How in the world could something like that ever work today? For one thing, it presupposed that every issue could be addressed and represented by a small, finite number of "sides." For another, it justified its infringement of the First Amendment by limiting itself to over-the-air broadcast media, where the courts agreed that it was necessary for the FCC to manage a scarce public resource (spectrum) for the common good.

The first of those rationales was not valid then, and certainly isn't now.

And the second rationale wouldn't apply to anything but public airwaves... unless your idea of healthy regulation is to mandate the present administration's idea of "fairness" in print, cable media, and the Internet.

No, thanks. The Fairness Doctrine wasn't fair, and it wasn't a workable doctrine.