Bad FCC / Fairness Doctrine Takes
@badfcctakes.bsky.social
If you've see your words screenshotted here, it probably means you brought up a very, very bad take on the Fairness Doctrine or other FCC regulation you didn't understand.
Repost = good take. Screenshot = bad take
Repost = good take. Screenshot = bad take
The Fairness Doctrine, had it remained, would not have impacted FoxNews even a little.
December 10, 2025 at 1:34 AM
The Fairness Doctrine, had it remained, would not have impacted FoxNews even a little.
Well, if Red believes it has no merit......
December 9, 2025 at 11:30 PM
Well, if Red believes it has no merit......
"Paved the way".
yeah no.
yeah no.
December 9, 2025 at 4:46 PM
"Paved the way".
yeah no.
yeah no.
Someone believes memes.
December 9, 2025 at 4:45 PM
Someone believes memes.
1) Because of the 1st Amendment.
2) A new Fairness Doctrine wouldn't impact Fox News. (See above)
3) This appears to be yet another person who thinks "Fairness" would mean "shutting down the cable channel I don't like."
2) A new Fairness Doctrine wouldn't impact Fox News. (See above)
3) This appears to be yet another person who thinks "Fairness" would mean "shutting down the cable channel I don't like."
December 8, 2025 at 9:47 PM
1) Because of the 1st Amendment.
2) A new Fairness Doctrine wouldn't impact Fox News. (See above)
3) This appears to be yet another person who thinks "Fairness" would mean "shutting down the cable channel I don't like."
2) A new Fairness Doctrine wouldn't impact Fox News. (See above)
3) This appears to be yet another person who thinks "Fairness" would mean "shutting down the cable channel I don't like."
The Fairness Doctrine would not have required this or any other story to appear on every or any channel.
December 8, 2025 at 6:18 PM
The Fairness Doctrine would not have required this or any other story to appear on every or any channel.
Terace is "many people"
December 8, 2025 at 6:17 PM
Terace is "many people"
Well, even if it was, it can't apply to print, cable, internet, podcasts....the places from which people get much of their info.
December 7, 2025 at 10:43 PM
Well, even if it was, it can't apply to print, cable, internet, podcasts....the places from which people get much of their info.
Stop. Sharing. This.
It's objectively false on numerous points.
It's objectively false on numerous points.
December 7, 2025 at 10:42 PM
Stop. Sharing. This.
It's objectively false on numerous points.
It's objectively false on numerous points.
"Allowed", as if it would have prevented Fox News from existing had it remained.
December 7, 2025 at 10:41 PM
"Allowed", as if it would have prevented Fox News from existing had it remained.
This one's confused.
December 4, 2025 at 8:39 PM
This one's confused.
Speaking of bad Fairness Doctrine takes combined with unconstitutional suggestions......
December 4, 2025 at 5:40 PM
Speaking of bad Fairness Doctrine takes combined with unconstitutional suggestions......
The Fairness Doctrine never did this in the 1st place, and this suggestion is obviously unconstitutional.
December 4, 2025 at 5:39 PM
The Fairness Doctrine never did this in the 1st place, and this suggestion is obviously unconstitutional.
Siri, what is a "FCC News License"?
December 4, 2025 at 2:03 AM
Siri, what is a "FCC News License"?
The Fairness Doctrine had nothing to do with media consolidation
December 4, 2025 at 12:46 AM
The Fairness Doctrine had nothing to do with media consolidation
Oh the irony.
(Sure, Confusion-ist, you blocked me, but there are ways around that to mock your bullshit FCC posts)
(Sure, Confusion-ist, you blocked me, but there are ways around that to mock your bullshit FCC posts)
December 3, 2025 at 11:14 PM
Oh the irony.
(Sure, Confusion-ist, you blocked me, but there are ways around that to mock your bullshit FCC posts)
(Sure, Confusion-ist, you blocked me, but there are ways around that to mock your bullshit FCC posts)
An old narrative with a slightly new twist.
December 3, 2025 at 11:11 PM
An old narrative with a slightly new twist.
