The Church of the Blinding White Light of Stupidity

Prosecute the Dixie Chicks for false advertising...

Dean Esmay has a post about the whiningest "Country" group on the scene today.

I got to thinking and after I reset the smoke alarms I came up with what I think is an interesting twist...

follow me on this

Nike is being sued for allegedly abusing freedom of speech in a commercial context. When attempting to mitigate PR damage to the Nike brand name done by activists allegations about the companies labor practises in third-world factories, Nike's spokesmen may have bent the truth and could have been misleading.

A California court has decided that Nike stepped outside the boundries of personal speech and into the advertising arena.

In May, the court ruled that public statements by Nike, Inc. -- including press releases and letters to newspaper editors -- in response to public accusations leveled against its overseas labor practices, constituted "commercial speech." That designation strips Nike’s statements of their full First Amendment protections, and places them in the same category as the company’s explicit product advertisements for purposes of applying state laws barring false and misleading advertising.

...this is the interesting part...

So, accepting the court's interpretation of corporate speech to include that speech which has as an intent the protection or promotion of corporate interests, including the public's perception of the corporate entity ...

The Dixie Chicks (and all entertainers who are now lying their asses off about thier positions on any political issue) are no longer indulging in personal freedom of speech but are practicing commercial speech intended to avoid business damage caused by shooting their mouths off.

These folks have willingly converted most of their personal privacy to public promotion of their corporate interests. Their every move is touted by personal publicists to the world via newspapers and TV.

Every entertainer has incorporated themselves, for tax purposes, and the main assets of those corporations is the entertainer him/herself and the public's goodwill towards that person, so that makes any attempt to protect that goodwill an exercise in commercial speech.

...let's see how we can abuse this decision...

The Dixie Chicks say they support the troops but don't support the war... but can they support that statement as commercial speech, like a claim for a product, say, aluminum siding?

Hi, I'm Billy-Jim and my aluminum siding will keep your house protected from tornados and severe weather for over a thousand years!

"No, I'm not truly embarrassed that, you know, President Bush is from my state, that's not really what I care about," she said. "I felt like there was a lack of compassion every time I saw Bush talking about this. I honestly felt a lack of compassion for people that are questioning this (war), for the people that are about to die for this on both sides."

False advertising? Let a jury decide.

Michael Morre proudly promotes his "documentary" Bowling for Columbine as a ... well... "A DOCUMENTARY"...

False Advertising? Let a jury decide.

I could go on and on...

Posted by Mike S at April 26, 2003 09:15 AM