Current Events — HabitableZone

Current Events » in reply to An alternative view, by Mitch Albom

Oh Yes We Do
Mark Eby — (archived)

RE: "as long as the performers maintain their professional demeanor at the time and place of the performance."

Just to be clear I'm not quoting the phase below out of context, you can't garauntee professional behavior on the part of hollywood types. There are many instances of them spouting political statements at what were considered inappropriate times not to mention showing up drunk or stoned for public appearences. Adding contract clauses limiting speech on political topics would be a clearer limitation on free speech than simply not hiring them on the basis of being a poor draw as discussed below.

RE: "We don't have the right to censor public performances based on our personal disagreement with the personal views of some of the principle performers,

Please tell me where you find a legal basis for limiting American's right to exercise the power of their pocket book to express displeasure. This is a time honored tradition in America. Event sponsors select their speakers based on public appeal. If a celebrity diminishes his or her public appeal by taking an unpopular public stance they should not expect to be insulated from their actions. They have more access to the media than the average American but more exposure too. I find it extremely self centered to expect to take advantage of celebrity to promote a cause, but expect no consequence to your celebrity status if the public doesn't like what you have to say. Truly principled people are willing to take risks of loosing public support when taking public stances. Both Bush and Blair were willing to put their carreers on the line, but their Hollywood critics are not.

Regards,
Mark

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (47 posts)