The FSC Responds To Blogs Outting Our Personal Details

http://www.xbiz.com/news/195620

“CANOGA PARK, Calif. — Free Speech Coalition, the national trade association to the adult entertainment and pleasure products industry, has issued a statement relative to the “outings” of adult performers and other adult industry workers.

The statement, as well as prologue, can be viewed below:

In the past few years, the adult industry has seen a rise in “outings” of adult performers and other adult industry workers, often with the intent to harm the person’s personal or professional life.

We see it most frequently on social media, or on blogs; other times it can be an email to law enforcement or a job or family members or Facebook. Several years ago, we witnessed the grossest example when identifying information of thousands of adult performers, including real names and addresses was posted online.

But the truth is these sometimes life-threatening outings, whether they’re the work of a stalker, an ex-lover or a rival, have become all too common. And just as commonly, the defense of the "outing’ is free speech. As an organization dedicated to free speech, we thought it was time to address the issue.

Statement made by Reed Lee, attorney and FSC Board of Directors member:

The adult entertainment industry has long been at the forefront of the struggle for freedom of speech. It has also been instrumental in pressing for full protection of personal autonomy — the right of each of us to live as we please, in peace. At the Free Speech Coalition, we are proud of our heritage; and we always know that we fight for real rights for real people. We have seen the power of speech to change the world; and we have seen our speech help to protect and enhance personal autonomy. That is why we think it is important, from time to time, to reflect on the values and the purposes which free expression serves and promotes.

In almost every situation, each individual has the legal right to disseminate truthful information to those who want to hear or see it. This is as it should be. The Free Speech Coalition continues to fight for that right — pressing our points in the public sphere and, when absolutely necessary, litigating to protect and expand those rights. This is not to say that all constitutionally protected expression is beyond criticism. Happily, there is no contradiction between defending the right of the Westboro Baptist Church followers to disseminate their hateful and reactionary speech and denouncing that speech itself as — hateful and reactionary.

There is a place, too, to criticize speech — even constitutionally protected speech — within our industry when it violates an individual’s personal autonomy by threatening the personal security that makes participation in the adult entertainment industry—or any social movement — possible for real people. Just as the First Amendment recognizes the value of truthful speech, it also recognizes the practical need for many who participate in controversial movements to avoid recrimination and retaliation by remaining anonymous or by using pseudonyms. This is why the U.S. Supreme Court protects the right of leafleters to disseminate anonymous handbills — someone pressing an unpopular cause need not sign his or her name. And when, in the thick of the civil rights movement, southern governments sought disclosure of the NAACP’s membership list, the court protected the privacy of the members. Even today, the Free Speech Coalition litigates against the federal government without revealing our membership list.

When it comes to our own identities, we must all bear in mind the world we live in. Many of us are fortunate enough that we can afford to be open about our connection with the adult entertainment industry and our advocacy of the freedoms it promotes. But many of us are not. Each of us, then, is entitled to make our own decision about how we identify ourselves to the world — how much of our identities and the details of our lives other people will know. Only by respecting this individual right can we ensure that others will be willing to stand with us and work with us — and that they will be safe in doing so. Free speech has consequences. Revealing private information about those we know in the adult entertainment industry — information which an individual has chosen to keep private — risks making it impossible for us to build the kind of social movement we need to defend ourselves. It risks ruining lives which have been devoted to our work and our cause. In some cases, it may risk consequences more serious than we know or care to imagine. In a world which is still — at some times and in some places—viciously hostile to us, we all need to respect every individual’s choice to participate without revealing our legal names or other private matters about our lives. And when people sometimes forget the need for that respect, it is no compromise with free speech to criticize them for that. Because free speech really does have consequences. Use it, but use it wisely."

Re: The FSC Responds To Blogs Outting Our Personal Details

Is it me, or is this a weird and long-winded — very long winded - statement?

How about this for brevity – “We urge a respect to a right to privacy for our members and for the people who work in the adult industry. This is important because civil rights are interconnected. Thus, the exercise of free speech is harmed when certain parties act to humiliate and otherwise violate the privacy of individuals.”

I’m sorry - but considering that this is a trade organization, how difficult is it to write a policy offering support for the people working in it’s very own business?

  • Steve

Re: The FSC Responds To Blogs Outting Our Personal Details

it’s great that they support privacy but does it make any difference what they say in practice?

Re: The FSC Responds To Blogs Outting Our Personal Details

Thank you! I didn’t want to be the first, but honestly, this isn’t a statement, it’s an essay. Proving once again that you should ask a lawyer to write anything you want anyone to read or understand. I fell asleep midway through Reed Lee’s first paragraph.

Re: The FSC Responds To Blogs Outting Our Personal Details

The title of the article is: FSC Makes Statement on Adult Performer, Worker Personal Privacy

I actually don’t see this as even a slap on the back of the hand. I mean, look at the last part:

Because free speech really does have consequences. Use it, but use it wisely.

Re: The FSC Responds To Blogs Outting Our Personal Details

Yeah, you guys basically summed up what I was thinking. This is a very long-winded way of saying “we don’t approve but meh!”

Re: The FSC Responds To Blogs Outting Our Personal Details

Sounds like a rather poorly thought out junior high school report on free speech.

Re: The FSC Responds To Blogs Outting Our Personal Details

Start with the beginning: “The adult entertainment industry has long been at the forefront of the struggle for freedom of speech. It has also been instrumental in pressing for full protection of personal autonomy — the right of each of us to live as we please, in peace.”

The protection for full autonomy? The adult entertainment industry is at the forefront of protecting full autonomy? What is that?

He explains: “the right of each of us to live as we please, in peace.”

This is preposterous. How is a business organization which exists for the purposes of doing business be dedicated to leaving everyone alone in peace? What happens when a company sends out a sales email to a mailing list? Or tweets? I think that’s disrupting people’s peace. How can any business engage in advertising at all while all seeking to leave everyone alone?

Please. Whatever this “right” is, the porn industry has nothing to do with it.

Maybe a better way to look at this, if you want to start from the foundation of free speech is to be a little more specific. Zach Sire can talk about whatever he wants on his blog. However, we have laws which recognize and potentially curtail activities based on the intent of the speaker. The obvious example here would be hate crimes laws. There are also laws about stalking people. Is this cyberstalking? This actually isn’t an easy question - but maybe the industry can set out some limits for itself and its members who are sensitive to their identities being outed and exploited.

The problem is that nobody’s asking for a constitutional ruling, yet the FSC keeps gravitating into broad dialogues about rights. People would just like their identities to be protected from bloggers who intention is to ruin them, whilst profiting from it.

The best thing about this entire episode was watching Danny stand behind his employee. That’s what’s important.

Does the porn industry think everyone in it is important enough to stand up for, or are we all completely replaceable?

The FSC actually has a real opportunity here to make itself relevant to everyone in the business. Instead, they released an academic abstract prolegomenon about rights which doesn’t help anyone.

Steve