Turner Votes to Keep the Airwaves Free and Fair

Statement

Turner Votes to Keep the Airwaves Free and Fair

Recently, I voted with over 300 of my House colleagues in a bipartisan show of support to allow the free exchange of ideas on radio without government interference. The House amended the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act to prohibit funds from being used by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to bring back a relic from the past that was inappropriately named the "Fairness Doctrine."

The amendment that my House colleagues and I voted for will prevent the Fairness Doctrine from being re-implemented during the coming fiscal year. However, it is a one-year solution. Therefore, I have signed on as a co-sponsor of new legislation called the Broadcaster Freedom Act (H.R. 2905). This legislation is designed to prevent the FCC from simply declaring the Fairness Doctrine as policy. A companion bill has been introduced in the Senate.

From 1949 through 1987 the Federal Communications Commission interpreted telecommunication laws to mean that broadcasters had to present all opposing points of view in any coverage of a controversial issue of public importance. That interpretation became known as the Fairness Doctrine. This doctrine required broadcasters to keep careful logs and records of their programming. Violating the Fairness Doctrine could cost broadcast station owners their FCC licenses.

For broadcasters the effect was to avoid anything that was controversial. The negative impact of the Fairness Doctrine was perhaps most evident on the AM radio dial. By the 1980s when music had moved to the FM band, AM radio had largely become the place where you would hear sports play-by-play; talk about UFOs; "black helicopters;" and other "conspiracies," but little substance.

Newspapers have never had a similar responsibility to provide equal space. In fact, in a 1974 Supreme Court case involving the Miami Herald, Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote about newspapers, "government-enforced right of access inescapably dampens the vigor and limits the variety of public debate."

In 1987 in a FCC News Report, the Commission reported that the Fairness Doctrine in fact, "had the net effect of reducing, rather than enhancing, the discussion of controversial issues of public importance." Therefore, the FCC voted to eliminate the Fairness Doctrine in 1987.

Once free of government regulations, the free market quickly ushered in a new era of innovative programming. In particular, Talk Radio programs grew. Many hosts across the political spectrum developed programs with devoted, large, national followings.

Since 1987 the technology revolution has radically changed the amount of information that Americans receive daily. The Internet had barely been invented in 1987. Since then satellite radio and television have been added to the previous broadcast and cable choices. Many people now also have access on the Internet to papers and radio stations from cities across the country and world. There are additional web sites, stations and blogs that don't have paper versions or broadcast over the airwaves. Today, it can be a full time job just to keep up with the information that becomes available daily. None of these new media sources are required to provide equal time to opposing points of view.

During the past few months some lawmakers in Washington have shared their wishes to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine as it existed before 1987. The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) has come out against the Fairness Doctrine. They state: "Free speech must be just that - free from government influence, interference and censorship."

Broadcasters maintain that they should be allowed to let the free-market determine what programs they carry. Radio and television stations would naturally carry the most popular programs because they would get the most listeners or viewers, which in turn would generate the highest advertising revenues. When there is compelling and interesting debate it should receive coverage on its own merits.

My House colleagues and I overwhelmingly voted to amend the Fiscal Year 2008 Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act so it could not be used to fund the re-implementation of the Fairness Doctrine. Now, I am a co-sponsor of the Broadcaster Freedom Act, new legislation designed to prevent the FCC from simply declaring the Fairness Doctrine as policy. I will report back on the bill's progress.

Source