States Continue To Make Photographing Or Taping Farms A Crime
from the because-farmers dept
Over two years ago, we wrote about an absolutely insane proposal in Florida that sought to make it a felony to photograph farms without permission. The bill tried to position it as "protecting farm intellectual property," but everyone knew the real reason: farmers were upset about animal rights activists photographing and videotaping animal cruelty and revealing it to the world. We hadn't heard much more about that until just recently. A month and a half ago, On the Media had a segment about how these kinds of bills were showing up in more states, and now the NY Times has done a big article on how these "ag-gag" laws are being pushed by lobbyists heavily influenced by big farm groups.It appears that the positioning of these bills has moved away from "protecting farmer IP" and over to claiming that animal rights activists are involved in terrorism for exposing animal cruelty. Now, we certainly believe that some animal rights groups go way overboard in their campaigns, though they often just make themselves look silly when they do so. But these laws just seem crazy, and a clear restriction on First Amendment rights.
But a dozen or so state legislatures have had a different reaction: They proposed or enacted bills that would make it illegal to covertly videotape livestock farms, or apply for a job at one without disclosing ties to animal rights groups. They have also drafted measures to require such videos to be given to the authorities almost immediately, which activists say would thwart any meaningful undercover investigation of large factory farms.ALEC (the American Legislative Exchange Council), a group famous for writing legislation for members of Congress, has a "draft bill" along these lines, which argues that the effort is to prevent attempts to use images and video to "defame the facility or its owner." That's insulting. First off, we already have defamation laws. If farm owners are defamed, let them use those laws. Second, truth is an absolute defense to defamation, and if they're taking a picture that accurately represents what's going on, it's difficult to see how that could, in any way, be any form of defamation. Third, and most importantly, just because one might use some tactic to defame someone (even if it's highly unlikely) that's no excuse, at all, for seeking to ban the activity entirely.
In the end, it's legal efforts like this that make people especially cynical about the political process. It's pretty clear that there's no good reason for such laws. Rather, the entire purpose is to protect some farmers who don't want their practices exposed.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: activists, ag gag, farms, free speech, photographs, videos
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I'm glad you threw in the anti-government rhetoric at the end. It was kind of boring until then. Thanks for the reminder that I should distrust the political process. I almost forgot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cynical implies that one is not directing such distrust in a sensible, fact-based way but rather in an out_of_the_bob (clueless, delusional) way. I think it's not the case anymore. While I do believe there are politicians that want to do the right thing (not that they can actually do anything against the rigged up system) it's pretty clear that there are greater financial powers pulling the strings.
In fact I'd say that this corrupt system has reached a stage where it self-sustains and most politicians simply can't pull out or they'll suffer consequences directly or indirectly (their families). And I do think there are those that are disgusted of what things have come to be but can't do much. I'm not sure how to call that.
We have yet to see the bottom of this mess. The bright side is that things will take a turn for the better at some point. But before that shitloads of Americans will suffer the consequences till awareness and outrage enough are raised to form a critical mass of people who will actually protest.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I think it means "Believing that people are motivated by self-interest; distrustful of human sincerity or integrity." I don't think there's any implication of delusion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Corporatized farming. Such animal abuse was rare before.
By the way, former multi-millionaire ABC reporter Sam Donaldson used to claim on his tax returns that he was a farmer; he bought into some tax fraud scheme that was set up just for Rich freeloaders to escape their awful tax "burden" and actually got payments from the gov't for farming.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Corporatized farming. Such animal abuse was rare before.
I always see you bitching that Mike never provides solutions. Ok, then. What is your solution for all of this? Are we all supposed to work for meager wages (can't have any "unearned income", can we?) as state employees (can't have corporations because they are evil!)? Do we start penalizing anyone or any corporation that earns more than you or something? Seriously, how are you going to achieve these things in reality?
You keep spouting this rhetoric, but always seem to run away anyone asks you specifics. Come on, Blue, enlighten us with this superior intellect you seem to think you have.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Corporatized farming. Such animal abuse was rare before.
Seriously, you can't imagine a world without huge corporations? Where you actually work for a living, rather than living off interest (A.K.A. Capital Gains)?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Corporatized farming. Such animal abuse was rare before.
Not really, to be honest. History has shown that communistic economies don't usually fare very well, because of human nature. Some of the animals end up becoming "more equal" than the rest. Capitalism uses that same human nature to it's advantage.
It's also a problem of deciding what is "too big" and what incentives to use to stop companies from becoming "too big". What do you do, put a cap on success? Doesn't sound very productive in the long run to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Corporatized farming. Such animal abuse was rare before.
Limiting corporate power is not "putting a cap on success". It's preventing the abuse that unrestrained capitalism inevitably produces -- eventually leading to the death of capitalism itself.
The death of capitalism, by the way, is what we're seeing right now. It's being killed by the powerful corporations and being replaced by a corporatocracy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Corporatized farming. Such animal abuse was rare before.
Maybe, but I'm not so sure. Feels more like the fall of the Roman Empire to me. Governments eventually collapse from the inside when they become too large, usually from corruption. The United States has already surpassed the half-life of a government. Even when governments fall, commerce continues on.
I'm also not really sure that we are seeing any more government manipulation from corporations then we've always seen. J.P Morgan, Carnegie, Standard Oil, the Railroads, etc. The difference now is that those in power cannot completely control how we communicate anymore. We are simply more aware and informed of such things now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Corporatized farming. Such animal abuse was rare before.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Corporatized farming. Such animal abuse was rare before.
you look at the US, and you see that our right insist we have the best medical system in the world, the rest of the developed world look at us and scoff, yes we may have some of the best clinics, but thats only if you can afford them.
the cost of medical care has gone up up up, in no small part thanks to insurance companies...
What I feel needs to happen is, "We The People" need to take back our nation/govt, then, use that power to reign in the corporate powers that are the root of the problem.
a great example would be broadband providers oligarchy, most of these big companies took our money, in exchange for expanding/building infrastructure to ensure americans had broadband access, then, they pocketed it....THEN they made agreements with eachother not to compete, they also try and use legal means to stop local municipalities from providing competing services, because they dont want to loose their massive profits.
the way i see it, they should all be hit with price fixing charges/suets and fined, use the fines to encourage other providers to build area's up.
rather then giving out money first, make it an award for doing a good job, encourage competition encourage advancement.....
a good example would be googles fiber...70bucks a month for 1gbit sync, when the best i can get here is 100/20 out of comcast at 115/mo, or 35/15 out of frontier.....
honestly, we need to kick these aholes in the nuts....
makes me sick having my friends in Japan and Korea, and hk and tw and hell even the Philippines tell me they have faster net then I have, and it costs less.... and they have tons of choices for providers compared to us......
i could list tv options, or dozens of other day to day things where our options are limited......hell we have 1 choice of store chain locally here, safeway, if we wana drive 15min, we have more choices, BUT safeway paid off local govts to keep out competing chains even after those chains bought land and got permits....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Corporatized farming. Such animal abuse was rare before.
This is an excellent argument. I'm going to have to think a lot more about this issue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Corporatized farming. Such animal abuse was rare before.
There's making a profit (capitalism.) And then there's being a profiteer (corporatism.) We used to have laws against profiteers (thank you, Teddy Roosevelt), but those laws have demonstrably been eroded over time, by both democratic and republican regimes, at the behest of the people with the money. Once again we have Golden Age-like virtual monopolies in every walk of life that are destroying any high ideals our country ever aspired to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Corporatized farming. Such animal abuse was rare before.
http://tinyurl.com/bt3jet6
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Corporatized farming. Such animal abuse was rare before.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
F#ck Off Washington Politics !
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Now tell me who's worse!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This Includes making it illegal to film or take pictures of oil spills, which of course give oil drilling a horrible name.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-12/why-is-the-press-ignoring-the-kermit-gosnell-stor y-.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
birdonawire (profile), Apr 13th, 2013 @ 10:43pm
Re:
There are people that want to bring to light the evil inflicted on farm animals, because that needs to be done, just like those that oppose the evil inflicted on the children at Gosnell's clinic. Do not think that these two things are in opposition to each other. It's the same evil that punches cows in the face that cuts the spines of living children. Don't be devisive in your understanding. I can say my last pro life march was this year, and I will always oppose abject abuse of animals that feed people, or any animal that simply exists in the world. I see all life as precious and hatred and abuse of all that God has created as somthing that is against God's will, yet allowed due to free choice. When I saw the pictures of those children I cried for 2 days, and it makes me sorrowful every time they come to mind, but I friend, refuse to scapegoat animals, because it is people who can and are the ones who commit evil. People like yourself that think that so called animal rights activists are doing something that is against people, excuse me, are confused, because fighting evil and sickness and darkness is always a good and right thing. One does not take away from the other. It is interesting to note that what is first done to animals, who have no voice, is the gateway of acceptance of what people do to each other, especially those children like in Gosnell's clinic. Animals deserve proper and humane respect, just like all people, because remember it is people that can be and are the improper and inhumane ones. Hope to see you at next years pro life march.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Does this refer to:
A) The red barns, which are clearly creative works and not at all based on older red barns which are in the public domain,
B) The genetic code of the plants, which can be directly read if the photographs are ultra, ultra, ultra-high resolution, or
C) The way the animals are standing, which is totally determined by the farmer and not at all by the animals themselves?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's defamation because city slickers are dumb
I remember a newspaper article several years back that talked about animal cruelty at a chicken farm. They showed some pictures of chickens that looked so ragged, without much feathers at all. At the time I felt so bad for those chickens and was ready for some justice to be paid out to those farmers. It wasn't until years later, when I raised chickens myself, that I learned that chickens moult on a regular basis. Those pictures I saw weren't signs of abuse. They were signs of my own ignorance.
(that said I still agree that laws against photographing farms are ridiculous.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's defamation because city slickers are dumb
That is what is different about today, almost everyone has the worlds repository of knowledge at their finger tips if they will make the effort to look.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's defamation because city slickers are dumb
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What's this mean for cops?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's this mean for cops?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Freakin Awesome Dude
Does anyone know if this would include Satelite and infrared too?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I wonder...
If not, and it's passed as written, then any criminal or regulatory investigation of an agricultural facility, even by agents of the USDA, might result in inspectors becoming felons, since photographs and video are often part of the inspection process.
Also, depending on how agriculture is defined, it might make it illegal to take pictures of landscaping or a backyard vegetable garden.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It takes some pretty strong copyright to figure out how to feed male chicks into the grinder. Such business ingenuity needs to be protected!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
C'mon over and take pictures
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: C'mon over and take pictures
now I will admit, the chicken processing plant i worked at way back would probably not like it, but, honestly despite it being nasty, anybody whos been around chickens much knows they are nasty filthy animals anyway.....
I do not truck with abusing animals, but, im not gonna go vegan like a few nuts I know keep trying to convense me I should....
oh and about the spitting...yeah, its kinda like a friend of mines grandparents, they raise ostrich and similar birds for meat, they had to go to a double fense a couple years back after some idiot stuck a hand threw the fence, got a chunk taken out of his arm, then sued them..(despite HUGE warning signs in 3 languages AND with images)
people are dumb.....(stupid really)....but any farmer with a no pictures/filming policy is ashamed of their operation, and thats not a farmer i would buy from.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: C'mon over and take pictures
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
federal anti-ag gag petition
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://truth-out.org/news/item/15721-pennsylvania-court-deals-blow-to-secrecy-obsessed -fracking-industry
Hopefully this ruling will be seen to apply to "photography" and journalistic investigation of factory farms as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]