Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
Your view is totally misguided unless you live in a time warp. In 2009 there is hardly a lack of access to information or opposing views. In the pre-internet days where there were 3 network tv stations and limited radio licenses it was almost palatable. In 2009 it is censorship, plain and simple. The govt controlling what can be said in any media form should be a scary thought regardless of your political leanings. For some reason Rush Limbaugh drives the leftys crazy but denying him his right to speak his mind is disgraceful. The govt is already seeping into places it should not be and the Fairness Doctrine is a nothing more than govt control of a medium it should not be near.
|
isn't censorship the complete removal of information? how is a liberal airing somehow censorship?
in no way am i advocating removing any shows at all. but how can someone call trying to get the 'other side' on the air censorship? it seems it's the exact opposite.
i always thought that the market would dictate what would or could be aired, and it certainly seems that liberal radio doesn't fly. but if the issue comes down to broadcast licensing being out of reach to one side, then wouldn't that be an issue?
i guess all i'm really arguing is that it's incorrect to call having both sides on the air as being censorship.