And did she really offend 50% of the Slim Fast purchasers? Time would have told, but I doubt it. Most people are probably not aware of the incident (actually, firing Goldberg created more publicity than the original performance); and, if you’re a dieter following the Slim Fast regimen, you’re probably not going to switch products. I don’t know — I don’t buy products based on celebrity endorsements, so maybe I’m misunderstanding the impact of them.

Actions should have consequences. And people should have the right to express their beliefs without fear of being fired. To me, that’s the underlying issue here.

Entertainers want it both ways. They want to be able to say what they want about controversial subjects and they want to say it in whatever vulgar way they feel like but they don’t think that there should be any consequences.

It is a simple lesson that most people should have learned from their parents – actions have consequences.

I think there is an underlying message being sent when a business contract is terminated due to public or private expression of views. Goldberg was speaking at a private event, and not representing Slim-Fast, so it’s unclear why they took this action (heck, I had no clue she did anything for them). This is a particularly public example of threatening speech, but what is to stop other businesses from doing the same thing on a smaller scale? So I do think there is an element of censorship here: your livelihood can be threatened if you speak out against something your so employer doesn’t like (no, I don’t believe Goldberg will suffer financially from this; I think you know what I mean)

As for Ronstadt, I think the Aladdin’s response was over the top. There is a long history of artists inserting politics into performance. I find it hard to imagine that Linda Ronstadt fans are unaware of her political views — perhaps she didn’t choose the best venue to express herself (I don’t know — I’ve read conflicting accounts regarding the extent of the audience’s displeasure). But again, the there is a message being sent: speaking your mind will not be tolerated.

It is entirely possible that Goldberg’s agreement included a clause about conduct vis a vis her relationship with the Slim-Fast. It’s unlikely that Ronstadt’s agreement included anything about what she could or could not say. Private companies have the right to conduct business with whomever they wish on whatever terms they wish, I won’t disagree with that. But I find both of these examples to be subtle examples of censorship, and that scares me.