by cognac 11 Replies latest jw friends
Do you think that this will affect JWs if this get's passed. If so, how? Also, what do think the chances are of this getting passed? If I understand correctly, this would be passed on the fed level and not just the state, right?
(ok, clearly I'm just getting into politics, lol)
What is this fairness act??
....it states: "all grown ups must play fair".......i think it will pass......
magoo
This is what I read about it:
"no longer be allowed to have religious talk radio, religious radio stations or tv shows. And if someone is teaching about one religion (even in churches), they must teach about ALL religions as right...not just their own."
You need to be a LOT more specific: when I search for this, so far I have found a Labor Relations legislation from 2004 with Kerry's name on it and an Internet Radio Fairness act that deals with Copyright Law.
It would appear that "fairness act" is a generic catch-all phrase that needs real clairification.
Mustang
I assume you're talking about the so-called "fairness doctrine" that requires opposing points of view on broadcast TV and radio stations. Leaving my thoughts about that aside, any law that required churches to preach something they don't believe would be a direct violation of the 1st amendment.
If you are talking about the Fairness Doctrine, I believe that would only apply to radio in today's world, as it has to do with limited FCC licenses. I believe the idea was that there were only so many frequencies available, and so they attached community service and equal time requirements to each license. Something like that. It was done away with in the mid '80's, and there has recently been talk of bringing it back.
Here's some info
Oh as far as having any effect on JW's, no, absolutely not. Unless they take to using public airwaves.
It's mostly political, to wit:
The FCC also regulates TV and to some extent the Telephone company. Telco uses many microwave links and goes over the airwaves. Much TV traffic for networks and syndication goes through the Telco trunks. This was the traditonal domain of AT&T "Long Lines" and "Toll Office". The infrastructure required is massive and the heavy investement of competitors into fiber optics has concentrated on intercity wireouts, rather than "Long Lines". So I think AT&T still holds sway there; either way, where you find "Long Lines" you will find FCC Commercial Radio Operators Licenses posted on the wall. That is the Law.
Licensing is also different for public radio and public television, and for community radio and community television, as compared to commercial applicants and licensees.
That quote is in a writeup further down the wikipedia link that was listed.
There is less an issue with bandwidth or technical specifications here [Fairness Doctrine] than that the FCC gets into the business of running the stations. Part of this is the political clout invovled, i.e. does congressman Jones own all 5 Radio/TV stations in this district? You're new at this: can you demonstrate sufficient financial reserves to account for three years of operating at a loss so that your new station will survive in the market you have chosen?
On the technical side: OK, Mr. John NewStationPetitioneer, we've looked at your [mandatory] technical survey and those of the existing stations. There is no room for an addtional station at this time.
John NewStationPetitioneer knows there is a small station in financial trouble; his backer, Julius Megabux buys it for him. This is simpler than waiting for "someone to die" or 50 years for technology to change things. Suddenly John NewStationPetitioneer is back at the FCC offices for a Station License transfer. This shifts things back to the political front office and more scrutiny under such as the Fairness Doctrine.
Growing up, I knew station Engineers, my buddy and his father bought a radio station and I got one of those FCC licenses.
Mustang
OK: the old "equal time" rules kicked in, as well as the mandatory Public Service requirements. And the FCC got tough on and tired of political policing, in cycles.
However, the orignal comment has "even in churches" mentioend, although parenthetically: whose paren's? This still begs the question for clarification.
Mustang
