The FCC Needs to Regulate Airwave Bullshit Using a 25% Rule
Many of us know about Ronald Reagan’s 1987 repeal of the 1949 FCC “Fairness Doctrine”, and some are old enough to remember that this was the end of things like the 60 Minutes “Point/Counterpoint” debates. Clearly though, a high percentage of news commentary has become dishonest bullshit intended to inflate emotions and make money. If this logic were applied to medical advertising, the FDA might allow Pfizer to claim that Advil cures cancer or increases sexual performance (without evidence). Here then, is a simple solution that requires at least 25% of certifiable substance as a precursor to any news commentary, thereby not allowing fake “fire!” alarms and preserving our First Amendment…you heard it here first!
Its November 2022, the Democrats have held the House and Senate, and another failed riot ensues at the Capital. Tucker Carlson claims that indeed the voting machines were rigged, and the riots were another Antifa “false flag” operation. But wait! This time, Carlson’s show is cancelled because of a new FCC law passed six months earlier saying that any news commentary “opinion” had to be backed by at least 25% certifiable fact. Those seeing the law coming (like Sean Hannity) began waiting a week or so to find poll workers that might have actually witnessed irregularities and made sworn statements (under penalty of perjury). They might also have searched for similar sworn statements from alleged Antifa members agitating protests. Perhaps finding only 5% verification of said statements, and being under pressure from his bosses, Hannity might’ve begun using safer language during his broadcasts such as “there is some small evidence of voting irregularities and Antifa false flag operations”, not wanting the FCC to pull the plug (or to face lawsuits). Carlson meanwhile, being defiant and having no filters, would be fired and perhaps relegated to broadcasting offshore (or wherever he was beyond the reach of the FCC). How would this work exactly with other layers of broadcast “bullshit”? Glad you asked!
Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin-Hey, it’s a free country and we’re not going to stop selling you Clorox even though idiot Trump implies that you should inject it to ward off Covid-19. The difference would be that any kind of news commentary (and this would extend to the President and other politicians) would have to substantiate at least 25% of the accuracy of their statements…a pretty low bar, actually. So for Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin, a news provocateur would have to wait 6 months for some kind of minimal clinical trial thing, where at least 25% of Covid patients were certifiably relieved or cured of symptoms. Right wing news nuts would scream “What?!! Wait 6 months and invest in a study?!!!” to which the FCC would reply “Exactly”. Problem solved.
School Shooting “False Flag” Allegations: Alex Jones would have to produce family members of shooting victims (at least 25%) willing to testify, under oath, that their family members took acting lessons prior to the tragic event, or else he’s done. Actually, the recent lawsuit won by family members was an even better solution, except it took a long time.
Alleged Antifa “False Flag”-Of course, good luck Fox News, finding sworn statements from 25% in Capitol riots (or anything else that makes the right wing look bad) claiming to be Antifa. But that won’t stop right-wing trouble makers. They will likely pay some rioters to join a complicit, soundalike club called “Anbeefa” (as in “Oh yeah, and we’re just a bunch of gun-toting white guys that like beef”) to skirt the rules.
“Stolen Elections” and “Voting Irregularities”-This has also been somewhat resolved by the Dominion lawsuits, but it’s a slow process. If the FCC 25% rule was in place, even news commentators would only be allowed to say things like “there are currently investigations into as yet unsubstantiated allegations of voter fraud”. The news would be on the sidelines, as they should be.
Political Campaigns-This is where it gets interesting. If politicians campaigning were considered an element of “news”, they too would be held liable for bullshit (as defined by the 25% rule). So if Trump wanted to claim that Ted Cruz’s father was part of the Kennedy assassination plot, he’d need 25% verification or face steep fines by the FCC. Of course this would also serve to inform the public that Trump was full of shit altogether, and essentially a “National Enquirer” politician. And while we’re at it, why couldn’t the National Enquirer be subject to the 25% rule, which might lead to headlines such as “Enquirer Investigations Continue into Alleged Elvis Alien Abductions”.
“Dr. Fauci is Worse than a Nazi Death Camp’s Dr. Mengele because he wants us to wear masks and get Covid Shots”-Any news commentator, such as Lara Logan, would have to get sworn statements from over 25% of survivors on Nazi Death Camps, testifying to the veracity that masks and shots are in fact worse than forced labor, gas chambers, and animal experiments (note: my father spent a year in a WWII Nazi prison camp and he probably would have punched Logan, Taylor-Greene, whomever in the mouth if they weren’t “girls”)
Marjorie Taylor-Greene-As long as we’re on the subject, Taylor-Greene may never get to say anything after the 25% rule is in place. For starters, she’d have to get 25% of space laser manufacturers to testify to the fact that at least 25% of their workforce were California-hating Jewish pyromaniacs with ill-intent. Good luck with all that.
Trump Allegations that Mexicans are Drug Dealers, Criminals and Rapists-Would the rule say that an aggregate of Mexicans amounting to 25% would have to be certifiably drug dealers, criminals, and rapists? Sorry Trump, no. You would have to certify 25% for each category. Since Mexico’s current population is 128.9 million, and some research reveals 1,962 cases of rape (<0.002%), 6,635 cases of drug dealing (0.005%), and crimes of all types 73,462 (<0.06%), even with substantial under-reporting you might say that the FCC would pull the plug on Trump, make him pay a substantial fine, along with 1,000 hours of community service in the barrios of Mexico City. (worldpopulationreview.com, 2021),(https://www.statista.com/statistics/982523/crimes-number-mexico-type/, 2021)
Allegations that White People are as Oppressed as Minorities-To substantiate this one, you might have to invent something like an “oppresso-meter” that actually measured one’s level of oppression. This meter might also have to divide “Opportunity Lost” by “Overall Opportunity”. Since it would be hard to invent such a device, the next best thing might be to select 500 white people and 500 black people at random, and look at their tax returns. If the average of the black people’s tax returns were 25% higher than the average of the white people’s returns, then Tucker Carlson could go ahead and make his pronouncement (haha good luck Tucker…how’s the signal strength of your new offshore broadcasts from…the Seychelle Islands?)