Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The impact of radio in America
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The impact of radio in America
The purpose of this study is to understand the logic behind Frieda Hennock’s opposition to “fairness doctrine,” and map her vison of the future of U.S. broadcasing by analyzing her notes, letters, papers, and mimeographed speeches during her term in FCC (1949 -1955). Particularly, this paper focuses on the reasoning behind her dissenting the controversial broadcasting policy, “fairness doctrine” in 1949, and on her thoughts underlying her works in FCC. She was a first woman appointed in 1948 to the Federal Communications Commission commissioner. Hennock undertook an important role in the development of U.S. broadcasting industries, and set the groundwork for the development of educational broadcasting. Hennock also tried to improve the gender balance in the industries. Even though there are previous studies on “fairness doctrine” and her achievement of promoting broadcasting is mentioned in every broadcasting history textbooks, there are few studies emphasizing her dissenting opinion appeared in the FCC’s report of 1949, In the matter of editorializing by broadcast licensees. Report of the Commission, which implemented fairness doctrine. This paper shed the light on Hennock’s broadcasting policy while re-examining the history of fairness doctrine to examine Hennock’s thinking and its implication for …show more content…
broadcasting. She promoted educational broadcasting because she thought that creating a non-profit entities alternative to commercial broadcasting would lead to new types of competition and prevent the monopoly of the broadcasting system by powerful entities. She believed that diversifying the industries by promoting educational broadcasting eventually contributes the development of media that reflects diverse views, and even the better democratic society. This foresight of the U.S. broadcasting implemented by her may give a new guideline policy to examine the issues of fairness in the broadcasting
Michael Parenti (2002) declares media in the United States is no longer “free, independent, neutral and objective.” (p. 60). Throughout his statement, Parenti expresses that media is controlled by large corporations, leaving smaller conglomerates unable to compete. The Telecommunications Act, passed in 1996, restricted “a single company to own television stations serving more than one-third of the U.S. public,” but is now overruled by greater corporations. (p. 61). In his opinion, Parenti reveals that media owners do not allow the publishing of stories that are not beneficial and advantageous. Parenti supports his argument very thoroughly by stating how the plutocracy takes control over media in multiple ways: television, magazines, news/radio broadcasting, and other sources.
Brennan, William J. “Roth v. United States, Opinion of the Court.” Freedom of Speech in the United States. 24 June, 1957. Strata Publishing Inc. 12 Nov. 2005
Public broadcasting was birthed, was to ensure that there is a medium where every voice had a platform. The goal was to ensure that citizens have access to information is essential in balancing the nation. Taras (2001) borrows a quote from Lowe and Juart (2005), who sate that public broadcasting “is to build social capital by “bridging” “bonding” and “witnessing”, but most of all by treating audience members as citizens rather than as consumers” (lowe & jauert, 2005).
Tuchman, Gaye. The TV Establishment: Programming for Power and Profit. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc., l971.
One hears about censorship of free word happening all the time in other countries, but did it ever happen in the United States of America? Not many people know that restriction of free speech and personal expression did in fact occur in America, mainly during the 1950s. During this tumultuous time, newfound fears of threatening outside influences, mainly political in nature, had set in and as a result the government tried to protect the American public from these “radical” ideas through the use of censorship, or a restriction in the flow of information or ideas. Working feverishly to control what they deemed inappropriate, they launched multiple programs to combat these influences. Unfortunately, the government’s reasonably good intentions warped and changed over time, and they wound up actually preventing the spread of culture and knowledge in America. This in turn had a lasting impact on the United States, both immediate and long-term. In essence, the 1950s was a time of fear, despair, and even disorder in the United States of America, as a desire to protect America led to a skewed witch hunt shown especially by the creation of the House un-American Activities Committee, censorship of literature, and censorship of music.
In this paper, I will explain why public support is important, but not essential for the Public Broadcasting Service to fulfill its mission to provide alternative programming to the American public. I will show how public broadcasting would exist without the support of the federal government, and then explain why the positive externalities created by public broadcasting lead to market failure and suggest that government support of PBS is in the best interest of society.
President Roosevelt was the leader of the armed forces in justified in ordering the Executive Order 9066. The reasons that Roosevelt was considered unfair and unjust is that the only thing he did was imprison hundreds of alleged spies. Now just because that the 99% of the spies were Japanese this means that this order was considered racist. The reason that imprisoning spies based on race is racist, but imprisoning spies based on home country is not racist because there is a difference between skin color and nationality. Roosevelt was in desperate need of gaining an advantage over the Japanese threat and required that action would be taken by the public.
While the Fairness Doctrine might seem like an equitable manner, allowing the Public to become better informed on matters of great controversy, in reality, the doctrine can allow an opinionated group or one with heavily vested interests to spread disinformation thus working against the interest of the Public. While the intent of the policy was to do quite the opposite, the authors did establish that the Fairness Doctrine contributed to the distribution of false advertisements as well as false information on the effects of tobacco smoke. Further, the authors established the Fairness Doctrine allows for unproven theories or opinions to be viewed as scientific facts by a Public that may be easily persuaded. In 1987, the Federal Communication Commission eliminated the Fairness Doctrine. The Commission’s rationale for the change in policy was the proliferation of media outlets as well as Internet access to which the Public can go for information regarding controversial issues. The public is no longer limited in terms of sources as in
The traditionalist approach to free speech protection is centered on core values and yields results that are basically neutral so that content allowed through one communication medium is permissible in all media.Freedom of speech and of the press is a basic tenant of United States constitutional law. Perhaps concern for the English use of prior restraint (licensing of press) and seditious libel was the reason for including the first amendment in our bill of rights. When the first amendment became law the printed page was the most widely used non-verbal medium of speech. Speech, as we understand it, involves more than verbal communication. Speecht includes pictures, movies, radio, television and expressive conduct [Shelton v. Tucker, 364 US 479 (1960)].
Some people have views that cable television is beneficial to students. In this fictional scenario, one can see the arrival of the idea of cable television onto the campus of Bowling Green State University. The administrators while sitting around their monstrous finely polished eastern oak table in their soft reclinable chairs, smoking their illegally imported cigars, thought of what seemed to be en ingenious idea. They thought of a way to supposedly improve the learning environment of students. One idea can be speculated that stood out in their minds. An idea that could give their students an incredible edge over other students from some other schools, the idea could be none other than the introduction of cable television into every room on the campus of their fine university. To them, this would give students access to explore a vast amount of educational and informational channels such as Discovery, Life, CNN, Animal Planet, and Health. Disney would also be provided for the mentally challenged, playful at hear...
According to the United States of America’s Bill of Rights, the First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” The freedom of press is having the liberty to speak and also having the liberty to be heard. The freedom of press is applicable to all types of printed and broadcast material, including books, newspaper, magazines, pamphlets, films and radio and television. Journalists have taken full advantage on what this clause stands for and have had many advances with the way stories and information is communicated to the mass. According to prospects.ac.uk, “Broadcast journalism is research that investigates and presents news and current affairs for television, radio and the internet.” The objective is to present information in a fair, balanced, accurate, and unbiased way through news bulletins, documentaries and other factual programs. Broadcast journalists can fill a number of roles within the media including editor, reporter, presenter/news anchor, producer and correspondent. Although this field of study is interesting and entertaining, it is very competitive and only the best of the best survives. With that being said depending upon the number of years and the position one may obtain in the industry it is hard to sustain a living and make at least over $60,000 a year. Broadcast journalism is a captivating interest of study. With its many perks and unique experiences it can offer it consequently has many negative connotations that may lead many people astray. The causes of unempl...
On May first of 1969 Mr. Rogers testified in front of the US Senate for funding of a national non-commercial television network, which was a new idea at the time. What the head of the Commerce Committee, Senator Pastore, was expecting was just another person from the entertainment field asking for money, but what he saw was someone with a genuine interest in childhood development and teaching thoughtful self-expression.
The Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 helped to bring educational radio and television programs to Americans, and later, the world. “So, today we rededicate a part of the airwaves for people’s enrichment” (“The American Presidency Project”). Technology had gone far, yet President Johnson thought this act could help make Americans more enlightened. “I have already asked my advisors to explore a network for knowledge and draw up a blueprint for it” (“The American Presidency Project”). President Johnson opened the gates for current networks such as PBS (Public Broadcasting Services) and NPR (National Public Radio). These are educational programs provided on radio and television that have come a long way since they were first launched. Now, they are available online or smartphones for quick access.
Mann, J. (1982) "What is TV doing to America," Impact of Mass Media pp. 25-27
In recent years, the importance of news broadcasts has increased. More people need to access the news to stay in touch with the rest of the world’s affairs. More TV channels have developed to give viewers more news. Both commercial and government networks are used to present the news to the general public. However, because of the different fundings and target audiences, different networks will focus on different aspects of the news, to make as many people of their target audience watch their particular broadcast. Therefore the separate channels can bring in a far larger audience, and take away another channels audience, therefore reducing competition.