To be honest, the fairness doctrine mostly meant that:
1. Every issue had exactly two sides (same as current dogma).
2. Every "bad" take from the "wrong" side would be aired to nobody, in the middle of the night.
It was a political weapon just as much as removing it was a political weapon.
Way back then there tended to be the same news, more or less, on every channel. Sure, you might prefer or avoid Walter Cronkite's "unhinged" op-eds on Vietnam, but that was about as different as it got.
1. Every issue had exactly two sides (same as current dogma).
2. Every "bad" take from the "wrong" side would be aired to nobody, in the middle of the night.
It was a political weapon just as much as removing it was a political weapon.
Way back then there tended to be the same news, more or less, on every channel. Sure, you might prefer or avoid Walter Cronkite's "unhinged" op-eds on Vietnam, but that was about as different as it got.
Here's a liberal view of Cronkite: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCdXVWsTpSM