I'd disagree. The fairness doctrine was doing quite well until Regan got rid of it.
Things went downhill since.
I recall things differently. The Fairness Doctrine imposed
a requirement to air opposing views, which was a disincentive
to air view which had opposition because it cost air time.
This made things more circumspect than I like.
But it's moot because it wouldn't apply to the internet.
Some could argue that it should, but they'd never get their
way because there's no broadcast license to hold over
the heads of sources.
Today we get more news than before.
It's faster, it's better, & it's less censored.
It's rushed, it's worse, it's more faux, & it's echo chamber-ogenic.
We gotta be careful consumers.