The Specter of Red Lion

In these post-Watergate days, the American public is much less likely than before to be shocked by exposés of what goes on in government. Hence Fred Friendly’s recent disclosure of how the Kennedy and Johnson administrations covertly abused the “fairness doctrine” did not cause nearly the stir it might have previously. Here is a wrong that lay uninvestigated for more than a decade. But late is better than never, and we thank the Columbia journalism professor and former CBS News president for bringing the matter into the open.

Friendly tells in a forthcoming book, from which an article was adapted that appeared in the March 30 issue of the New York Times Magazine, how Kennedy and Johnson aides exploited the fairness doctrine to serve their political purposes. Their targets were right-wing radio commentators such as the fundamentalist preacher the Reverend Billy James Hargis, whom they regarded as a threat at the ballot boxes. Some of these victims have cried long and loud of conspiracy in the White House, and virtually no one but their own bands of supporters took them seriously. Friendly now enables them to say, “I told you so.”

The case which occasioned the Supreme Court decision upholding the fairness doctrine grew out of the refusal of the Reverend John M. Norris, owner of a Christian radio station in Red Lion, Pennsylvania, to bow to demands that a Hargis foe be given free time. Apparently unknown to Norris, who died last year at the age of 91, or to the Federal Communications Commission, or to the courts was the fact that the complaints originated with the Democratic National Committee (which, it turns out, also financed a book against Barry Goldwater à la Rockefeller-Goldberg-Lasky) and were part of a Johnson administration campaign. According to Friendly, this was a continuation of an organized pattern of harassment begun under President Kennedy. The presumption in what has become known as the Red Lion case, which produced the landmark decision on the fairness doctrine, was that a maligned private citizen was simply seeking redress.

The fairness doctrine is a principle expressed in a number of FCC rulings over the years. It requires broadcasters to present all significant sides in dealing with important public issues. The reason is that the number of broadcast frequencies is limited (this is in contrast to, say, newspapers, the number of which is theoretically unlimited), as are the hours in the day in which they can be used. Therefore, unless care is taken to apportion use of the airwaves to differing viewpoints, some side will monopolize them, and the public will be deprived of valuable information that the controlling interests choose to withhold.

The necessity of care becomes more apparent when one stops to consider the popularity of television and radio. These media have a powerful influence on the minds of millions, for good or for bad. Luther used the advent of printing to pull off the Protestant Reformation. Hitler exploited the novelty of radio to whip up the masses into a political frenzy. Each medium had its limitations, as does television, and one never knows when a particular medium is at the height of its potential (today, neither Luther nor Hitler would have had a fraction of the same impact with his chosen medium, other things being equal).

The United States now has well over 100 million televisions sets, alone, some 36 per cent of the world total. There are more than a billion television and radio sets in use throughout the world. The United States has some 7,400 radio stations, more than half the world total, and more than 900 television stations. About 40 per cent of U. S. television homes can get no more than six channels, however. Cable TV promises to make more stations available, but its progress has been slow.

In 1967, the FCC expanded and implemented the fairness doctrine by issuing the “personal attack” rule. Under this stipulation, a radio station is obliged to advise people who were criticized in broadcasts that they have a right to reply. The intent is to “insure elemental fairness.” All radio and television stations in the United States operate legally only under licenses granted by the FCC and subject to periodic review (and revocation). A station owner faces the risk of losing his license if he disobeys the new rule. But policing broadcasts and notifying those critcized can be costly and cumbersome.

The easier way is to get rid of programs that abound in attacks. Free speech, regrettably, is the loser.

CHRISTIANITY TODAY in 1967 called on the courts to nullify the “personal attack” ruling. The attention now should focus, however, not upon the merits of the fairness doctrine but upon how to keep government power from misusing it.

Slower Speed Saves

Last summer we noted editorially that the lower speed limit of fifty-five miles per hour saves lives (see July 26 issue, page 24). New statistics have reinforced this fact. The Department of Transportation estimates that about 45,000 people were killed in traffic accidents last year, compared with 55,100 in 1973—a reduction of 18 per cent. As the traveling season approaches we want to remind our readers again to think as Christians while driving. Obey speed limits and drive courteously. That not only conserves energy but also conserves lives. And concern for lives is part of what being a Christian means.

For Better Tv

Members of the television industry either lack imagination and good taste or else are convinced that television audiences have neither. Perhaps both are true.

This season, made-for-TV films and others selected for TV screening have offered viewers a large amount of violence. In Cold Blood, The Godfather, and Born Innocent are only three examples. While some so-called violent films have redeeming social value—A Case of Rape is an excellent example and has already been shown twice—most murders, muggings, and rapes aired on television are there only to entertain, not to teach. Several psychiatric studies have shown how subtly detrimental viewing violence can be. Explicit brutality cannot be excused on the grounds that it is necessary to the realistic or artistic merits of the film. Greek drama, in which all violence took place off stage, and Alexander Pope’s Essay on Criticism point to a better way.

We urge readers to (1) write to television executives to complain about the amount of violence they allow; (2) write your representatives in Congress to find out what they can do or are doing about the problem; (3) write letters of commendation to those responsible for good programming both on the major networks and on public television. Supporting good television specials and series is a good way to put yourself on the side of better TV.

Another is to turn off the set when programs are less than edifying. We have a responsibility to think about pure, just, lovely, and gracious things, and to guide our children to do the same. There are other ways to be entertained, some of which could strengthen family relationships, help your children do better at school, and help them lay foundations for lifelong pleasures and interests. (Adult TV addicts might also consider what kind of foundation they are laying for a satisfying retirement.) Read aloud to your children, and with children who can read, assign reading parts in stories and plays. Encourage them to make up stories and plays, too, and to use their creative faculties in various other ways. Play games together. Listen to music. Sing together, with a piano or a recording. Local libraries often offer stimulating educational and entertaining events.

The fight against bad TV begins at home—right at the On/Off button.

All, Not Most

There are many times when God’s Word says “all” but we think and act as if it said “most,” or even “some.” Consider a few examples from the first half of Paul’s letter to the Colossians.

Paul is thankful because he has heard of the Colossians’ love for all the saints (1:4). But many Christians love only some of their fellow believers; the rest they merely tolerate, or ignore, or even actively treat in an unloving way.

Paul’s inspired petitions for the Colossians are ones we should offer for ourselves and others with the assurance that God will answer them. We should pray for all the spiritual wisdom and understanding (1:9) and for all the power and all the joyful endurance and patience (1:11) we need to enable us to lead a life pleasing in all things to him, bearing fruit in all good works (1:10). In practice most of us expect God to help us regularly, but do we really count on his guidance and strength totally?

Christians, like other people, are susceptible to fear of unknowns and of uncertainties, whether mundane or extraterrestrial. The Colossians certainly had such fears, and these fears were leading them astray both in doctrine and in behavior. Paul reassures them whatever there might be—in heaven or earth, visible or invisible—all things were created in Christ (1:16), who is before all things and in whom all things hold together (1:17). Moreover, all the fullness of God is to be found in Christ (1:19). Malevolent beings or forces are not to be feared. Nor are benevolent beings to be worshipped as if it were necessary or even possible to add to the fullness of deity that dwells bodily in Christ (2:9).

Paul stresses that all our trespasses have been forgiven because we accepted the death of the Lord Jesus Christ on our behalf (2:12, 14). It is one thing to accept this glorious truth sufficiently to effect our eternal salvation. It is another thing to accept it psychologically and emotionally so that the sins of our past do not continually trouble us, consciously or subconsciously. Not only do we have trouble fully assimilating the extent of God’s forgiveness for ourselves; we also have difficulty in relating to our fellow believers as those who, like us, have had all, not just most, of their sins forgiven.

Have something to add about this? See something we missed? Share your feedback here.