« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Shouldn’t Facebook Provide Equal Time?

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  April 26th, 2011 at 12:00 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Just last Wednesday, Barack Obama held a townhall meeting online at Facebook. It drew lots of publicity and was hailed as a campaign event. Heck, it clearly was all about Barack Obama’s re-election.

We know Facebook leans left. We know Mark Zuckerberg is happy to be taxed more. But what of the Facebook community? They aren’t all lefties.

When the GOP has a nominee, Facebook should be fair and give the GOP nominee equal time. Our sister site Human Events has a petition up that you can sign and ask Facebook for equal time.

————-

UPDATE: Judging by the comments, some people have a literacy problem. The operative word in this post is should. The operative phrase is ask Facebook. We’re not calling on the federal government to get involved. Equal time rules do not apply.

We simply think in the interests of fairness, Facebook should allow the Republican nominee to hold a Facebook townhall too.

Tags: ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • hrolf556

    The question comes down to who has to provide equal time.

    AM radio stations can select what they wish to broadcast. They are a business and aren’t required to provide equal time.

    Facebook is a business and can select what they wish to broadcast. Because of that, they aren’t required to provide equal time.

    I think this is a direct impact of repeal of the Fairness Doctrine.

  • romeg

    But this is one of those times.

    The last thing needed is MORE federal interference in the conduct of business.

  • izoneguy

    if it hurts conservative causes – otherwise the left will tell us to shut up and sit down.

    Let me know when Zuckerberg writes that check to the IRS.

  • acat
  • LibertarianHawk

    For one thing, people often the “Equal Time” rule (which deals with political candidates) with the “Fairness Doctrine” (which deals with issues). You seem to be doing that here.

    For another, there are no broadcast licenses involved with Facebook — which was always the FCC’s hook in enforcing these regulations.

    And, lastly, I read Erick as saying that Facebook *should* offer equal time to a Republican candidate of their own volition….not that they are, or should be, compelled by law to do so.

  • johnt

    be fair, not FB must be made or coerced into being fair, which if that did happen, would have nothing to do with fairness, but only Govt regs.
    I for one am quite happy the Fairness Doctrine is as dead as Obama’s brain, the contrary implications should make one’s blood run cold, sort of like having Jack the Ripper over for dinner.

  • Aaron Gardner
  • erp617

    It’s truly scary when even those on our side show they’ve bought into the concept of collectivism. Equal time is only for public entities. Private companies like Facebook can and should do whatever they want.

    Remember, it’s only equality of opportunity that is birthright of every American, not equality of outcome.

    Are those on left slezoids? Yes, without question. Will they be first to go under Islamism or Socialism? Again, yes without question. Should be let it happen to prove it. No, no no.

  • hrolf556

    I was equating the two together and he did say “should”. Those are good points. It all comes down to a business and the target market for that business.

    AM stations, by a large percentage, broadcast conservative programs vs. liberal programs. I know, from purchasing radio ads, that AM radio tends to have an older audience.

    I found a 2010 poll (couldn’t find a more recent one) that showed 63% of all facebook users were under 34. 40% were under 25 years old. I couldn’t find any polls(does anyone have any) that showed the political split between age groups.

    The old adage is the younger you are the more liberal you are so Facebook is targeting their demographic sweet spot. It is all about eyeballs, page views, stickiness and audience engagement for Facebook. Their audience tends to be younger and probably more liberal.

    Don’t forget Facebook did provide a platform for when Bush 2 was promoting his book. I would guess they will probably do the same for the Republican nominee.

    Sorry I didn’t add a link to the poll…I didn’t know if that was allowed.

  • LibertarianHawk

    Facebook is a private business and — being that we are, by and large, conservatives here — I think most here respect that and all that comes with it.

    I’m not sure I totally agree with Erick’s point. It sounds whiny to me — which is much the same as lefties and AM talk radio.

    Still, all he’s saying is that Facebook should, as a business decision (being that they have a lot of conservative users), make a similar provision for the Republican nominee. If they don’t want to, that’s their prerogative.

    I just don’t want us confusing this petition with the notion of some federally-enforced regulation. That’s what Democrats do, not us.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Why is it that libertarians have such atrophied concept of community and private action, that they’re projecting on you a call for state action?

  • romeg

    under terms and conditions acceptable to the opposition (us), that is totally up to them. Whether or not we think they should do so is of consequence only to the point that Zuckerburg et al can be persuaded to go along with us.

    Obama IS the Democrat Candidate and will be their nominee. He has a very large draw and following. That is good for Facebook. When we have a candidate that can generate the kind of numbers that Obama does, then Zuckerburg will have to think about that.

    As Libertarianhawk observes, why whine about it if they won’t let us play in their sandbox. It only makes us look weak just as their whining about access to the AM airwaves makes them look like crybabies.

    IOW, what’s the point of filing some sort of petition? It seem like an enormous waste of time and resources to make ourselves look, frankly, silly.

    If moral suasion is the approach to use then make every effort to make Facebook look bad, biased or whatever. But don’t expect to get much mileage out of that. For the moment, they have a lock on the social network niche and unless Zuckerburg can be persuaded to a conservative/libertarian POV, efforts to embarrass him will only embarrass us.

  • hrolf556

    The proper term is “He is the Democratic Candidate” not “Democrat”. It would be like anyone said, “He is the Republic Candidate”

    Just an FYI.

  • http://www.erickerickson.org Erick Erickson

    I’m just saying Facebook should of its own volition do it.

  • Aaron Gardner

    Let’s just cut to the chase… you admit you were wrong and we can just move on.

  • Aaron Gardner
  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    What Aaron said.

  • frankmac

    The “ic” added to Democrat was done only after Obama took office. His regime is obviously trying to give people the idea that he stands for democratic ideals when in fact he is a socialist. Democrat candidate is the correct term!

  • romeg

    They call themselves “Democrats”, not “Democratics”.

    Democratic is an adjective that does not pertain, in any way, to that cabal of communists and socialists.

    I am a Republican. I am a member of the Republican Party.

  • romeg

    They are a private entity and can do as they wish. Any whining we engage in is exactly that.

  • Aaron Gardner
  • olsmithie
  • rogershru2

    Libertarians, your Objectivism is showing. Like Erick is pointing out, it’s ok to make judgments about behavior and morality, without appealing to government as the judge.

  • davidleigh

    Who cares about facebook! I’m serious, who cares! I hope the republican nominee–which is most likely going to be Romney–snubs the dweeb Zuckerman. And, I pray Romeny snubs Oprah’s new, failing channel as well. Stick to the serious media, mainly Fox News and perhaps a few other cable outlets. If you MUST go on Meet the Press with Davy Gregory, then I hope Romney–who is certainly capable of playing rough considering his lifelong success–is rapid in his defense of what his plans are–even if the media looks aghast and complains about the po l’il ole soccer moms. I would take Obama to the woodshed every single day; I would be America-first and rattle the world markets and the little dictator men running around in uniforms that America is coming back with a vengence and no apologies –and no bowing for cripes sakes! We need a man in the White House: no woman, no Obama! I mean it. No more metro-sexuals! Our nominee doesn’t need to kiss a 14 year old’s rear-in, that means no Facebook.

  • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

    Good luck with that…

  • jimc1969

    If they won’t, I’m sure myspace wiill !!!

    And since FB, probably doesn’t want people using myspace, it would be in there best interest to allow it…..

  • jimc1969

    If they won’t, I’m sure myspace wiill !!!

    And since FB, probably doesn’t want people using myspace, it would be in there best interest to allow it…..

  • jimc1969

    I recently read that over 1/2 of Americans who are 14 ( or maybe it was 13 ? ) or over are on FB, so its NOT just the kiddies.
    Heck, I know people in there late 30′s and early 40′s that practically LIVE on FB.

  • jimc1969

    I recently read that over 1/2 of Americans who are 14 ( or maybe it was 13 ? ) or over are on FB, so its NOT just the kiddies.
    Heck, I know people in there late 30′s and early 40′s that practically LIVE on FB.

  • jimc1969

    Though, I fully agree with you about Oprah !!!

  • jimc1969

    Though, I fully agree with you about Oprah !!!

  • romeg

    to WANT to do it.

    I’m not much on protests or demonstrations or petition drives except when the target of those actions is the government. Rather than trying to shame someone into an action that you desire, make them look foolish for even thinking about NOT including you in their plans.

  • romeg

    Why don’t you?

  • Aaron Gardner
  • nedescon

    Literacy problem?..I believe it is a cognitive problem….

  • http://www.voteforteri2010.com teridavisnewman

    God forbid Mark Zuckerberg should deter from the liberal creed which as we all know is:
    1. The rules do not apply to us.
    2. The end justifies the means.
    3. Do as we say, not as we do.
    If he were to appear fair and impartial then he would lose his “cool” and everyone knows how important it is for Zuckerberg to be an icon of “cool” since if it weren’t for Facebook, he’d be just another pocket-protector-wearing nerd who couldn’t get a date and who would never have had sex without money changing hands.

  • qurys

    Its obvious from reading the replies why we can’t get much done in government. What is the difference between “could” and “should” and “must”. What is the difference between the fairness doctrine and equal time? What is the difference between Democratic and Democrat? What is the impact of facebook on our society? Is there any impact? Do we care? Is a petition a call for government regulation? Are we in the weeds here?
    Have we so bought into the notion that the social media elected Barack Obama that we are afraid we cannot elect a conservative without their platform? Have we so forgotten how to talk to a neighbor and try to convince them of our conservative beliefs in a conservative candidate that we turn the job over to Mark Zuckerberg? If each and every one of us sat down face to face with one other person and spent the “equal time” that we spend on facebook or twitter – and attempted to convince them of our positions and our candidate, we would win. We would not convince all of them, but we would win.

  • Common_Cents

    It’s not the only one, but it is important and will continue to be.

    Your argument is like saying why do we need automobiles when we got horses?

    Social media is very important and should be embraced early on by GOP.

    Not kiss butt to FB but leverage it as a communication tool. Pressure it if need be to have equal time. Nothing wrong with that.

  • djvu

    you are on a slippery path. Yes there is a legal difference between the Fairness Doctrine and equal time but do you recall how the camel got into the tent? It WOULD BE NICE if FB gave us equal time without our asking THEM. Oh, they didn”t offer? Let’s JUST ASK them. What? They said no! Let’s MOUNT A PETITION. No again? Let’s find someone who can put PRESSURE ON THEM. What no again? Let’s find someone who CAN ORDER them to give us equal time. I KNOW who that is. Voila! EQUAL TIME DOCTRINE. How will you defend your stand against the Fairness Doctrine when all you are doing is ASKING – in the beginning – for the same thing?
    Robert Palmer Smith

  • YnotNOW

    that you acuse Eric of sliding down. Don’t you trust Conservatives to stick to conservative principles when fighting for conservatives?

  • YnotNOW

    that you acuse Eric of sliding down. Don’t you trust Conservatives to stick to conservative principles when fighting for conservatives?

  • YnotNOW

    that is an activist blog.

  • YnotNOW

    that is an activist blog.

  • djvu

    Thanks YnotNOW for your comment. I, too, feel that we can trust REAL conservatives. Your question of trust is what concerned me. Had I read Daily Events this morning before posting my comments about a slippery path ( you are correct – the word is ‘slope’ ) I would have been able to insert two more examples of my concern.
    Mr. Adam Tragone, managing editor of Daily Events, has used the expression, “Hold FaceBook accountable.” HOLD them accountable for what? And Human Events in their petiton is using the word DEMAND. Based on these two words I am going to DEMAND that my neighbor allow me to use his lawn mower to cut my grass and HOLD him accountable to do so.

  • djvu

    that my comment title in the above reply to YnotNOW didn’t in any way infer that Erick, Tragone and Human Events are not REAL conservatives. What concerns me – again am I repeating myself – is that Face Book is owned by Zuckerberg, just as my neighbor’s lawn mower is owned by my neighbor, and we conservatives have no right what so ever of DEMANDING that he give us equal time of the use of his property.
    My fear is that since we have no presidential candidate that we can all really support heart and soul (read Reagan) we are groping in the dark for means to combat what , at the outset, appears to be a successful start of the Democratic campaign to reelect the most destructive president our Republic has ever known.
    Robert Palmer Smith author of DARKEST TRUTHS OF BLACK GOLD in which I catagorically deny that the Democratic liberals have any basis in their philosophy that should allow them to have control of our government.