rule directly. It’s always the rich and powerful with the influence, while we beg for scraps.