Here's How You Can Strike Back Against Right-Wing Cable, Radio

After the last few weeks of even-more-poisonous rhetoric than usual from right-wing cable and talk radio, we need to talk.

More specifically, we should talk about pulling local radio-station licenses, plus other effective and practical measures of attacking the real problem -- the right-wing media malice machine.

Writing your Congressperson and Senator and the White House supporting the public option is great. But there are other ways of attacking the underlying problem -- disinformation and outrageous lies in the media that influence such important policy decisions.

And it's time to talk also about pressuring local cable licensees to consider pulling Fox News from their cable lineups as a condition of renewal. (See below) Obama's vast army of supporters can also play media hardball. Here are two more ways:

One: By taking careful note of exactly who advertises on both right-wing radio and on Fox News -- NOT just on race-baiter Glenn Beck's carnival show, but on the whole network in all dayparts. These advertisers need to hear from you about their subsidizing outrageous lies, fearmongering and, of course, racism.

Two: By pressuring the reconstituted FCC about bringing back the prudent and sane Fairness Doctrine, which required holders of broadcast licenses to present controversial issues of public importance -- and to do so in a manner that was (in the Commission's view) honest, equitable and balanced.

This sounds reasonable, right? The rule, introduced in 1949, was upheld by the Supreme Court 20 years later. But an FCC majority appointed by -- surprise! -- Ronald Reagan -- unwisely (if predictably) dropped it in 1987 under the pretext of "deregulation."

This opened the door for extreme right-wing radio, and allowed hatemongers like Michael "Weenie" Savage, Rush "Boss" Limbaugh, and Sean "Gumby" Hannity to spew poison and to motivate their hateful, fearful listeners to show up at town-hall meetings and disrupt them, among many other public indecencies.

As mentioned at the top:

The FCC used to pull radio-station licenses when a station was not operating in the public interest. You can still technically pursue this remedy and challenge a broadcast license in your area when it's up for renewal.

Today, sadly, broadcast licenses are seen, thanks largely to the FCC's "benign neglect," by their holders as inviolable. When I once mentioned the still technically correct term "the public airwaves" to one radio and TV licensee in San Francisco, he laughed out loud.

Bad reporter! MY license! Bad! Bad!

Here's how the Fairness Doctrine used to work:

I've covered radio and TV for decades for four major newspapers, and when I'd write an unfavorable column about a local radio personality -- which was often -- he'd sometimes go on the air, rant and say unflattering things -- OK, slander -- yours truly. It happened a lot.

Then, not long after, I'd get a Fairness Doctrine notice from the radio station giving me the opportunity to rebut what was said about me. Sounds reasonable and fair, doesn't it? It was. (Note: In almost every case, I declined, knowing I'd be playing on the announcer's home turf).

Did anyone else notice all the screaming by Boss Limbaugh and the right wing media that started almost immediately after Barack Obama was elected, warning us that the Fairness Doctrine would be repealed and it would ruin radio?

Here's a little secret: The return of the Fairness Doctrine is right-wing hate radio's Achilles Heel.

When the Obama administration then made assurances this wouldn't happen - an unwise move, to appease -- the screaming abated.

Now, after what Reichstag Radio ("Sieg Heil on Your Dial") has done, again using its Fairness Doctrine immunity to spread poison and to knowingly promulgate outrageous lies about Obama and health care, it's time for Congressional Democrats and the Obama administration to fight back.

It's long past time for the FCC to open hearings on bringing back the Fairness Doctrine -- and to take testimony about exactly how it has been abused since being lifted -- actually, even the idea of fairness has been openly mocked.

Now to Fox Noise, which has openly encouraged liars and town-hall disrupters: You can contact your city officials and tell them when their cable provider's contract comes up for renewal, Fox News should not be in their lineup. Find out when that renewal is set to be considered by city council. A cable operator can choose to drop any satellite channel it wishes.

The right will, of course, scream (as it always does) and call this censorship.

I call it taking away privileges for bad, even reckless behavior. It's also a way to inspire some restraint and decency (and a civil tone) to the public airwaves. (The latter is another "socialist" idea adopted when the FCC was formed).

We need to bring back the Fairness Doctrine almost as badly as we need serious campaign-finance reform. But, as I've laid out, there are other avenues to justice and sanity in the media by using your government to fight back.

Follow Bill Mann on Twitter: www.twitter.com/newsmann

Comments

[yphili184]

I agree! we elected Barrack and then put the ball is his hands and went about our business. It might be a fact that intelligent people are busier and more hands off but we need to be more proactive and aggressively supportive of this young administration (and demanding). But lets not just sit and criticize. lets be just as aggressive and cunning and loud as the Party of No, their propaganda station(Fox) and their hick mob! no more mr nice progressive.

[eyeswideopen88]

Did you know that 59% of the viewers of FOX are Republican? Fox freely admits that they don't have journalists, but "commentators", who don't have to check any facts. This is why the Reps have so much false information. Where are the lawyers who used to hold people accountable for lying, slandering? Appreciate the effort to compile a list on contacts that we can hold accountable.

[roads]

The GOP base doesn't want to be told what to do....but they want to be told what to think. They buy the lies spewed by the fear mongers every....f­reakin' ...time. they are the gift to the GOP that just keeps giving.

Sadly, the are dragging the rest of the country down with them.

[RobDoub]

1. Restore the old rules about media ownership, to eliminate the concentration of media in the hands of a few. The consequences of that rule change have been devastating.

2. Both sides should use their power to influence advertisers, as well as their power to use the 'off' button. That is fair and effective.

3. Let's remember that the American People have a brain, and will make the right decision if they have full and accurate information. When we see misinformation out there, we should always take action to counter it with the truth- that is our obligation as citizens. We don't need to shut down the voices of hate and lies - rather we need to counter them with truth and clarity and a passionate devotion to our country and each other.

[sdskelton03]

You are right. The answer to speech that you don't like isn't less speech, but rather more speech.

[Robb Lewis]

I read this article and while I understand the frustration with what the right does we can not take such extreme approaches that cross the line and disregard the 1st amendment. I was going to write a comment with a more logical approach but then I saw your comment and I think you hit the key points so I'll just jump off yours. (of course you're a Rob as well :-)

Guys - trying to censor them will just make them more powerful. The best way is to get the facts out and don't get caught in a tit for tat exchange. When people see these mouthpieces have been lying to them then they will wake up. People don't like being lied to.

[dtlewis]

Ignorant whites make up the bulk of the right-wing talk audience. Cite my source? I've criss-crossed this country in my business travels over the past ten years and it is my personal experience that the vast majority of those who believe the garbage being spewed by the right-wing talkers are just plain dumb. Minorities tend to be inately suspicious of the MSM and therefore less inclined to glom onto the lies du jour.
Poorly educated whites are the most gullible, most inclined to be absolutist. The better educated white right-wing exploit this weakness to the hilt. This strikes me as profoundly sociopathic; they're willing to sacrifice virtually all others in the name of greater personal wealth and power for themselves. I've personally witnessed such conduct and it sickens me to the core.
On careful examination it seems obvious to me the so called Main Stream Media (MSM) is not main stream at all. In fact the views expressed routinely by the MSM are almost invariably the views the minority white right-wing extreme wants their followers to believe. They own roughly 90% of all cable and broadcast media in this country and having largely eviscerated our nation's regulatory constraints and having purchased the loyalties of their chronies in government, they are effectively free to defile THE PEOPLE's only means of mass communication with relative impunity.

[sdskelton03]

Boy, that's not racist at all!

[ldmason45]

Maybe we can just go to state run media like North Korea or Iran ? What a scarey place we'd live in if anyone who disagreed with bo and libs would be silenced. Besides the American people have voted and they choose conservative talk radio and cable news (FOX News) I think what we have here are just a bunch of sore losers. I know it hurts to not be the "popular" guy on the block but that's no reason to try and shut down everyone's constitutional rights that disagree with you.

[sisterdebmac]

So why are you afraid of both sides getting equal time? We're not.

[quisp65]

Your looking at it wrong. There are thousands of sides. Who gets to decide which 2 sides is the relevant side?

[RobDoub]

We also voted and chose Barack Obama. But you are right, and if people listen to FOX then FOX will continue to succeed. If advertisers refuse to support Beck, then Beck will fail. Maybe the names of the advertisers will simply change - and if so that is fine, and Beck will succeed. I hope not, personally.

[JazzyJim]

You as a neocon do have a state run station Pox/Fox - unfortunately, the brainwashing ignorance the spews out of it 24/7 is hate and violence that all decent Americans despise. Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, Coultre and the propaganda and lies must STOP! DECLARE WAR ON FOX!

[BetterDays]

Why stifle the truth and facts? Why stifle on 'honest' dialogue with both sides. The disagreement and dialogue are fine. It is the lies and distortions that corrupt.

[BetterDays]

State run might be an improvement over the corporations running our news media.

[legalgirl]

How about breaking up the radio monolith that is Clear Channel by returning the law to the pre-Bush (or earlier) days of limited ownership of media outlets? We get distorted "news," which is then regurgitated endlessly by talk-show hosts across the land. Often the "news" feed has already been corrected or debunked in other outlets, but not the "mainstrea­m." Oh no, they're sticking to the "story," and a story it is. Then we'll spend weeks (or more) getting to the real information, which was that it was a put-up job in the first place. This is not the fourth estate at its finest. It's corporate profit-making and controlling the "message." Oh, who does that? Let me think, controlling the message . . . hmmmmm . . . oh yeah! Rove, GOP--what a surprise!

[sisterdebmac]

Right on. Fanned.

[sdskelton03]

The problem here is that those who disagree with us are allowed to speak.

In addition to the fairness doctrine, I say we set up an email account and encourage people to use it to identify those that speak out against the current administration. The administration can then compile the information and keep track of all people who voice opposition.

This way, we can silence all voices in the media AND the voices of private individuals.

[ldmason45]

Mabe you can set up a system and jail or imprison all those who disagree with the lib view. Oh I know, maybe you can give them a public flogging or stone them to discourage freedom of speech. That'll teach conservatives !

[LBaby]

Oh, you dropped your cross...an­d you will need some nails if you want to look authentic.­..

[sisterdebmac]

WTBFH are you people so afraid of that you can't stand the idea of progressives having equal time? Is that you KNOW that people might no be so easily fooled if they actually got to hear a voice of reason every once in a while? That sure is what is sounds like.

[JazzyJim]

Your right to prove your ignorance has been exercised, noted and proven by your post. Congratulations. Another RNC member served.

[gulopartisan]

I guess you haven't heard: It was the Cheney administration that suppressed dissent, going so far as to arrest elderly librarians for denying the difference between Bush and McCain. And it's O'Reilly who won't allow those who disagree with him to speak, even on things as uncontroversial as loofah. Anyone who thinks Fox News is "balanced" and the mainstream media is "liberal" shows their ignorance of history and politics.

[Taylar]

I'm ready to boycott all of Fox News sponsers. I believe they are inciting violence in general. However, it sickens me to actually watch Fox News. Could you or someone provide a list of Fox advertisers?

White, female, democratic Obama supporter in Georgia,
T

[Bill Mann - Huffpost Blogger]

Several readers have suggested this, and it's a good idea. I'm going to start compiling it, so, as Koko sang so memorably in Gilbert & Sullivan's "Mikado," we can then announce: "I've got a little list." That list of Fox enablers will be in one of my future blogs.

[JazzyJim]

Actually FNC is a small audience given the broader scope of broadcasting. I am in. I've fanned you and will lend my support any and every way possible. Fox must be held accountable. Great post! Let's motivate the decent American citizens that haven't been brainwashed or bought by the RNC minority.

[eyeswideopen88]

Please do that, would really appreciate it.

[fedupinfla]

http://www.debone.com/boycottFoxNewsSponsors.html

http://foxnewsboycott.com/fox-news-sponsors/

[ldmason45]

Good Luck with that. FOX News has such a large dedicated audience that the advertisers are paying big bucks for their airtime for commercials. I don't think that a few libs complaining are going to affect that. I actually called my cable company and told them I'd like to cancel all my cable stations except FOX News because that's the only one I watch. If I wanted to see another version of the fairytale "Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves", I'd watch nbc, msnbc or cnn.

[lastcallmd]

As long as they get after Rachel Maddow, Randi Rhodes, et al as well. Guys, it's 2009, not 1909. Broadcast media is like the internet--buyer beware. Take everything with a few grains of salt. Walter Cronkite started the morph from reporter of the facts to molder of opinion and the media has run with that model since 1968. That train has done left the station. The fairness doctrine might have mattered once, but trying to use it today to shut down those voices you find offensive just makes you look like someone who time has passed by, telling all who will listen that the straight edge razor, wielded by your local barber, is so superior to a Bic disposable that we should ban them from the market. Hey, we have 500 channels, satellite radio, and the internet. And you think we need a fairness doctrine? I'd say try Russia, dude, but even they're past that. Iran maybe, or Burma.....

[sisterdebmac]

You people just don't get it. No one is trying to "shut down those voices". All we're asking for is equal time for sanity and the truth. But I guess that's too much to ask in today's climate.

[BetterDays]

Support facts, not personality.

[RobinSeattle]

Personally, I'm real uncomfortable with government intervening in content matters in the media. Just because it's on the air doesn't mean you have to watch or listen to it.

However, if you want to send protest letters to advertisers, a tactic that the Media Research Center, Focus on the Family and other assorted conservative groups have used, in trying to remove advertising from programming they find objectionable, that is okay and it is also more constructive. Advertisers can then make a free market decision as to the worth of continuing to sponsor said programming.

[GrahamInCanada]

There are two different issues addressed here, muddied into one.

The FCC's former Fairness Doctrine is well explained here, but it addresses opinions. The fall of the doctrine effected the type of opinions that are aired, or not aired, in the US.

The second problem is distortion of the news. The other policy, the FCC news distortion policy, is not well explained here, although it should be, as it provides the route to challenge a broadcast license.

The news distortion policy has not been codified, and it is not law, rule or regulation. That's why when FOX News fired reporters Jane Akre and Steve Wilson for refusing to falsify news, they got away with it, in 1997, setting a precedent that FOX News is allowed by the courts to falsify news.

If the news distortion policy is not law, rule, or regulation, what is it? It is a body of administrative decisions already arrived at by the FCC to pull broadcast licenses for news distortion.

In 1997, when the court ruled that FOX news did not break the law when it falsified the news, the FCC should have stepped in and pulled FOX' license, after all, FOX admitted the facts.

It's not too late...

[CynAnne]

Well said, Graham. Perhaps it's time for all of us to contact the FCC and have this wave of outright hate-speech looked at closely, and actually enforce the regulations against such yellow-rag rhetoric..­.

[LordNord]

Hate speech...s­ort of like the hate of the right on this website? Need proof...re­read the hate and vile coming from the people in here. The left wants to appear they are the better side, more educated, more logical and rational. If THIS what all you are writing is a indication of how the left works, I feel sad for the lot of you.

BTW...when you all say you voted for BO, might I remind you not all Americans Voted for the guy or did you forget that? Fox news is not your enemy no matter how you want to make that seem. You want to remove one News group as if that will make you feel better to silence free speech. If you do not like FOX...no one is forcing you to. Just like no one forces you to watch or listen to anything.

You allow yourself to get mad over something YOU can control by turning it off. If Silencing is how you want America to work...the­n shall the right do the same to you? I mean, you claim you want fairness and balance talk, if what you all have to say is full of lies or other excuses you use to silence others...t­hen the right has a reason to justify shouting the left out! Remeber its about fairness, unless that was lip service.

[blico]

Not just Fox Graham! They can all do it if they chose to.
During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so. After the appeal verdict WTVT general manager Bob Linger commented, “It’s vindication for WTVT, and we’re very pleased… It’s the case we’ve been making for two years. She never had a legal claim. You can reead the whole story here.
http://www.brownpride.us/forum/fox-news-sued-have-right-lie-and-unbelievably-won-absurd-lawsuit-t30173.html?s=3ed4f2d13721daa56dcb65894eab1570&
Brings to mind Dan Rather and his "Bush Awol" documents. Dan is still well respected by many in this country.
Also brings to mind Michael Isikoff (Newsweek)and his sensationaly bogus story about Quarans being flushed down toilets at Gitmo. If you remember - the muslims errupted and there were riots everywhere and people were actually hurt and killed. He is still well respected and makes many apearances on MSNBC.

[BenPearson007]

"simply shut them down. Its the American way!" ? That will truly be a sad day when we crush free speech. The right and the left, both sides of the table are free to speak their peace on the open airwaves. That is the American way!

[RT777]

There it is again...de­regulation by the GOP. They don't want government to regulate anything (not even banks) but by golly they want to make sure two guys don't make-out in public or God forbid get married and they sure do want to regulate abortions at the federal level...

But where were these small government folks during the past 8 years when the administration was "regulating" their right to privacy? When they took it upon themselves to "regulate" the meaning of national torture conventions?

Can someone please tell me what these guys think they are doing? Heck, even if they rev up all the sleeping kool-aid drinking right wing nut jobs to vote Republican in 2012...who would they vote for? They don't have a credible candidate.

In the mean time, maybe they could lend the country a hand (just this once, while we really really need it) by telling the truth, by showing some respect for a man who has done NOTHING to deserve such horrible treatment, and by coming together to solve real honest problems.

Deregulating everything doesn't work...we see that. Regulation isn't always the way either. We have seen that too. Maybe, we can show how advanced we are as a nation by not picking sides but rather by crafting thoughtful, honest, and sustainable solutions to our problems.

But how can we even start over all the nasty noise????

[alex92ut]

Why is the left so afraid of the other side speaking their minds? Didn't we hear plenty from you the past 6 years? I've never heard so much hate directed at a president in my life. Why was it OK then? Should only the left have the benefit of freedom of speech? I can recall little if any call for legislation to shut you up. Doesn't that seem just a little bit unfair to you? I know it doesn't but it should.
Freedom of speech is one of our most valuable freedoms. And it is worth fighting for to me. I wouldn't ever try to take this valued freedom from anyone. And I won't sit by and have it taken from me. If you think we are loud now, try to shut us up with legislation that would deny us our right to be heard.
You won't get anyone on capital hill to back you on this except the ones who are completely out of touch with the people.

[fedupinfla]

What do you mean "we heard enough out of you the past 6yrs"? You mean people that protested the illegal & immoral war in Iraq and were called unpatriotic and villified? People that were called traitors when they protested torture done in THEIR names. Do you recall any protesters carrying signs calling for the deaths of Bush's wife & kids?!?

If calling the POTUS a nazi, the anti-Christ, Hitler, etc. & carrying signs calling for his death is YOUR idea of "just speaking your mind" then obviously you've lost yours. I never thought I'd say there should be a limit to free speech but when you have TV hosts calling doctors "baby murdering nazis" & then defending their rhetoric when the same doctor is murdered, thats NOT free speech. Its inflammatory hate talk for the sole purpose of ratings.

If Beck had gone on TV and called YOU a white-hating racist, YOU'D have legal grounds to sue his a$$ to he11 & back for slander & libel. And you'd win. But because he's talking that way about a man you can't stand, all of a sudden its free speech.

You sir, are a hypocrite.

[newsmann]

You are confusing freedom of speech with the classic yelling-fi­re-in-a-cr­owded theatre. There's a big difference. Saying that someone wants to pull the plug on granny is fire-in-the-theatre stuff.