I'd be all for bringing back the Fairness Doctrine.

ETA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_doctrine

The Fairness Doctrine has become an urban legend among the left with a regrettable amount of built-up legends of its power.

Whatever you think it did, it almost certainly did not do that. In practice it meant that J. Random Crazypants would be allowed to give an editorial -- sometimes in the middle of the night, and sometimes as 60 second after the news. Additionally the Doctrine never applied to Cable TV for obvious First Amendment reasons.

problem is who gets to decide that both sides are bing presented fairly? do you think that Fox Newsmax and OAN are going to be under the same pressure to give the liberal viewpoint as MSNBC and CNN will to show a righting viewpoint?

There are a number of problems with the Fairness Doctrine in principle. The intent of it is that nobody monopolizes the then-scarce licensed broadcast stations. This is not a problem today, as TV and radio broadcast stations are abundant and also compete with the Internet and thousands of cable channels. A more reasonable attempt at such a law today might provide oversight on the licensure of individual TV and radio stations to ensure that new stations can be started up easily. I'm not convinced it is a real problem today except on PBS and NPR, which are taxpayer-funded and seemingly biased.

The fairness doctrine was a good thing, but it existed in a different time. Bringing it back today wouldn't address the main issue which is the internet.

When everyone is given a loudspeaker, and the power to create an audience of millions; when "journalism" is equivalent to any random opinion; when anyone with the will and a negligible amount of resources can promote their agenda... No amount of oversight can bring back balanced discussion about actual facts. Reversing a post-truth society cannot happen without radical disruptions to the system that got us here in the first place.

Yes please

[dead]