Join the Discussion ...

Restrict, fine and suspend media outlets that promote hate speech, racism, and violence.

The FCC should seek penalties for corporations and individual broadcasters that promote hate speech, racism, and violence over the public airwaves. There are too many instances of TV networks and radio stations that host broadcasters that not so subtlety encourage discrimination, hate, and sometimes violence against those that that they fear. A recent example is Bill O'Reilly's repeated comments that someone should 'kill' Dr. Tiller, the abortion provider and referring to him as "Dr. Tiller the Baby Killer".

Glenn Beck's "Progressive Hunter" campaign is another example of intentional propaganda with the purpose of generating fear and hate of anyone he and his listeners labels as 'progressive' by claiming that 'progessives' are linked to violence and intend to do harm to the country - this is obviously not of benefit to the people of this country, ignorant or otherwise.

Rush Limbaugh is another perpetrator of ignorance, hate, and violence. On January 19, he said that he would not be surprised if Democrats propose statehood for Haiti; following this up with the statement "It's gonna happen". This man does not deserve to take up space on the public airwaves with vile such as this. It's an abomination and insulting to anyone with a shred of decency, dignity, and pride in this country.

The FCC needs to revamp the agreements it has with the corporations that abuse the public airwaves in this manner. Many stations no longer contribute to the public good but cater and feed the fears of those that are susceptible to the ever more clever propaganda that is increasingly broadcast.

This has to STOP!!!

50 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    ReasonableOneReasonableOne shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    14 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • CurtisNeeleyCurtisNeeley commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Regulate wire medium common carrier communications if broadcast to the anonymous 24x7 and leave authenticated exchanges of speech entitled to the full protections of the First Amendment. "Information services" are nothing more than telecommunications in the wire medium that are left unregulated because of the 1997 Reno v ACLU, (96-511) legal mistake.

      • 17891789 commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        "ReasonableOne" may get his wish. The FCC is proposing to send newsroom monitors into media outlets to determine how they make decisions on content. Of course, we could presume that unlike the IRS, the FCC wouldn't choose sides, but those who wish for government control over voices they don't like to hear had better be sure that their side never again loses effective control of the government. They also might want to actually read the First Amendment to the Constitution.

      • Molly PitcherMolly Pitcher commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Seems the "Reasonable One" is hardly reasonable and the quotes he gives are taken out of context. Just what, o "RO", do you think a late abotion consists of? Beck merely put in the details that President Obama omitted because he doesn't want to recognize the tremendous barbarism and cruelty that actually occur in this procedure. I hope and pray for our people's sake that this heinous action of abortion which takes a life, sometimes more than one, including the mother's, will one day be consigned to the past with all the other horrific acts of violence against humanity. I think 55+ million victims is enough, don't you?

      • Molly PitcherMolly Pitcher commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Problem is: who gets to decide what is "hate" speech? Before, it was simply remarks against someone because of their race, color, religion, national origin, to which have been added gender, sexual orientation (or disorientation if you are still deciding). Age used to figure in, but has long since been cast aside. Religion doesn't seem to matter anymore unless one is a non-Christian, non-Jew or just plain non-believer. So who gets to decide? The example given of Dr. Tiller is poor: the man WAS a "baby killer" since he performed late-term abortions, though I don't ever recall Bill O'Reilly advocating for someone to kill him. Seems the facts (as usual when presented by leftists) need to be checked. But it seems that abortionists are exempt from any criticism, but not those who stick up for the rights of the unborn. Yes, they DO have rights. The left has created the myth of abortion being a "right" -show me that in the founding documents. You won't find it, but you will find "we hold these truths to be self-evident (ie, everyone ought to recognize them), that all men (the term then was inclusive) are created equal (=no discrimination), that they are endowed by their Creator (oops! reference to God) with certain unalienable (=non-negotiable) rights, that among these are: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness..." Without LIFE, the other rights don't exist. I have heard far more "hate speech" out of the mouths of people supporting abortion on demand and out of the mouths of leftists. These I refuse to label as "liberal" (which used to mean "open-mindedness") or "progressive" since the idiotic ideologies they ascribe to do NOT bring PROGRESS, but REGRESS. I guess they could be called "regressives"! Let Mr. Limbaugh, Mr. O'Reilly, Mr. Beck speak, as it is their constitutional right and it is the constitutional right of their audiences to listen. I have heard more truthful statements out of them then I have from many a mainstream media "journalist". Whine all you want, but leftist radio propaganda is just not popular. People are tired of the same old angry, slanted dribble they are already hearing from the mainstream media, from Hollywood, etc. Let the media be an open market or, if you will, a marketplace where everyone can speak and listen. Just don't complain because certain ones get pelted with rotten tomatoes. They deserve them.

      • mikemike commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Sounds like just another Lib whining about the truth being told. You want managed news and political correctness on the airwaves? You may soon get your wish. Of course Libs never lie, but are always truthful. Just ask your President.

      • Reasonably Prudent CitizenReasonably Prudent Citizen commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        It appears to me that you're demanding 'tolerance' while being 'intolerant' of opinions that you don't agree with. Learning does not come from sheltering yourself and silencing those who disagree with you.

      • AnonymousAnonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Common, now who praytell would that mean? Give me an actual example backed up by valid proof. We have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, not the right to go through life without being offended. What is offensive to some is not offensive to others. Some might cry over what someone like Limbaugh says but couldn't care less whether the internet or the media bombards us with pornography. Common, get a backbone, that will solve the problem without mandating that everything in our society lives up to your own expectations.

      • tnogroptnogrop commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        So, 'reasonable one', basically every comment you disagree with is guilty
        of hate speech. I didn't notice racism among these, but that not withstanding,
        don't forget the the protecting of free speech wouldn't be necessary if some
        of it wasn't repugnant to start with. Why don't you just enjoy the shock talkers,
        debate them when you can, and use the free market system to make your
        support or lack of it known. If these types didn't have a majority following,
        they wouldn't be heard in the first place. It is easier to whine and tell the
        nanny state to control free speech than to build your own media outlet.
        Air America is doing just fine these days... thanks to its wild popularity ;-)

      • ReasonableOneReasonableOne commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        "We've already donated to Haiti. It's called the U.S. income tax."
        comment by Rush Limbaugh aired January 13, 2010

        President Obama "suggested that [it] was OK" to "go into those pregnant women and pull the babies out of them and put a spike in the baby's head,"
        false claim made by Glenn Beck aired November 25, 2009

        "Holocaust museum shooter is not a "terrorist" because he didn't yell "Allah Akbar"
        comment by Bill O'Reilly, November 12, 2009

        and don't forget this classic:
        "If "feminazis" had remembered to oppose "affirmative action for black guys ... they wouldn't face the situation they face today"
        Rush Limbaugh hitting two birds with one inane, racially charged and misogynist statement, aired May 21, 2008

        How will this end?

      Feedback and Knowledge Base