Posts Tagged ‘celebrities’

A ban on airbrushing?

Jameela Jamil (“The Good Place”) wants to ban airbrushing in magazines and advertisements, warning BBC readers that, “If you buy the products airbrushing is used to advertise, you won’t look like the person in the photograph.”

“If this comes as a surprise to you, please exercise caution before stepping out of doors or in front of a mirror,” I reply in my new op-ed in southern California newspapers. “Here in the land of liberty, fortunately, we recognize that to ban display of someone’s airbrushed image even if they’re fine with the idea would constitute a trifecta of coercion, stomping on personal autonomy, freedom to contract with others, and freedom of the press.” Read it here.

P.S. Review of General Psychology paper on media and body image here, and related.

Claire Berlinski on #MeToo

Veteran journalist Claire Berlinski has a contrarian warning regarding the #MeToo momentum on sexual harassment and assault: “Revolutions against real injustice have a tendency, however, to descend into paroxysms of vengeance that descend upon guilty and innocent alike. We’re getting too close.” [The American Interest] Related, Emily Yoffe on the workplace and the Title IX example [Politico]

October 4 roundup

“New York does not have a chronic celebrity shortage that warrants rushed and careless legislation”

“The right of publicity is an offshoot of state privacy law that gives a person the right to limit the public use of her name, likeness, or identity for commercial purposes….Since the right of publicity can impact a huge range of speech, any changes to the law should be considered carefully.” But an Assembly bill in New York is being moved forward without much discussion that “would dramatically expand New York’s right of publicity, making it a property right that can be passed on to your heirs – even if you aren’t a New York resident.” [Daniel Nazer, EFF] Compare another piece of legislation intended to protect celebrities’ interests yet not well thought out, California’s recently enacted restrictions on the sale of signed memorabilia.

Free speech roundup

  • Until late night talker Stephen Colbert became a target, many people didn’t realize the FCC looks into every complaint of on-air obscenity. Time to revisit that practice? [Amy B. Wang and Callum Borchers, Washington Post; Volokh]
  • First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams on his new book, The Soul of the First Amendment [Cato podcast, panel discussion with Abrams, Ronald Collins, and Ilya Shapiro, Roger Pilon moderating]
  • Worth a read: promote legal liability for speech and watch it come back to bite you, time and again [Jason Harrow, Take Care Blog on purported incitement by President Trump at his rallies]
  • Irish blasphemy investigation of comedian/actor Stephen Fry, though quickly dropped, prompts major political parties in New Zealand to pledge repeal of that nation’s blasphemy law [Independent, U.K.]
  • Singing legend Joan Baez on letting the other side have its say [Facebook post]
  • On the Macron email dump shortly before the French election, Will Saletan: “All advocates of limits on campaign speech should think about this: Law-abiders can’t respond, so lawbreakers have the field to themselves.”

November 2 roundup

  • Clarence Thomas completes a quarter century of distinguished service on the Supreme Court, not that certain journalists will ever see past their loathing [Adam White, Weekly Standard; Ann Althouse]
  • Hollywood actor’s lawsuit-related vengefulness against anonymous Twitter troll endures past death [Mike Masnick]
  • United Nations panel: U.S. owes racial reparations [PBS]
  • “Yesterday’s Antitrust Laws Can’t Solve Today’s Problems” [Tyler Cowen]
  • “As a gay man, I’m horrified that Christian bakers are being forced to surrender their beliefs” [Neil Midgley, Telegraph on ruling by Belfast, Northern Ireland court of appeal]
  • Another review of Naomi Schaefer Riley’s new book, The New Trail of Tears: How Washington Is Destroying American Indians [W. B. Allen, earlier] ABA Journal covers ongoing controversy over Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) [earlier]

For Prince’s name, perpetual posthumous protection?

In the aftermath of Prince’s death, lawyers representing the entertainer’s estate administrator have been pushing a posthumous right of publicity law in Minnesota. The proposed PRINCE Act (“Personal Rights In Names Can Endure”) would forbid the use of an individual’s name “in any medium in any manner” without consent, which critics say makes it a rare instance of a law that actually violates itself. [David Post/Volokh, Jacob Gershman/WSJ Law Blog]

“Texas teen Ahmed Mohamed seeks $15 million for homemade clock incident”

“Ahmed Mohamed, the Irving teenager who made national news after he was suspended for bringing a clock to school, is seeking $15 million in damages from the city of Irving and the Irving school district.” After the handcuffing incident in September, in which public opinion sided strongly with the youngster, he was widely praised for his interest in science, appeared on Good Morning America and was invited to the White House; his lawyers now say, however, that Mohamed’s “reputation in the global community is permanently scarred.” [Sacramento Bee via Sam Ro (“Now you know for sure he’s an American.”)]