According to the results of a Rasmussen survey released today, 47% of our fellow countrymen (47%!) “believe the government should require all radio and television stations to offer equal amounts of conservative and liberal political commentary….” This is up from the 41% results of July 2007.

Further, 31% favor requiring internet sites to also balance their commentary.  (Imagine having to sift through a series of blog posts on campaignforliberty.com arguing strongly in favor of world intervention and the Federal Reserve system.)  The good news is that this is down from 34% in the July survey referenced earlier.

Think about this for a second.  Nearly half of the Americans surveyed believe that government should be mandating the content of commentary on their news outlets.  The so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” which espouses the belief that news outlets should be forced to present both (liberal and conservative) perspectives of an issue, is usually supported by those on the left, but I can imagine some conservatives supporting the question posed by the phone survey because of what is seen as left-wing media bias.

But let’s step back for a second.  Shouldn’t news be objective?  Yes, the presentation of the news of the day should be objective.  However, there’s a big difference between news and commentary, and there’s a major difference between outlets presenting balanced programming, and outlets being forced by the government to present balanced programming.  News outlets should be free to offer whatever commentary they wish, and I should be free to decide whether or not to give them my support.  (The question of the news itself being objective should be a matter of principle, not force.)  By the way, the “Fairness Doctrine” has been tried before, and was done away with during the Reagan administration.

Let’s face it.  The FCC would be empowered like never before to control even more of what you’re allowed to see and hear, and the idea of constitutional limitations would be slid further into the shredder.  Besides being an attack on free speech, the “Fairness Doctrine” is an all-out assault on what remains of the free market.   If I don’t like what I’m seeing or hearing on tv (an ever-increasing sentiment these days), I have the right to turn to something I approve of and give that program higher ratings.  The same concept can be applied to what I read.  (Just ask newspaper owners about what the internet has done to their business.)

And why just conservative and liberal viewpoints? In the interest of “Fairness,” shouldn’t all viewpoints be allowed to compete in the arena?  (Can you see what a mess this would turn into?)

Dr. Paul has co-sponsored HR 2905, a bill from Congressman Mike Pence of Indiana to prevent the enforcement of a “Fairness Doctrine,” and I urge you to contact your representatives and tell them to co-sponsor this bill if they have not already done so.  (You can find a list of co-sponsors here.)   You can also urge your representative to sign the discharge petition, which would pull the bill out of committee and bring it to the House floor for a vote.  The petition only needs sixteen more signatures.  (Discharge petitions require 218 signatures - a majority of the 435 House members.)

Spread the word on HR 2905 and the discharge petition, and let’s keep this threat to the free market out of our Republic.