According to a new Rasmussen Reports survey, “Nearly half of Americans (47%) believe the government should require all radio and television stations to offer equal amounts of conservative and liberal political commentary,” with only 39% opposed.

Fortunately, 57% opposed “equal time” for websites and blogs. The irony here is that the antis have a pretty good opportunity to get equal time at this and many other blogs, we leave our comments open, and would not remove comments from anti-gun people unless they violated the rules we would apply to anyone (direct calls for violence, etc.) So maybe the (un)fairness doctrine would help us, forcing them to open comments. But then again, the main readers of the Brady blog, etc. are gun bloggers. So that wouldn’t help all that much…

And of course this wouldn’t apply to the already balanced news reporting, I mean, come on, they already give equal time, right?

The Government dictating speech infringes on the First Amendment. Period. End of sentence.

We already tried the (un)fairness doctrine. There is a reason it is no longer on the books. This quote from FCC V. LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF CALIFORNIA, 468 U.S. 364 (1984) pretty much sums it up:

…the FCC, observing that “[i]f any substantial possibility exists that the [fairness doctrine] rules have impeded, rather than furthered, First Amendment objectives, repeal may be warranted on that ground alone,” has tentatively concluded that the rules, by effectively [468 U.S. 364, 379]   chilling speech, do not serve the public interest, and has therefore proposed to repeal them.

“Chilling Speech” in the name of “fairness” is an objective most of us should be able to see is wrong. We need to make sure that our representatives know that we don’t want this, and talk to friends about why it is a bad idea. 

Hat tip Cam Edwards, via IM, so no direct link.