My name is Alvaro Alvillar and I just put out a YouTube video titled "A Call to Artists" in which I ask my fellow artists to stand up against liberal politicians, the main stream media and their attempts to strip away our freedoms. Mr. Andrew Breitbart of breitbart.com picked up the story, why is talk radio, the people I'm trying to reach, ignoring the help and consequently, the possibilities?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyatlyQuNbs&feature=channel_page

Apparently, conservative talk shows are unaware of the presence of anything other then self loathing, anti-American artists, at least that's been my listening experience. I'm sure a lot of artists would step up if they knew they weren't alone.
We are here and it's a pretty lonely place! We could use just a little of the time you devote to art and artists you guys don't like. Believe me, I understand why that gets all the press, but maybe you could take three minutes and watch my video and help us help you by spreading the word. We're in this together, we can make a difference. I thank you for your hard work and I am trying my best to help.

Thank you, Alvaro

for another artists perspective, click link below

http://www.modernconservative.com/metablog_single.php?p=2894

If some gay,black, or minority owned a "conservative talk" radio outlet would it be still attacked by nancy p's crowd? Might be interesting for some conservative money guys to get a gay or black conservative to front or a owner partnership for a broadcast venture.Would they dare attack it? If I had the money it might be worthwhile,but then trying to teach these politicians lessons on how a free market business works is about as logical as smashing your head against a wall because it feels so good when you stop.

If it seems that only "conservative" media is to be effected then we must figure out what defines diverse. Looking at mainstream media broadcast the only thing that defines them as diverse and unbias is that they claim they are. Therefore all conservative media has to do is also claim to be diverse and unbias. The burden of proof would be up to the law to prove otherwise.This would set a standard,spelled out, that ALL broadcast media would have to adhere to. ABC,NBC,PMSNBC,PBS,CNN and other leftist media would have a hissy fit trying to adjust. Internet could be next.Imagine Daily Kos or moveon.com having to service opinions other than their rabid drivel.This could be very entertaining.

Hey Nancy. Want diversity? Come down to Florida and listen to FM sometime. Now try to find something that isn't hiphop, rap, or something in between. Rock and anything "other" are few and far between.

Any requirements for allowing dissenting voices are a waste of legislation and oversight. The media outlets of TV, radio, and newspapers are privately owned, and can choose what they want to publish. All of these outlets run on advertising dollars, and those companies don't like the format, they take their money elsewhere. There's also a more simple method for those who disagree: Change the channel.

"In Amerika, TV watches you!"

LiberalHater,

...and Nancy Pelosi, Obama Claus, Barney Frank, etc.

I am strongly opposed to any restoration of the Fairness Doctrine as a clear violation of the 1st Amendment. But in practical terms, if this congress can pass it and the SCOTUS upholds it, then let's start a movement to hoist the left by their own petard. Since 90% of the media outside of talk-radio ranges from left-liberal to somewhere to the left of Joe Stalin, we should start a massive campaign to challenge every editorial, pseudo-editorial, etc... Swamp NBC,CBS,ABC,MSNBC,CNN with Fairness Doctrine challenges.

One of the many questions that's bugging me is where are the lines drawn. Does the Fairness Doctrine apply to ALL opinions, or only those of a political nature?

In other words, will Christian radio stations be required to "balance" their playlists with Insane Clown Posse? For every hour of broadcasted sermons, will they be required to also provide an hour of lectures on secular humanism?

The Fairness Doctrine, even if it could be Constitutionally defended (which it clearly cannot), it is FAR too vague to be implemented, FAIRly.

It reminds me of Potter Stewart's criteria for hardcore pornography -- "I know it when I see it."

In order for laws to be fairly implemented, there MUST be a clearly defined set of rules to follow. Otherwise, how will we know when we have violated those laws? With the Fairness Doctrine, there can't be a clearly defined set of rules.

Then can we finally start talking about increasing the diversity of political opinion in academia? Or in newsrooms? When diversity in those places is discussed now, it refers strictly to ethnicity and the like.

Then I suggest that Nancy start a radio program and see if see can anyone to support it through contributions or advertising dollars. If it gets enough listeners, it'll stay on the air. If not, no one really cared about her message.

"After all, a fairness doctrine would mean you could finally do something about that Darn Ol' Librul Media!"

What you think and what I think of "take care of" reveals a huge difference between you and I. To me, I prefer to speak my opinion, and let others speak their own, and expose the left-wing media for the non-object fools that they are, in the arena of open debate. You just assume I want to use the aggression of government, WHICH I DON'T.

"And without it, you have NO cause to complain about left-wing bias in the news."

I can only comment about people like Keith Olbermann that project themselves as being objective, when they are anything but that. Does Rush claim to be objective? No. He says "bi-partisan" is fake, and that we should embrace our opinions openly. No one is objective, so lets just drop the more-objective-than-thou.

Brilliant!
Sounds like what has been done to our nation in celebrating our "diversity".
Why if I didn't know any better, the media is getting setup to be a victim and receive government bailout money.
To ensure diversity and make sure those advertising dollars that those stations make are "given" due to balance in content and support for the public good, they might want to just nationalize all broadcasters.

I think the radio waves are already diverse without government "help".

Use the liberal trick and sue, sue sue!!!

That's what I've learned in 20 years of working in politically correct offices.

Are nonwhites all such failed excuses for people that they constantly need a boost? When does it stop?

How long will Pelosi retain her control as Speaker? She is stretching the limits of many of her own party's leaders and if their party losses seats in 2010, look for a realignment of leadership and a move back to slightly left of the center. The question is how long is it going to take to repair the damage that will be her legacy. The late great Tip O’Neill must be spinning in his grave.

Diversity? Does this mean that only so many people can have blue as their favorite color? Or does this mean that there must be a diverse racial make-up of ownership in communication media? Perhaps it means all communication media must have owners of Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Atheist, Toaic, etc...religions beliefs. Or maybe these people form diversity: Rural and Urban, Mountain and Plains, Rich and Poor, Work-a-holic and Lazy, High-Strung and Laid-Back, Optomist and Pessimist, Communist and Capitalist, Pro-Life and Pro-Choice, Semite and Anti-Semite, Smart and Stupid, and the list goes on.

So who will be the Judge of Diversity? Dick Durbin or Nancy Pelosi?

Just what we need, another intellectually vacuous amendment.

If the democrats want diversity in the media, one should assume they will also enforce that diversity in newspapers and television programming. Think they'll be willing to give up that liberal bastion and allow conservative voices equal time? Me thinks not.

Dictatorship anyone?

Queen Bee Nancy is calling for diversity in radio station ownership? This reeks of fascism where the government controls who owns what business. This also sounds like the Opportunity Equalization Bill. I do believe that Atlas Shrugged is starting to come true. Where is John Galt?