Bravery, On Wings Like Eagles, tells the story of how America 50 years from now, told from inside "New World City", rounds up and beheads millions of citizens practicing the then-illegal faith of Christianity. A very significant part of the government's control is via media on every level. The following, a chapter from the co-producers upcoming tell-all memoir about their rather significant political adventures, explains why the Fairness Doctrine, which Obama eliminated by executive order in 2011, desperately needs to be reinstated. It is published here because it is so very relevant to the cautionary, dystopian warning which comprises the story of Bravery, On Wings Like Eagles. www.braverymovie.com
The following was written by Bravery co-producer & director, conservative activist Proe Graphique, who has over 30 years of significant NYC creative and business media experience in TV production, advertising, theatrical motion pictures and publishing. For the fast version, scroll down and read only those parts highlighted in WHITE.
CHAPTER 4. THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE
One of the reasons that the authors and Tea Party Fire Ants had to ultimately engage in their own form of media communication was because, as politically aware conservatives know, the American mainstream media has, in recent decades, become so one-sided that the only appropriate applicable word to use is "corrupt".
At the rate the country is going, Trump administration or no Trump administration, without governmental intervention, the conservative right will discover too late that it has been optimistically fighting a losing war of attrition. The mere fact that Barack Obama could win a second term as President running on personal attacks, fear mongering and hollow rhetoric while ignoring his own disastrous record as President is a testament not to his oratorical skills, but rather to the extent to which the American mainstream media can put almost anyone they want into governmental office by gross and calculated manipulation of the news coverage.
To illustrate the power of the democrat/Clinton-supporting leftist mainstream media, consider this: it took the combination of a personally hopelessly flawed candidate in the form of Hillary Clinton who has a reputation of being a total monster behind-the-scenes; the fact that she was under a widely-known criminal investigation (for which TPFA was partially responsible, as you will read later on); officially responsible as Secretary of State for a dead Ambassador who died in Libya because she didn't bother to help him when she could have helped for months before his death; a disastrous series of congressional hearing performances by her; a scandal involving even her own daughter apparently pilfering from her supposedly charitable organization, the Clinton Foundation, for her wedding; the history of infidelity of her former-President husband who was impeached and lost his law license for perjury; totally alarming videos of her staggering around and falling down in public places and an avalanche of thousands of emails released by Wikileaks exposing her gross corruption, for Hillary Clinton to lose the presidential election in 2016 in what proved to be a nail-biter of an evening.All that horrendous Clinton baggage competing against an incredibly successful businessman beloved for one of the most successful TV shows in history, and Hillary Clinton almost won. That is the frightening power of today's totally tyrannical left-wing media.
This is not a long-term sustainable landscape for conservative politicians. Television is one of the biggest problems.This book will deal with social media and the Internet and solutions to those problems later on.
Regarding television, something must be done as soon as possible about the USSR/ Nazi-esque "State News Agencies", previously known as the networks and cable news companies and their corrupt coverage which may have actually shaded into criminal conduct, depending on circumstance and intent. Yes, criminal. Remember, if the news agencies are selling advertising space on what they are promoting to the advertisers as a fair news network, while simultaneously colluding with one Presidential campaign or the other, that is an act of criminal fraud - the advertisers are being lied-to in a scheme to get their money by misrepresenting the intentions of the network. Very bad.
Donald Trump was so relentlessly marginalized, maligned, and defamed by a supposedly fair and unbiased television media that even the most experienced political and media players in America found the performance to be unconscionable. What had been in former elections to be merely gross bias and prejudice became outright collusion with the democrats which manifested itself on TV screens in the form of lies about the Republican and embarrassingly obvious fawning coverage of the Democrat.
No one should assume that we now live in a new world of honest television news coverage simply because the sins of the media's recent past have been exposed. Even now, arrogantly unmindful of both President Trump's anger and his power, they continued to tell outright lies about his presidential campaign including fabrications about his presidential transition team being in disarray when, in point of fact, Trump's brilliant transition team has proven to be one of the fastest and most efficient in American history.
Proe can tell you from the media inside that the hiring practices of the media are, to his experience, almost uniformly based in-part on detecting political biases. The way it goes is this: they take into account the University, of course. They also look for clues in writing or give-aways in conversation as to political biases which are detected. Let no one tell you that they choose on the basis of objective merit alone. That's BS. All companies want the new person to be "a good fit" and for media that means also political biases.
Naturally the most stridently liberal candidates are the most easy to identify as “a good fit”, and they get hired. The problem arises when those newly hired people settle into their jobs, rise to the top and they, themselves, start hiring. The ones who are more strident than they, themselves, were back in the day are the ones easiest to identify for the new generation who are doing the hiring because their own extreme political viewpoint blinds them to a more average view of society. Therefore, the next people hired are even more strident than the people who hired them were and are, and on and on it goes, into a spiral of utter prejudicial madness.
That's how, after 30 years, we wound up with supposedly unbiased television news reporters doing something which would have been positively unthinkable 30 years ago: crying on-air in despair because Donald Trump happened to win the Presidential election. Disappointment is one thing, but the rending of garments in public is something reserved for the truly emotionally disturbed.
There is a solution to this problem which we have been espousing for years and it comes in the form of something which served this nation well for decades and was eliminated entirely by President Obama in 2011. Interestingly, it was initially spawned, in fact, by democrats, who are now playing dull and cowardly Republican legislators like a cheap accordion. It is called the Fairness Doctrine, and we need it back and we need it back now.
The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) which was introduced in 1949. It required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was honest and balanced.
The Fairness Doctrine was beloved by liberals for decades when television networks were owned and run by more conservative companies. For example, in 1969, the U.S. Court of appeals ordered the FCC to revoke the license of a TV station which was censoring NBC's coverage of the civil rights movement. With the media now owned almost exclusively by the left, the Fairness Doctrine was finally eliminated, after many years of not being enforced, via executive order by President Obama on August 22, 2011. The democrats don't need it anymore and it is totally obvious that don't want Republicans getting equal time on TV.... and that's the point.
In recent years, the Fairness Doctrine has become interpreted politically in ways so twisted and bizarre as to appear ridiculous to the rational mind: Democrats who have so much to lose in their control of television content keep threatening to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine and conservatives, who would gain from its reinstatement to get equal coverage on much-more-important television than radio, often claim to fear and loathe its return.
The reason for these incomprehensible views is that the democrats have successfully been able to re-define the Fairness Doctrine into something which it is not: something which only applies to talk radio, and dull-witted conservatives are scared to death of losing their last and only area of Media Power. Dim and poorly-informed Republicans tremble at the mention of the so-called "Hush Rush Law". Were it only about radio, conservatives would have every right to be concerned. But it is not only about radio.
The Fairness Doctrine would cover television as well, as it did for many years, and demand fairness on all counts from all television broadcasting. That would be a sea change in the United States of incomprehensibly seismic proportions and, perhaps, be the single greatest move Republicans now in power - perhaps only for two years in congress - could take.
To fully understand what this would mean, imagine turning on any network television news program and seeing both sides of a political campaign handled fairly out of fear of the news network or TV station being put out of business. Imagine turning on the ladies daytime talk show, The View, and seeing the hosts, by law, comprised equally of liberals and conservatives. Imagine CNN being legally unable to lie about conservative politics and conservative viewpoints for fear of being shut down for good; of MSNBC hosts comprised by half of conservatives.
On the conservative side, both republicans and democrats already have such a thing: it's called Fox News, and anyone who thinks it is entirely conservative has not been paying close attention to prime time host, Megyn Kelly, who unsurprisingly, just moved to extremely liberal NBC after bashing Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump when she should have been asking fair and balanced debate questions. Imagine if Fox News' fair and balanced ideology was forcibly applied to all network news departments, entertainment venues - as entertainment influences the population usually more than the news - and all cable television stations.
One very stupid argument against the Fairness Doctrine is to let the free market decide what is successful. That only works when there is no prejudice in the range of the television shows being offered. But when 95% of the media is controlled by the left, the only free-market “choices” will essentially be the extremist left-wing view of the world and that is literally – literally – how things are right now, and that is not acceptable in a free society which desires to remain free.
The argument of free market choice in the United States media is as stupid today as it would have been to make that argument about radio, newspapers and movies in Stalin's Soviet Union, where choice was defined as either engaging media or ignoring it; there was no range of free market choice when it came to political point of view. Indeed, in the Soviet Union, one big state-sponsored motion picture genre was science fiction, because they could do away with morality and religion in the storylines completely in favor of hard science and characters who touted the Soviet political line. You will note that history appears to be repeating itself.
In Stalin's Soviet Union, politically skewed creatives speaking out, even in the abstract, such as puppet animation filmmaker Uri Trinka with his classic anti-totalitarian short film, “The Hand”, usually died mysterious deaths, mysteriously young, as Trinka did.
There is almost literally no political free market electronic media choice in the United States today unless conservatives are to go without pictures at all, because sound – radio – is all conservatives now have remaining. The problem is so horrible when you understand it that it can only be called a total nightmare.
What is needed is a forced re-balancing to compensate for hundreds of corrupt people controlling and financing the U.S. Media. That is what re-instituting the Fairness Doctrine would demand and it must happen because the current television political trajectory is shaping up to be an irreversible train wreck for Republicans in as soon as two years if the Democrats are able to reclaim even one house of Congress and stymie President Trump's agenda in the legislative branch.With the Presidency and both Houses of congress controlled by Republicans as of this writing, the Fairness Doctrine must be implemented now to lock it down tight as a drum before potential future Democrat control could undermine its reinstatement.
In an effort to undermine resolve for the Fairness Doctrine, some timid conservatives and many liberals pretending to be conservatives will complain that the left will never play fair, that they will stack the odds, and thus there is no reason to pursue the Fairness Doctrine. That's true to a small extent. The so-called “conservatives” many liberal networks would bring in would barely qualify as right of center, although some places and shows would undoubtedly bring in more appealing people to conservatives for the greater audience numbers and revenue if they were stuck by the FCC mandate, anyway.
It is true that, until the generations who had sinned in the eyes of Walter Winchell die in the media desert, a true fairness will never be realized even with the Fairness Doctrine. Conservatives might only get a 60/40 fairness split. Maybe even only 70/30. But it's better than 95/5, which is where America literally finds itself today, and that includes slowly dying talk radio. We on the right are getting killed in the media and we're getting killed quickly, now, as Obama's elections and Hillary's monstrous near-election categorically, manifestly prove since both were praised by the media well beyond any deserving measure since, based on record of accomplishment, neither of them is fit to be elected dog catcher, let alone President of the United States.
The good news for conservative radio talk show hosts is this: with the Fairness Doctrine demanding equal coverage everywhere, many of those talk radio hosts would frankly see massive additional possibilities for themselves on television, from the counterpoint view on any issue to getting their own - albeit admittedly marginalized at first - TV shows. Additionally, from a counter-programming perspective, the results of having a few extra liberal talk hosts on the radio would help the conservative talk radio hosts by giving them better contrast on the radio and endear them to their audiences further. The advantage for the right-wing commentator, intrinsically, is that they are almost always actually correct and the left is almost always wrong, and that is lost in the current apples-to-oranges comparisons between television and radio personalities and news coverage.
The United States cannot be allowed to go to hell by giving up television and the internet just for the sake of a handful of potentially - potentially only - angry talk radio hosts and noisy liberal trolls working desperately to stop the Fairness Doctrine on television and the internet. No. This country, figuratively speaking, just dodged a massive bullet in the form of a near-Hillary Clinton Presidency which would have sent this country into an economic and sociological death spiral.
Trump could even reinstate the Fairness Doctrine immediately by executive order, just as Obama instated orders such as 13563, and also when Obama actually eliminated the Fairness Doctrine regulation itself by executive order in 2011.
The Fairness Doctrine can be easily defended even in the Supreme Court, which upheld the Fairness Doctrine in all previous challenges when it was active. Once Trump reinstates it by executive order and the Republicans in congress see the immediate change in news coverage, they will be delighted beyond their wildest dreams and be certain to enact an even more certain form of law before the 2018 midterm elections. Indeed, this media veteran would like to see it written as an Amendment into the Constitution, so the political media horror show which has crept up on the United Staes can never happen again. The chances are we won't be as lucky in an election - ever - without it, and it needs to be enacted soon - now - right away.
Remember, also, that the Fairness Doctrine for television would force all the hundreds of local network affiliates to abide by the same rules, which would be a huge help to Republican congressmen on a local level. The conservative inroads to previous liberal democrat strongholds would and will shock and enrage liberal Democrats and delight conservative Republicans who have been marginalized to the point of being all but shut out of the election process in their states and districts.
The excuse for eliminating the Fairness Doctrine was that with so many avenues of electronic communication, it was deemed no longer needed - by Democrats. They got what they needed from it and don't want the pendulum to swing back in the other direction for Republicans. However, what emerged from the Wikileaks emails, showing massive mainstream media corruption, demonstrate that the Fairness Doctrine is needed for fair and balanced coverage on all issues - and about all political candidates.Even if Donna Brazil, feeding questions in advance to Hillary Clinton so Clinton could plainly cheat in the debates, was the single example, that would be enough to demand the Fairness Doctrine. Perhaps Republicans will one day erect a tall statue outside of Rockefeller Center in honor of Brazil: "Thanks for supplying the material evidence we needed".It is plain that the media has become so infiltrated and controlled by liberal ideologues that it will never police itself to ensure even the most remote degree of fairness - and that is the fundamental reality which demands that the Fairness Doctrine be reinstated, now, presumably by the same type of executive order that eliminated it.
The Fairness Doctrine, very importantly, can and must be applied to all internet and social media accounts of all companies under the authority of FCC, with the argument that what those companies, such as CNN, CBS, NBC, CBS, etc, post online is organized and paid for by the larger company under the authority of the FCC, though the FCC simply has the power to enforce the Fairness Doctrine on the internet without making such an argument to the people. Electronic venue is not the point of contention, eliminating political corruption is, with the Fairness doctrine is effect, the world of the internet could literally be entirely changed overnight and end the harassment, marginalization and outright censorship of conservatives everywhere on the internet.
The flawed legal argument that there is much competition for all sides to be heard is easily debunked. Mom and pop blog posts cannot be compared to massive communication corporations, which supply an endless amount of propaganda which in-turn gets spread all over the internet, thus obliterating any sense of competition for mom and pop conservative blogs. To say that the fact that mom and pop conservative blogs simply exist is enough for all sides to be heard fairly would be the same as saying that back in 1949, when the Fairness Doctrine was instituted, that a single town crier wearing a sandwich board on the street in San Francisco qualified as a reason for denying the Fairness Doctrine to television and radio back then. Right now there is no fairness for conservatives in literally 95% of the media. That's the legal point which can be easily made and defended.
Even the slightly left Brookings Institute, represented in a writing by Darrell West, said this about the excuse for eliminating the Fairness Doctrine: "The idea behind media regulation in the 1980s was that satellite technologies and cable television would allow for the presentation of diverse viewpoints…That approach has proved largely ineffective.”
Yeah. No kidding.
The Democrats and liberals, particularly, were quite happy to use the Fairness Doctrine when it was to their advantage. If anyone doubts that the Democrats really wanted it for anything other than talk radio, all they need to do is remember that the regulation, unenforced but officially still on the books, was formally scrapped by President Obama in 2011. He knew that with all the media now controlled by the left, that the Fairness Doctrine could now pose only a very substantial threat to the liberal media's total monopoly control of broadcast and internet information.
It is absolutely imperative that the Trump Administration reinstate the Fairness Doctrine across all avenues of media communication overseen by the FCC and to do so immediately, while the memory of collusion between the Clinton campaign and places like CNN and the The New York Times is still fresh and persuasive, because the media has made it plain that it has learned no lessons from their collusion being exposed. They need to be crushed by the consequences of their own unconscionable actions and brought to heel. To fail to do so is simply to invite the eventual reality that in the future, the Trump Presidency will only have been a minor speed bump to the liberal agenda to turn the United States into a socialist third world state, and nothing more. That would be a tragedy for the entire planet millions of times worse than any theories about Global Warming.
The Fairness Doctrine must be reinstated for television and to ensure that Facebook, Twitter and other social media accounts for all news organizations must be held to the same standard - and the time for that is now. Not later. Now. Right now, while conservatives have the power to do so. Or they may never control government again .
This nation only narrowed dodged the destructive disaster which would have been a Hillary Clinton presidency; putting a woman in power who is so unstable that all people leaking information - extremely reliable sources, apparently - have said that Hillary Clinton spent the following two days after the election screaming, crying uncontrollably, and throwing and breaking objects in her home. This is no joke: that is not someone you want with her finger on the nuclear codes, and with her finger on the nuclear codes is exactly where 95% of the apparently now-deranged, crying-on-air, left-wing media wanted her to be. Absolutely incredible that the greatest nation on earth could be reduced to that.
The United States must not be "fundamentally transformed" as Obama declared and tried to do; the United States of America, the greatest and freest nation on earth, must be preserved at all costs. There is no other United States to rescue us from communist tyranny as the United States has so often done for others. Once freedom in the United States falls, freedom falls for the world and the media sets the national agenda.
With the Fairness Doctrine at work for the conservative cause, giving conservatives a fair voice for the first time in decades on television, and perhaps the first time ever on the internet, groups like the Tea Party Fire Ants would not even be necessary, and frankly, we love that idea. We do what we do only because what we do is needed and it can at times be a pretty unpleasant burden. We'd love America to be politically free again so we can get on with things like exclusively fighting for the Christian cause. This is becoming a lot of work for no pay!
The time for the absolutely critically important Fairness Doctrine, in an expanded version, to give conservatives a fair hearing on television and the internet, is now. As we always say, “Lose your media, and you lose your country.”
The United States needs the Fairness Doctrine back in operation once again, and we need it now, before liberals, who built a media empire by exploiting it, steal the opportunity away from conservatives in the near future and wind up controlling all that is seen and heard in the United States from that moment forward, for all time.
Kathy Amidon and Proe Graphique, January 2, 2017