Ag-gag

Ag-gag laws are anti-whistleblower laws that apply within the agriculture industry. Popularized by Mark Bittman in an April 2011 The New York Times column (but used long before then by advocates), the term ag-gag typically refers to state laws in the United States of America that forbid undercover filming or photography of activity on farms without the consent of their owner—particularly targeting whistleblowers of animal rights abuses at these facilities. Although these laws originated in the United States, they have also begun to appear elsewhere, such as in Australia and Canada. Supporters of ag-gag laws have argued that they serve to protect the agriculture industry from the negative repercussions of exposés by whistle blowers. The proliferation of ag-gag laws has been criticized by various groups, arguing that the laws are intended primarily to censor animal rights abuses by the agriculture industry from the public, create a chilling effect in reporting these violations, and violate the right to freedom of speech. A number of U.S. ag-gag laws have been overturned as violations of the First Amendment to the U.S. constitution. Ag-gag laws emerged in the early 1990s in response to underground activists with the Animal Liberation Front movement. In Kansas, Montana and North Dakota, state legislators made it a crime to take pictures or shoot video in an animal facility without the consent of the facility's owner. In 2002, the conservative organization American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) drafted the "Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act", a model law for distribution to lobbyists and state lawmakers. The model law proposed to prohibit "entering an animal or research facility to take pictures by photograph, video camera, or other means with the intent to commit criminal activities or defame the facility or its owner". It also created a "terrorist registry" for those convicted under the law.