SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT HAVE A SAY IN MEDIA?

Remember when your parents used to tell you what you could watch and what you couldn’t watch as a kid? Some parents even announced you could watch a certain channel, but only at a certain hour.

Of course we hated being told what to do, because we are born with that natural curiosity. Now as adults, it’s tougher if someone tells you what you can do, what you can watch, and even what you can post on social media, simply because as an adult you feel like you should be able to do what you want to do.

The goal of any mass media, and that includes radio, TV news, print news, and the internet, is to get a variety of information to communities of all sizes. Shows that are in the “entertainment” category also have the same goal – to get information out, and to tell a story.

The Fairness Doctrine was a communications standard developed by the Federal Communications Commission, and enforced from 1949-1987, that required licensed radio and television broadcasters in the U.S. to introduce contrasting viewpoints on controversial issues of public importance.

Some new leaders of our country have verbally attacked the media, saying that the information some outlets (companies) are delivering is “fake news” and that it should be publicly controlled.

This raises the question: Should government have “a say” in media? Should the government have the right to control what news is produced?

We really have to consider, here, that as citizens of the United States we have the right to express our thoughts. That being said, media has the right to inform the public about what is happening in the world – the issues, the positive topics, and even the topics most people don’t want to talk about – without government interference.

If something like the Fairness Doctrine (dropped during the 1980s when cable TV and talk radio began to surge) were to be issued again, the free press would certainly be less free.

A lot of people think that if the doctrine were to be reinstated it could guarantee more opinions to be aired, when actually, FCC officials found just the opposite. The doctrine “had the net effect of reducing, rather than enhancing, the discussion of controversial public importance,” and therefore was in violation of constitutional principles, according to the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C.

As college students, it is even more important to receive correct information and to receive it all, unadulterated – especially the “discussion of controversial public importance.” Government control or interference would be a step backwards. We deserve to know what is happening in the world that we are slowly becoming a part of as we advance our education. Students need to understand how important it is to be informed on the major topics of the country because in the real world many people may try to take advantage of the students who are only just beginning to understand what life is all about.

A free press should stay free, and the Constitution’s amendments that the founders of our country determined should be respected.

Advocate Staff