The tenor of public discourse is changing. In some ways, it is good that market forces are starting to clean up what we see and hear through the mass media (no one took a principled stand on Don Imus – it was a matter of advertisers voting with their feet, marching to different programs…)

The negative comes in the form of those who feel as though we need some other artificial intervention: one imposed by government. The stirrings have begun, as some are now calling for the renewal of “The Fairness Doctrine.” Not long ago, I shared my personal definition of what I consider to be fair. Few have ever quibbled with me about it, but the Fairness Doctrine certainly would. “Ole F.D.” measures political punditry on the radio and television, and requires stations to provide “equal time” for those who have an opposing viewpoint. It was practical in an age when there were only a couple of media options, now it’s just silly.

(Silly because one of the key arguments against talk radio hosts is that they are already preaching to the choir – which means no one of an opposing view is listening anyway…)

I’m not going to get into the weeds on this one, because the only thing sillier than those wanting to reinstate this policy are those over-reacting to it. In the spirit of true Fairness and Compromise, I offer the following Modest Proposal:

In the future, all radio talk shows shall be required to simultaneously broadcast liberal opinions out of the left speaker, and conservative opinions out of the right speaker. In addition to being more fair, it gives the sales staff twice the opportunities to sell air. Also, we achieve the perfect balance of opinions in real time, instead of having to wait for the inevitable court-mandated quibbling about “daypart equivalence.” Just think about all of the jobs we could create! In the internet age, there is no dearth of opinions out there, and no national shortage of those willing to share. What better way to encourage healthy debate than to legislate it!

Of course, each individual listener would have the power to adjust their own balance knobs, and drown out the side they find less interesting. This would not be a detriment, as the talk format rarely gains any appreciable benefit from broadcasting in stereo. (Yes, I know that most talk radio is on AM, and that most AM is mono. If the FCC can mandate the conversion to HDTV and digital signals for television, it can make AM Stereo tuners mandatory in vehicles. And yes, you can look it up. There is such a thing as Stereo AM.)

UPDATE: One “rabid-rightie” talk show host has already signed on as a backer of my proposal. He plans to hire a third grader to read “It Takes a Village” on a continuous loop through the left channel.
[tags]Ike Pigott, Occam’s RazR, Fairness Doctrine, FCC, radio, politics, parody, humor[/tags]