Jeez, the NY Times sides with Linda Ronstadt (which is iffy, but understandable), but in the process they misrepresent the Constitution. In an opinion piece talking of the Aladdin's decision to fire her, the Times says:

This behavior assumes that Ms. Ronstadt had no right to express a political opinion from the stage. It implies - for some members of the audience at least - that there is a philosophical contract that says an artist must entertain an audience only in the ways that audience sees fit. It argues, in fact, that an artist like Ms. Ronstadt does not have the same rights as everyone else.

It doesn't assume anything. As either an employee or contractor to the Aladdin, they - not Ronstadt - have the right to determine what kind of speech they allow at their facility.

Secondly, there is a contract between the audience and the artist - its called the ticket. They purchased it with and expectation and promise of a certain kind of entertainment. To get something entirely different (granted, in this case it wasn't entirely different, but generally) does indeed violate that contract.

And lastely, Ronstadt does have the same rights as everyone else, its just that the Times apparently chooses not to understand that nobody has the right to say whatever they want with no consequences when they are doing so under the employ of another person/entity.

« Strange Stories | Home | From Michael Moore's Pants »