I don’t trust the government to determine what is “fair” or “equal”— right now MSM already thinks they’re doing debates justice by having the NRA to discuss the pro-gun stance instead of having anyone with actual authority (and no financial interest) in the matter on to make it a productive conversation. It would be easy to find public policy representatives on both sides, but until they start being interested in that, I don’t need more opinions being spouted as “fair” to present to the public who’s trying to educate themselves and trusting the media that if an option/side is presented it’s a valid side, which they’re failing to do. Besides, the two political sides might differ on something because one legitimately just refuses to acknowledge facts (climate change, Ukraine phone call...), is presenting that as a reasonable stance to take just condones the weird group delusions that are taking place partially because the media is already too soft on the side that’s crying victim. Multiple studies have debunked the idea that the media is unfair to the right— if anything, they’ve coddled them so hard that the public no longer knows how to look at information as information and instead have to view it in partisan terms. Facts aren’t liberal, so the MSM has to stop apologizing for the people who are hurt by facts and tell them if they don’t like it, then they can change. But they don’t need ANY more coddling or easily-twisted rules to further dictate how to fragment our discourse here.