RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

09/07/2011

Stock questions for the 'Stop SB48' campaign

by Jeremy Hooper

FACT: The campaign to overturn LGBT-inclusive education in California schools is clearly a controversial effort.

FACT: As per usual with anti-equality campaigns, this "Stop SB48" effort is using a stock photo family to represent actual California citizens:

Stopsb48-Sign-Legal-Size3

FACT: This stock photo comes from FotoSearch:

Screen Shot 2011-09-07 At 9.38.57 Am
Stock Photo - Family Walking on the Beach [FotoSearch]

FACT: FotoSearch includes this restriction in the license agreement associated with the image in question:

3. Restrictions
3.5 If any Licensed Material featuring a model or property is used in connection with a subject that would be unflattering or unduly controversial to a reasonable person, Licensee must accompany each such use with a statement that indicates that: (i) the Licensed Material is being used for illustrative purposes only; and (ii) any person depicted in the Licensed Material, if any, is a model."

License Agreement [FotoSearch Gold]

FACT: Nothing on the unduly controversial StopSB48.com website or on any of the group's promotional materials (all of which use this same family) contain any sort of disclaimer about the family being made up of models.


QUESTION: If this StopSB48 coalition has the will to make public schools less fair, shouldn't they at least have the fortitude to put their own visual stamp on the effort?

QUESTION: If coalition members won't stand up and be shown, don't they have a responsibility to make the visual outsourcing known?

QUESTION: Don't Californians deserve to know that crucial decisions affecting their state's families and children are being fronted by families (maybe Californian, maybe not) who were paid to smile for the camera?

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails