Let’s use the topic of abortion to illustrate the absurdity of the ‘Fairness’ Doctrine.

How can you possibly make sure that “each side” gets equal time for something like this?  It is not a simple “pro” or “anti” issue.

There are people who favor mandatory abortions for population control.  There are people who think abortion should be banned as a way of increasing the population.

There are people who support taxpayer funded abortions.  There are people who believe that abortion is a good thing, but that there should be no taxpayer funding involved.

There are people who support a Federal Amendment banning abortion.  There are people who want abortion made illegal who see no need for such an amendment.  There are people who think abortion should be legal, but should be a state-level issue.  There are people who think abortion should be illegal, but it should be a state-level issue.

There are people who think abortion is murder, but do not think it should be illegal for any number of reasons.

There are women who would not have an abortion but think it should be legal everywhere in the U.S.

There are people who support abortion-on-demand, and people who support abortion but with a short waiting period.

There are people who believe abortion should be legal through the entire pregnancy, and those who put other deadlines on legality, all the way back to conception.

There are people who believe abortion should never be legal for any reason.  There are people who say it should be legal only in certain cases, and those conditions vary from person to person.  There are people who think no reason should ever be required to obtain an abortion.

There are people who believe that minor females should be able to obtain abortions without any parental notification or consent; others who believe parental notification should be required; and others who think that parental consent should be required.

You can pick another topic, like say, immigration and border control, and likewise get a wide variety and complexity of overlapping and opposing opinions.

How can anyone successfully apply a ‘Fairness’ Doctrine to make sure all viewpoints are given equal time?

The notion is ridiculous.

Yes, successful talk radio is largely conservative, but that is the market at work.  Liberals, Democrats, Leftists, etc. have just as much access to that market.

However, conservatives hardly have a corner on successful talk radio.  Howard Stern is not a conservative, and certainly not a Republican shill.  Tom Leykis is not a conservative or a Republican shill.  Who would classify Adam Carolla as conservative?

KFI here in the Los Angeles market has Rush Lumbaugh.  But the rest of the station’s lineup is hardly lockstep conservative or Republican.  Bill Handel supports the activist homosexual agenda, helps homosexuals obtain children, pushes ESCR and assisted suicide, thinks the Religious Right is a bunch of wackos, and is defeatist on the Iraq war.  Dr. Laura is after Rush, and she seems to be a conservative, but her show is hardly a Republican love fest, nor is it even political all that often.  John & Ken are strongly against amnesty for illegal aliens, but they could hardly be classified as conservatives or Republican shills.  They bash most politicians rabidly.  John Zeigler is more of a libertarian and doesn’t hesitate to bash Bush or Schwarzenegger.  Coast to Coast AM is full of a wide variety of opinions, including conspiracy theories aired by guests.  On the weekend, Dr. Dean is certainly no Republican or conservative.

What about registered Democrat Tammy Bruce, an openly lesbian pro-choice animal-loving feminist who supports gun ownership, the death penalty, border control, and killing terrorists?  How would you classify her?

Even among people associated (at one time or another) with the GOP and/or conservatism, there is a huge variety.  Dennis Miller is no Michael Savage is no Hugh Hewitt is no Michael Medved is no Laura Ingraham is no Dennis Prager is no Larry Elder is no al Rantel is no Sean Hannity.  Some of these people do not want to be linked to each other in any way.  Plus, many of the radio hosts give significant airtime to people with views opposing theirs.

Leftists have most of academia, most of the network news, the news weeklies, most of the newspapers, and most of the entertainment industry.  Yet they can’t handle it that talk radio isn’t under their thumb.

How insecure of them.  How wasteful of their energy and time to try to bring back the doctrine, given the rise of the Internet.