Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

One of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) most controversial policies, the Fairness Doctrine obligated U.S. broadcast licensees to seek out and present contrasting viewpoints on controversial issues of interest to the community in which the license was held. The commission reasoned if such programs were aired in sufficient amounts by a licensee, then the public interest, convenience, and necessity (PICN) would be better served, thus improving the likelihood for license renewal. The goal of the Fairness Doctrine was to foster discussion of important community issues, but it was ultimately set aside by the FCC because it was said to contravene that goal.

Set forth as FCC policy in 1949, the commission declared:

Radio [must] be maintained as a medium of free speech for the general public as a whole rather than as an outlet for the purely personal or private interests of the licensee. This requires that licensees devote a reasonable percentage of their broadcasting time to the discussion of public issues of interest in the community served by their stations and that such programs be designed so that the public has a reasonable opportunity to hear different opposing positions.

The Fairness Doctrine appeared to gain statutory status in 1959 when Congress amended Section 315 of the Act (which exempted legally qualified political candidates appearing in bona fide news programs from equal time requirements):

Nothing in [this amendment to the Communications Act of 1934] shall be construed as relieving broadcasters… from the obligation imposed upon them…to operate in the public interest and to afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views on issues of public importance.

The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the constitutionality of the Fairness Doctrine in its Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC decision, June 9, 1969: “The Fairness Doctrine… and political editorializing regulations are a legitimate exercise of congressionally delegated authority.”

In the years after Red Lion, broadcasters claimed the policy had an inverse effect; rather than fostering debate, it “chilled” discussion of controversial issues such that broadcasters avoided controversy, fearful that they would be required to air opposing viewpoints, thus losing available commercial airtime. In 1984, Fairness Doctrine critics and a sympathetic FCC began gathering information to support a change, and the FCC soon announced that, although it would not repeal the Fairness Doctrine, it no longer served the public interest, and in 1987 the FCC announced it would no longer enforce the policy. Congress attempted unsuccessfully to enact the Fairness Doctrine into law in 1988, and the D.C. Court of Appeals ordered the FCC to repeal the final corollaries to the Fairness Doctrine in October 2000.

RobertGobetz

Further Readings

Communications Act of 1934, Pub. L. No. 86-274, 73 Stat. 557 (1959). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Fairness Doctrine Report. (1985). (102 FCC 2d 145).
Federal Communications Commission. (1946). Public service responsibility of broadcast licensees. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Kahn, F. J.(1984). Documents of American broadcasting (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Red Lion Broadcasting Co., Inc. et al. v. Federal Communications Commission et al., 395 U.S. 367 (1969).
Sterling, C. H.<

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading