Censorship from Louisiana?

Current Events
1

After a conversation on Facebook, I’ve been concerned with a possible upcoming Louisiana State action.

 

First, a bit of context: Pat Robertson of “Duck Dynasty”, which is filmed in Louisiana and shown by the company A&E, made a remark(s) towards homosexuality. A&E then reacted and let Robertson go from the TV series, “Duck Dynasty”. Unlike what the unprincipled conservatives think, no freedom of speech was infringed upon.

 

Now, in retaliation, it seems that the State of Louisiana may revoke the filming License of A&E.

 

"The Robertsons made their statement regarding the potential future of Duck Dynasty on A&E on Friday, as did Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal, but Louisiana lieutenant governor Jay Dardenne and the Louisiana Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism may end up indefinitely revoking A&E’s filming rights for the program, as well as sister network HISTORY, which films and airs the seriesSwamp People on History, if it becomes necessary.

GMN received a potential tip earlier this evening that the @Ouachita Ouachita Parish Sheriff’s Officehas already revoked A&E’s filming rights in Ouachita Parish, but that has been neither confirmed nor denied at this hour, as OPSO has not returned a response."-GMN

 

Brian Lee I’m a bit confused. How’s the state able to intervene with a private business, A&E? Can someone please explain?

Like · Reply · 1 · about an hour ago

 

Guerilla Media Network There are implications regarding tax credits the state gives for a network to film in that state, e.g. Georgia gives tax credits for Tyler Perry’s shows and Family Feud to film there, Louisiana giving tax credits to AETN to film Duck Dynasty for A&E and Swamp People for History, etc.

If a network chooses to show the state in a negative light, the state tourism board (in this case, the Louisiana Department Culture, Recreation and Tourism (Louisiana CRT)) reserves every right to revoke or terminate tax credits and filming rights. And it impacts not just A&E. It has implications for History or any other AETN network.

Like · 7 · 46 minutes ago

Guerilla Media Network When it comes to tourism revenue, Louisiana CRT has every right to step in. They authorize the tax credits and filming rights. If any network sheds any resident, any celebrity, any community or any business in a negative light, CRT reserves every right to terminate said credits and filming rights.

Like · 7 · 28 minutes ago

Brian Lee If the State of Louisiana steps in against A&E, will this then be an act of Censorship?

Like · 1 · 24 minutes ago

 

 

Guerilla Media Network Nope, because A&E violated a clause in the Louisiana state constitution stating its citizens have the right to individual dignity and the network infringed upon that right by indefinitely suspending him.

Like · 2 · 3 minutes ago

 

Okay, my question is: If the State of Louisiana steps in to revoke the filming License will this then be an act of Censorship?

 

Is this how the relationship between State and private business work? First, a License is required from the State to do private business, film, then, if the filming company “infringes on individual dignity” they’re then targeted by the State, the very ones that first required a private business to obtain a license?

2

Of course it is censorship.

 

There is no such thing as “the right to individual dignity.” Actually, you should go and read its definition. This is how it is defined in the LA Constitution:

 

 

No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws. No law shall discriminate against a person because of race or religious ideas, beliefs, or affiliations. No law shall arbitrarily, capriciously, or unreasonably discriminate against a person because of birth, age, sex, culture, physical condition, or political ideas or affiliations. Slavery and involuntary servitude are prohibited, except in the latter case as punishment for crime.

 

http://senate.legis.state.la.us/documents/constitution/article1.htm

 

 

The LA Constitution simply means “equality under the law.” The poster was lying, or willfully ignorant at best.

 

Actually, if you go even further, the LA Constitution actually supports A&E’s right to fire:

 

§7. Freedom of Expression

Section 7. No law shall curtail or restrain the freedom of speech or of the press.

Every person may speak, write, and publish his sentiments on any subject,

but is responsible for abuse of that freedom.

 

There is a crucial distinction between censorship and freedom of association. Censorship is the initiation of force to silence someone. Freedom of association is the ability to choose who you want to associate, or trade, with.

3

Yes, the “right to individual dignity” is a floating abstraction. Perhaps their sheriff understands that Censorship implies state involvement, not the private sector:

http://www.douglascountysentinel.com/news/local/article_a2b03444-69ea-11e3-9c03-001a4bcf6878.html

4

The state shouldn’t be issuing licenses for anything. Once it’s assumed they may, the confused and unprincipled results are to be expected. Given the current context, the explanation given to you on Facebook makes sense, in that the state is trying to do damage control from backlash to A&E’s decision.

Giving permission via tax credits confuses the results, but the permission to film should never be the state’s to give.