The Problem

Talk radio has made it possible for Americans to enjoy a full and fair discussion of issues often ignored by the so-called "mainstream" media.

Talk radio empowered both sides of the 2006 and 2007 amnesty debate with real time information they could use to make their case.  Talk radio was a major reason why statehood for Spanish-only Puerto Rico was defeated in 1998 and that attempted federal regulation of home schooling families was defeated in 1993.

Some people wish to put an end to the ability of people like Rush Limbaugh, Dr. James Dobson and Sean Hannity to make the public aware of issues of interest to their listeners.

The End of the Fairness Doctrine Opened the Door to Rush Limbaugh

The birth of talk radio followed a 1987 decision by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to cease to enforce the so-called "Fairness Doctrine."  

The Fairness Doctrine required broadcasters to air all sides of any controversial issue [a "reasonable opportunity for discussion of contrasting points of view on controversial matters of public importance"].  In practice, this requirement discouraged broadcasters from mentioning any controversial issue.

The FCC finally concluded that the Fairness Doctrine "had the net effect of reducing, rather than enhancing, the discussion of controversial issues of public importance."

In addition, the Fairness Doctrine was a political weapon in the hands of whichever political party was in power at the moment.  During Watergate, Nixon Administration officials threatened the valuable television licenses owned by the Washington Post.  A former Kennedy Administration official, Bill Ruder, admitted that their strategy was "to use the Fairness Doctrine to challenge and harass right-wing broadcasters."

The repeal of the Fairness Doctrine resulted in an explosion of political discussion on both radio and television.  A Heritage Foundation study found that "[i]n 1990, there were some 400 stations with a talk show format nationwide. By 2006, there were more than 1,400 stations devoted entirely to talk formats.

Most of these programs, led by Rush Limbaugh, proudly proclaimed their conservative views.  Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting complained in 2005:

Nationally, virtually all of the leading political talk show hosts are right-wingers: Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Oliver North, G. Gordon Liddy, Bill O'Reilly and Michael Reagan, to name just a few. The same goes for local talk shows. One product of the post-Fairness era is the conservative "Hot Talk" format, featuring one right-wing host after another and little else.

Liberals, unhappy that their agenda was aired only on ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS and National Public Radio, attempted to silence this new medium of communication by reviving the Fairness Doctrine.

Fairness Doctrine advocates like Congresswoman Louise Slaughter (D-NY) have admitted that their intention to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine was specifically motivated by the ability of talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh to arouse "their listeners to contac[t] their members of Congress."

Efforts to explicitly revive the Fairness Doctrine have consistently failed to date in court and in Congress.  The latest effort to revive the Fairness Doctrine was overwhelmingly rejected in 2007 by the U.S. House of Representatives, 309 to 115.

Efforts by liberals to create national syndicated radio talk shows more in line with their views, such as the Air America network, have failed in the marketplace, although the MSNBC television network seems to be succeeding as a liberal alternative to FOX News.

"Localism": A Back Door Fairness Doctrine

Because Congress has made it clear that it will not restore the Fairness doctrine, opponents of talk radio have discovered a back-door way to accomplish their goals: strict enforcement of so-called localism requirements.

Pick up any newspaper.  The local news seldom appears on the front page.  Given that yesterday's newspaper is of value to few, newspaper publishers have considerable incentive to give the public what it wants to read and to demonstrate that those things are in the paper.  The front page is a marketing tool.

Similarly, nationally syndicated radio programs provide an incentive for radio station listeners to keep their car radios set to the station that carries their favorite show.

The local morning program on Washington, D.C.'s SportsTalk 980AM benefit from people who were listening to FOX's Steve Czaban or are waiting to listen to Sports Illustrated's Dan Patrick.

A local church purchasing time on a radio station before or after "Focus on the Family" is aired will similarly enjoy a carryover audience that it can earn on its own.

FCC Commissioner Michael Copps has called for a reinvigoration of "the license-renewal process" and stricter enforcement of localism mandates:

Under FDR, renewals were required every three years, and a station's public-interest record was subject to FCC judgment. Today a broadcaster sends in a postcard every eight years, and there is no credible public-interest evaluation. We need to get back to renewing every three years--and add enforceable guidelines to encourage coverage of real local news, culture and civic affairs.

Copp is simply repeating the findings of a 2007 report by the Center for American Progress, "The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio."  This report cleverly recast the Fairness Doctrine as "localism" by stating that "any effort to encourage more responsive and balanced radio programming will first require steps to increase localism."

The Center's report also urged quotas by race and sex for radio station ownership because a survey of all "10,506 licensed commercial radio stations reveals that stations owned by women, minorities, or local owners are statistically less likely to air conservative hosts or shows."

The Center's  localism idea was not new.  The FCC actually held hearings on the subject in 2003 and 2004, but took no action until late 2007.

The FCC Climbs on Board the "Hush Rush" Bandwagon

On January 24, 2008, the FCC published a "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" in the Federal Register which, if ultimately adopted, would impose the biased vision of the Center for American Progress on the nation's airwaves.

The FCC's proposed regulations claim that radio station "programming -- particularly network programming - often is not sufficiently culturally diverse" and that the FCC seeks "to ensure that broadcasters serve their communities, especially traditionally underserved audiences," such as non-English speakers, whether or not these people actually exist and whether or not these "underserved groups" can be served consistent with the needs of commercial radio to make a fair profit.

(One witness testified in favor of the localism regulations by citing a "population of 60,000 Somali Americans" in Minneapolis, St. Paul,forced to get by with "10 regularly-produced TV series on vocational training, acculturated, health education and other topics of vital importance" accounting for "approximately 20 hours of programming a week … because the community is not deemed to be a viable market.")

The FCC's proposed regulations also suggest a new requirement that all "licensees should convene and consult with permanent advisory boards."

These advisory boards "should include representatives of all segments of the community," a requirement which would empower self-appointed "community leaders," such as representatives of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) or the Center for American Islamic Relations (CAIR), to discourage commercial radio stations from airing discussions of controversial matters such as the costs of illegal immigration or the meaning of jihad.

Canada, our neighbor to the North has some experience with the aggressive suppression of free speech by Islamacist organizations, notes Mark Steyn:

[T]wo years ago, the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada took The Western Standard to the Alberta "human rights" commission for republishing the Danish Muhammad cartoons. A few months back, the Canadian Islamic Congress took Maclean's to the Canadian, Ontario and British Columbia "human rights" commissions for publishing an excerpt from my bestselling hate crime, America Alone. Last week, the Centre for Islamic Development took the Halifax Chronicle-Herald to the Nova Scotia "Human Rights" Commission for publishing an editorial cartoon of a, ah, person of an Islamic persuasion.

Let us remember that professional ethnic activist groups like the Center for American-Islamic Relations have local affiliates throughout the United States each eager to complain about even the most unintended insult.

The organization's own web site boasts that "CAIR has affiliates in 19 states" and "thirty active chapters in America and Canada."

The idea that radio stations should be forced to grant control of their programming to self-appointed activists carry programs of interest to few is also urged by the Minority Media and Telecommunications Council:

Broadcasters should engage in genuine outreach efforts to sectors of the community with which they do not routinely interact in the normal course of business.  … Broadcasters must reach beyond the business sector and look for leaders in the civic, religious, and non-profit sectors that regularly serve the needs of the community, particularly the needs of minority groups that are typically poorly served by the broadcasting industry as a whole."

Who exactly the Minority Media and Telecommunications Council is currently representing was not mentioned in its 2008 filing with the FCC.  However a 2003 filing by the Council lists its Executive Director, David Honig, as "Counsel for Civil Rights Organizations" including the League of United Latin American Citizens, the National Asian American Telecommunications Association, the Minority Media and Telecommunications Council and the National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium.

Honig has also argued that "nonminorities … need to hear minority viewpoints," but does not apply this reasoning to liberals who might benefit from hearing conservative viewpoints.

What You Need to Do Right Away

Unless the FCC and the U.S. Congress hear from the American public, your local broadcast of the "Rush Limbaugh Show" may be replaced by Spanish-language programs on how the families of illegal aliens are still eligible for food stamps.

Please sign our petition.