The Death of the Fairness Doctrine

The abuses by the media as a result.

The Fairness Doctrine was eliminated in 1987 by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) under President Ronald Reagan's administration.

• The Fairness Doctrine, established in 1949, required broadcasters to present controversial issues of public importance in a balanced and fair manner.

• The Reagan-appointed FCC, led by Chairman Dennis Patrick, repealed the doctrine on August 4, 1987, arguing that it violated First Amendment rights and was no longer necessary due to the increasing number of media outlets.

• Congress attempted to codify the doctrine into law, but Reagan vetoed the legislation.

The repeal is cited as a major factor in the rise of politically polarized media, particularly the explosion of conservative talk radio and right-wing news outlets like Fox News. The end of the Doctrine has profound effects on information dissemination, mainly captured in the rise of conservative media figures and strategic use of media by the GOP to spread misinformation.

Basically, the Fairness Doctrine did these things. It required all broadcasters to air both sides of an issue, thus preventing the overshadowing of a different view, and in effect, gave rise to a media environment with many different views. The public could more consistently absorb information and make sound decisions without standing in a one-side echo chamber of biased information.

The damaging effects we see today are an almost direct consequence of the deregulation that repealing the Fairness Doctrine was supposed to foster. Without a call for balanced views, the media have increasingly served their so-called niche audiences, often at the cost of objectivity, using sensationalism and bias rather than fact-based reporting. Conservative commentators have taken unrestricted advantage of this deregulated environment. Figures such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Tucker Carlson, and Joe Rogan have turned into household names with massive followings based on what tends to be inflammatory and often divisive rhetoric.

Equally troubling, these public figures have made a lot of money selling extremely biased and even, at times, factually incorrect information, strengthening what should be called the mother of all problems, confirmatory bias. What is perhaps most frightening about all of this is the proliferation of obvious lies. Conservative media have been unhindered by neither the necessity nor the desire to showcase views from both sides of the aisle and, as a result, are purveyors of flatly false misinformation and conspiracy theories.

This trend was quite apparent during the 2016, 2020, and 2024 presidential elections when they made unproven claims of election fraud with no credible evidence. Such misinformation has real-world consequences, including erosion of public trust in democratic institutions and increased political polarization. The Republican Party has skillfully worked the current media landscape to its favor. Aligning with influential conservative media figures, the party has been able to frame public discourse and activate its base. This symbiotic relationship has meant the GOP is free to promulgate its message almost at will, often outside traditional media scrutiny.

The Covid-19 pandemic is just one example in a series of instances indicating that a lack of the Fairness Doctrine fueled mass misinformation. Conservative media outlets and commentators, at the beginning of and throughout the pandemic, downplayed the disease and pushed untested treatments while casting all kinds of suspicion on the efficacy of vaccines. These media outlets and commentators created critical and deadly public health consequences, fostering vaccine hesitancy and undermining efforts to gain control over the virus.

As if the negative effects above aren’t enough, the erosion of a balanced media environment seriously affects democracy. Properly functioning democracies require well-informed electorates—in its absence, misinformation stands to violate this very principle. The more often important sections of the population are misguided over crucial matters, the further away from consensus and well-informed choices the country will move.

In the end, a holistic approach is needed to meet this challenge. In a modern capacity, the spirit of the Fairness Doctrine must realign media to show many positions. Media literacy is needed to prepare citizens to be critical about where and how they are sourcing their information. Social media platforms must be responsible in helping limit this spread by being stronger in fact-checking and moderating content.

The practice of journalism makes the journalism landscape one that will have to adapt. Investigative journalism and fact-checking should reach a magnitude greater than ever to counter disinformation and turn the tide against the damage already done. News organizations should set high standards in terms of accuracy and impartiality in providing the public with credible information and in holding others to account who spread untruths. Sadly, we know this won’t happen as long as right leaning billionaires own too much of the media.

We see the costs of losing the Fairness Doctrine. Reinstating it and demanding more fairness from media outlets and commentators could slow the inflow of misinformation and lies. Only a joint effort from policymakers, media organizations, and demands from the public can make this a reality.

To recount and summarize, the farthest-reaching consequence was the revocation of the Fairness Doctrine, which enabled conservative commentators and the Republicans to lie on air without being questioned and even without being held accountable. This has brought about a loss of public trust in the media, democratic institutions, and politicized politics, thus weakening the public ability to make informed decisions. America needs reform that eventually creates a return to a balanced and accurate media environment. Such reforms should reinstate the balanced value of public discourse and of American democracy.