I don't see the need to impose any type of "Fairness Doctrine" on media outlets that report on political issues. This is a blatant attempt to regulate or mandate certain types of political speech, a violation in my view of the 1st Amendment. It simply smacks of fascism to me--that along with "net neutrality" (which Joe Biden is a major advocate of) are all sly governmental attempts at content control.

The real problem that I see is the fact that the communications industry is dominated by 6 large companies internationally. Power is extremely concentrated in that sector and that is very damaging to democratic governance. It is very easy to control the flow of information when only a few organizations hold so much power. I propose setting ownership caps on some of these media conglomerates to prevent them from dominating any one given media market.

Obama has come out against the "fairness doctrine"(http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/ CA6573406.html).
However many Democrats in Congress support it because they feel that it will diminish the impact of conservative talk radio and other right wing media sources. I don't believe in what essentially amounts to censorship in the press. With media power concentrated so heavily in the hands of so few, regulating content can have very dangerous consequences.

I'm guessing this issue is getting a serious airing over at Fox News.

Another attempt by the democratic party to make things "fair" except fair to a democrat actually means a dem can say anything he/she/it wants and the rest of us poor shlubs have a butt plug shoved in our piehole.

The mental Liberal idea of fairness is the backbone of Liberalism. Of Coarse he will sign it.

I believe that this is more than a simmering issue. Its a touchstone issue that could lead to the loss of rights that people fear. Certainly, it is an agenda that the Pelosi-ites have on the burner. My opinion of B.H.O can elevate from rock bottom if he blocks any and all attempts to legislate this fascist agenda.

What confuses me here are not the Obamanists who put their full faith and support behind him, while looking away from a lengthy list of "unmentionables". I know they have been subdued by the chem-trails that they have been inhaling through their Barack Bongs. What confounds me are the people...even here...who have been doing some serious campaigning against Obama, then throw their vote to him by casting a vote for "none of the above". Why not just vote for him? Its the same thing

This would be a quasi-nationalization of the electronic media and should be resisted with all our might.  The idea that the GOVERNMENT will tell us what is right and what is wrong is hilarious and Orwellian.

Valid question with an easy answer- if elected, yes, Obama will sign this piece of Joseph Goebbels legislation into law.

Considering it could be used to kill talk radio, I'd like to know...