Language
Country/Area
No result found
The Mysterious Origins of the Fairness Doctrine: Why did the United States introduce this policy in 1949?
In 1949, the Fairness Principle introduced by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was a policy that required broadcasting license holders to impartially reflect the views of all parties and discuss key social issues when broadcasting. However, the policy was repealed in 1987 until the regulation was officially removed from the Federal Register in 2011, prompting the advent of the digital media era and sparking a rethinking of the public voice. Is the proposal of the principle of fairness due to public demand or the influence of political forces?
The principle of fairness not only hopes to enhance audience perceptions of social issues, but also allows different perspectives to be discussed widely.
The principle of fairness contains two main elements: on the one hand, it requires that broadcast media need to provide coverage of socially important issues in their programs, and on the other hand, it requires that these media need to demonstrate different perspectives. This provides broad space for broadcast stations to be achieved through a variety of forms such as news reports, public affairs programs, or editorials. It does not, however, require opposing views to be presented in equal time, but only the impartial presentation of different views. The purpose of this policy is to enable the audience to be exposed to a variety of perspectives and thus form their own opinions.
The origins of the principle of fairness can be traced back to 1938, when attorney Lawrence J. Flynn filed an indictment against Boston-based WAAB radio, claiming they broadcast the political views of only one party. As the broadcast industry developed, the FCC eventually issued the so-called "Plum Blossom Decision" in 1941, which required broadcast media to maintain a neutral position in news coverage. By 1949, the FCC reaffirmed its position, officially repealing the plum decision and introducing the principle of fairness.
The U.S. Supreme Court recognized the FCC's justification for enforcing the principle of fairness in the 1969 case of Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC and found it necessary to ensure public access to diverse information.
With the implementation of the principle of fairness, many political blocs and news media have begun to use this policy in response to their opponents, even asking broadcast stations to provide counter-information when certain issues are mentioned. Due to the scarcity of broadcast frequencies, the law gained the Court’s support that society must consider how to ensure the existence of various voices within limited resources.
However, with the development of social media and the deepening of political divisions, the principle of fairness was abolished in 1987, which many believe has gradually intensified the polarization in American society. In particular, the rise of conservative radio stations has made the voice of some communication media increasingly unrestricted, bringing about a variety of highly oriented reporting.
Equity principles are not just for television or broadcasting, but are concerned with how social public issues are presented and encourage dialogue.
In multiple legal proceedings, the Supreme Court has also expressed the importance of the policy to the functioning of democracy. In Red Lion , the court stated that “holding a license does not mean having the right to control frequency, but rather providing a platform for diverse perspectives.” Such a verdict means that broadcast media is not only a tool for profit, but also the maintenance of society The important role of diversity and the public interest.
However, with the advent of the 1990s, the principle of fairness gradually faced challenges. Some political figures as well as media personnel believe that the openness of the market and more media options make the policy appear outdated. After several attempts to reinstate the policy, there have been no successes so far.
In 2005, House Representative Louise Slaughter and others attempted to introduce a fairness and accountability bill in the hope of reintroducing the principle of equity, but the proposal did not gain sufficient support due to intensification of political party antagonism. Even so, there are many voices contending that this policy should be revived to protect the diversity and equity of public dialogue.
“Will a return to the principle of fairness make the current political discourse more rational and diverse?”
Recently, with the changing social atmosphere, many voices supporting the principle of revival fairness have resurfaced. Many question the current way the media operates and hope to promote more dialogue and understanding by rebuilding the principles of equity. How to find a balance between the many players and voices so that everyone can express their views fairly is undoubtedly a major challenge facing the development of modern media.
