What ever happened to equal media time for the Presidential Candidates?

[AC_Mem]

My understanding is that the candidates are supposed to receive EQUAL air time during a presidential campaign. It seems to me that the crazier he is, the more time he gets in the media - the very media he calls dishonest and shuns from his events! Turn on any television or radio political or news channel and you tell me if the coverage is equal.

Seems to me that not only does Hillary, a woman, get far less recognition and coverage for all the GOOD she is doing as she tries to educate America on her plans (yes - she has PLANS!) for America, but her opponent gets MORE coverage for lying, cheating, inciting violence, and having absolutely NO plan or NOTHING of importance to say.

It seems to me that the media would rather hand out airtime to a, at the very least, severely unbalanced individual with anger issues, daddy issues, mommy issues and a 4th grade vocabulary and understanding of current events. While Hillary and her surrogates are basically given whatever is left, or brought on to try to provide facts - that are easily uncovered by the very media who allows them to be aired on their programming, and dispute the lies.

In the end - turn on your radio or television - who are you hearing about?

Why is a horse race more important than our country's safety and well being? Have we really come to this?

I want to see EQUAL coverage for the candidates. Every time he calls in and his call is accepted on a show, Hillary gets that same amount of air time. Every time a surrogate comes on and is able to spread ignorance hate and lies, they should have a surrogate of Hillary standing split screen, giving the facts - RIGHT THEN AND THERE.

Otherwise - yes, this race is rigged - and it will be rigged in Russia's direction.

Wake up! It is time for the PEOPLE to show how very very quickly they can affect change. We need to use our voice and our pocketbooks - organized write in campaign s and boycott advertisers of shows that are not giving equal airtime to the Democratic message, or are not immediately disputing GOP outright lies and hate. It sends a message very quickly - I've seen it work many times over the past 10 years.

Annette
Orlando, who may turn blue this year!

[edhopper]

1. It doesn't apply

Last edited Sun Aug 21, 2016, 11:22 AM - Edit history (1)

to News coverage. And Reagan got rid of the Fairness Doctrine to pave the way for FoxNews.

[FreakinDJ]

5. Since Reagan got rid of the Fairness Doctrine by Executive Order

Why doesn't Obama Executive Order it back

The Fairness Doctrine was about the airwaves belong to the people and not Mega Corporations buying up media to spew lies at us

[onenote]

8. Reagan didn't get rid of the FD by Executive Order

The FD was a rule adopted by the FCC. In 1987, the FCC voted 4-0 (there was one vacancy at the time) to repeal the rule. An effort to reinstate in legislatively was vetoed by Reagan.

[1939]

7. Fairness Doctrine applied only to broadcast media

Broadcast radio and television were subject to the fairness doctrine as a part of their being given a portion of the broadcast band. The Fairness Doctrine never envisioned 24 hour cable news. Fox, CNN, MSNBC, and other cable-only media were never foreseen. Even if Congress and the President were to pass legislation extending a version of the doctrine to cable, I am not sure it would survive a court case.

Most of the laments about the Fairness Doctrine seem to be about the right-wing takeover of AM radio, which nobody wanted when the doctrine was relaxed because nobody foresaw that AM radio would even survive FM stereo and on-board 8-track, cassette, and CD players in cars.

[X_Digger]

11. Fairness Doctrine != Equal Time. n/t

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-time_rule

[edhopper]

12. True

I wasn't clear that I was talking about them separately, Equal Time and the Fairness Doctrine.

Equal time does not apply to News coverage and it's about giving time to the candidates, I don't know if that even happens any more. Maybe in local elections.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

14. Don't need equal time for anti-vaxer / climate-denier / birth-certificate / Hillary-health crowds nt

[TipTok]

2. Ahhh innocence...

[CentralMass]

3. The Clinton campaign seems to be idling at the the moment.

[Scruffy1]

13. I find this disturbing.

This election is an historic chance that the Democratic Party hasn't had since 1964. I don't watch television, but the "news" on the internet is about 90% Trump. I think HP headlines Trump nearly every day. I sincerely hope the Democratic leadership can come out swinging with some popular plans. So far, media coverage has been awful, but then again , you don't really have to attack Trump, just let him go on. Just like Joe McCarthy, once people see him they will be repulsed. I know Hillary will win, but a landslide is needed to destroy the nut cases who run the House and Senate. It almost seems like Hillary is hiding to me, but that may be just how much the media sucks, including the internet.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

16. Very old battle saying: "Never interrupt your enemy while they are making a mistake". . nt

[Avalux]

26. +10000! Or - never murder a man who is committing suicide.

Even though Hillary's campaign seems a bit quiet, they are observing and strategizing, preparing for the debates.

Im not worried.

[Stonepounder]

17. Just did an quick, very non-scientific survey. On DU Home

There are 15 stories/ops about Trump and 5 about Hillary. Even here we talk much much more about Trump than we do about Hillary, her policies, her strengths, her weaknesses, etc. Same thing as on TV. (Which I have just about quit watching for news.)

[LWolf]

4. I don't remember

that ever being the case.

Perhaps it was before Ronald Reagan?

[Kyblue1]

6. The media is no better than the National Enquirer

I too have been amazed and frustrated by our local news? sations who report on Trump's every move every day, without a mention that Clinton is in the race. They all comment on his efforts to close the gap, no mention of anything of substance being said by Trump or by Hillary for that matter.
Perhaps Clinton should claim that she was abducted by an alien. That would be more to the media's sense of news.

[BumRushDaShow]

18. This is because

the major networks merged their news and entertainment divisions to save $$$. And this was foretold to happen back in 1976!

[lame54]

9. Shhhh...

Let Hillary lay low while Trump flaps his gums

It's working

[X_Digger]

10. You remember wrong.

If Candidate A buys 30 minutes of ad time in prime time, Candidate B must be offered the same rate for 30 minutes of air time.

It doesn't mean that a station must give time to Candidate B.

Also, news coverage is exempt. (Since Candidate A didn't pay to be on the news.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-time_rule

[oberliner]

15. To be fair

Trump has done rallies pretty much every day.

Hillary has kind of being laying low in terms of public appearances.

[BumRushDaShow]

21. Neither have been rallying every day

He has been doing more ridiculous tweeting non-stop which puts him in the daily news cycle and makes it appear that he is everywhere at once and if you look at Hillary's calendar (archive), she is out there as much as he is (plus doing evening fundraisers).

[oberliner]

24. Trump has had open-to-the-public speeches nearly daily

For the past two weeks or so. At least 3-4 per week (sometimes 2x a day).

Hillary has had very few, and has none upcoming.

She has done private fundraisers and other events of that nature.

She is definitely not out there as much as he is by any stretch of the imagination.

[BumRushDaShow]

29. Did you even bother look at the link?

She will be in Reno on the 25th and was in Cleveland this past Wednesday. What you posted is just nonsense.

[oberliner]

32. Trump has three public speeches scheduled between now and the 25th

He is literally holding events every single day between now and then (including tomorrow night).

And he has had four events since Hillary's speech on Wednesday.

He is definitely holding far more open-to-the-public events than she is.

[BumRushDaShow]

34. His poll numbers are cratering

his campaign has had a series of revolving door loons come and go, he is losing the establishment GOP in very public fashion, while he continues to be a loose cannon. It's obvious that he has no choice (or at least his staff have none since they have him reading teleprompter-speeches). You can keep suggesting that what he is doing is somehow going to be helpful, but good luck with that.

[oberliner]

35. My only assertion is that he has more public appearances than Hillary

I would love to see Hillary do more. She has a great message and her demeanor and presentation would contrast well with Trump's bombast.

[BumRushDaShow]

36. She is not a carnival barker

so her speeches haven't been nor will be covered outside of a few sound bites or reports of her or her campaign's tweets, because the merged news-entertainment entities want "infotainment" instead of election reporting, and Trump provides plenty of outrageous bullshit for them to fill air time and get ratings.

[oberliner]

37. Agreed

But she has not given many general election speeches, to be covered or not.

I would love to see her give more. The more frequently her message is delivered, the better, in my opinion.

[judesedit]

19. I've stopped watching all the news channels due to this bs, but have not boycotted the advertisers

I will actually put my tv on mute and write the advertisers down so I do not purchase anything they're selling. I don't know why I didn't do this from the beginning. Thanks for the advice.

[vkkv]

20. HRC gets LOT of Benghazi reporting at Faux News...

Fox would claim that as equal air-time, I'm sure.

[Coyotl]

22. That's equal access to purchase ads, not equal time on the supposed "news" (propaganda) time.

[Ligyron]

23. She's busy doing fundraisers this coming week. eom

[retrowire]

25. As a former Bernie supporter

this post just... makes me ill.

[turbinetree]

27. I will second that motion

Honk----------------for a political revolution "Our Revolution"

[Dustlawyer]

28. The media is owned by 6 huge companies (90% of what we see and hear other than Internet).

They control the propaganda and do what they want. They have Lobbiests and campaign money to keep politicians doing their bidding. Until we achieve Publicly Funded Elections and bust up the media and banking oligarchies we will continue to lose rights and elections to their brainwashing. This is what we actually need to do to "Take our country back!"

[onenote]

33. Old bs meme.

There are plenty of reasons to complain about news reporting, but the notion that all "media" is owned by six corporations is an unprovable, nonsensical claim. What do you define as the media?

[spanone]

30. reagan killed it....cause who would want 'fairness' in our elections

[ncjustice80]

31. I would like to think the media (minus Fox, of course) woudl get on board with us...

and just deny him any airtime whatsoever unless it is negative coverage. The media is a powerful force- they need to realize their social responsibility to keep Trump out of the White House.