Will the Dixie Chicks and Country Radio ever kiss and make up?
- Thread starter Bad Bishop
- Start date
In a word...yes.
Seriously, standup comedians have said far worse and no one bats an eye. These people are mere entertainers that are just voicing an opinion.
Last edited:
A
Amaris
Guest
Sure, if you'd rather come up with your own idea about what I said rather than what I said.
If I've ever heard a Dixie Chicks song I didn't know it. But this fracas taught me that Reba McEntire is a piece of shit.
No impulse to decency is ever forgiven by conservatives. Dixie Chicks will be blacklisted by Clear Channel et al. forever.
Personally, I like some bluegrass. And I've noticed that a country label doesn't mean you're going to hear anything bluegrass or with bluegrass in its musical heritage. In fact, near as I can make out, all you can really tell from a country music label is that there aren't going to be any contemporary African American influence. It's lily white to the best of my knowledge.
No impulse to decency is ever forgiven by conservatives. Dixie Chicks will be blacklisted by Clear Channel et al. forever.
Personally, I like some bluegrass. And I've noticed that a country label doesn't mean you're going to hear anything bluegrass or with bluegrass in its musical heritage. In fact, near as I can make out, all you can really tell from a country music label is that there aren't going to be any contemporary African American influence. It's lily white to the best of my knowledge.
The Chicks were a very talented group, enjoyed many of their songs and even went to one of their concerts.
What Natalie Maines said was, perhaps, a bit over the line at "a time of war" when the Iraq Invasion first began (keeping in mind Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11) but she has the right to say it. The reaction from the people at large was a bit extreme but I suspect most country music listeners are Right-Wingers and they were hurt that their Golden Boy Dub got trashed.
So, fine, don't buy their albums. But the reaction many had was to boycott, burn and vilify The Chicks which was just a bit over-the-top. They were making the women into Anti-Americans because they... spoke their mind?
Huh?!
I had no idea that radio stations were still protesting The Chicks or that they were still vilified/boycotted by the public as since she (they) said those things much of country seemed to trend more on to their side of things. That Bush was screwing things up and the War in Iraq was a mess. It's been several years I think it's more than past time for the radio stations and listeners to get over themselves.
What Natalie Maines said was, perhaps, a bit over the line at "a time of war" when the Iraq Invasion first began (keeping in mind Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11) but she has the right to say it. The reaction from the people at large was a bit extreme but I suspect most country music listeners are Right-Wingers and they were hurt that their Golden Boy Dub got trashed.
So, fine, don't buy their albums. But the reaction many had was to boycott, burn and vilify The Chicks which was just a bit over-the-top. They were making the women into Anti-Americans because they... spoke their mind?
Huh?!
I had no idea that radio stations were still protesting The Chicks or that they were still vilified/boycotted by the public as since she (they) said those things much of country seemed to trend more on to their side of things. That Bush was screwing things up and the War in Iraq was a mess. It's been several years I think it's more than past time for the radio stations and listeners to get over themselves.
Ah, a fellow Statler Brothers fan!
Here's what I think of the Dixie Chicks: (silence)
Sure they have the right to their opinions. But so do their fans and the public in general. If they can say what they want, then other people can express how pissed off they are *at* them. The Chicks' detractors have as much a right to THEIR opinion as the Chicks do to theirs.
Ah, a fellow Statler Brothers fan!
Here's what I think of the Dixie Chicks: (silence)
Sure they have the right to their opinions. But so do their fans and the public in general. If they can say what they want, then other people can express how pissed off they are *at* them. The Chicks' detractors have as much a right to THEIR opinion as the Chicks do to theirs.
I was wondering if anyone was going to pick up on that or not.. Thats more or less my opinion as well, I couldnt care less about what they said, cept for the not being proud of being from Texas thing, that rankles me no matter what the reason, and I do not miss there music any, they werent really anything special....
not the case at all, given there is not Alot of African American, but it is there, and it is strong, Charley Pride was churning out #1's at a time when mainstream people considered country music people backwards and stupid, in Fact, he was churning out #1s smack in the middle of the Civil Rights Movement. He is in the Country Music Hall of Fame(Not because he is black, but because he is a damn good singer who sings damn good Country)
Ray Charles also gets Alot of air time on my local classic country station(97.1 Houston)
Also, you can make a strong case that the Blues of the 30s and 40s was strongly influential on Country Music Giant Hank Williams, and therefor has influenced almost every Country singer since then, in fact, google Rufus "TeeTot" Payne and see what you come up with. Thats not even bringing in to account the whole Cajun/Zydeco/Swamp Pop sub genre, which has strong ties to Blues, Country, classic R&B, and even Rap.....
^ Charley Pride is my favorite country singer of all time, and in fact is one of my favorite singers of *any* genre. He did a LOT for country music. He is as pure country as any white artist.
Last edited:
Hey Y'all! Thanks for the numbers update. I should've done a little more research on that Chicks album sales number. Whoops!
Since cd sales numbers are influenced by the piracy phenomenon that has all but destroyed the music business, perhaps I should've relied upon concert ticket sales numbers which is maybe a bit more "democratic" when discussing an artists influence or lack thereof.
Since that is the main form of income for popular artists and ticket sales speaks directly to the overall popularity of an entertainment artist.
The Chicks concerts after "the incident" have sold so poorly that many concerts and tours were cancelled or moved to much smaller venues. They sell better mostly in the northeast and Canada. British radio also continues to play their music.
Their tours have been busts ever since. Even their recent spate of OPENING slots for the Eagles has been met with cancelled shows and poor ticket sales. (of course the economy has played a part as well)
As tax paying Americans, those ladies had every right to speak their mind. But as entertainers, who obviously wore their feelings on their sleeves, and wished to continue with their very high level of popularity maybe the better career decision would've been to simply keep their opinions to themselves. Especially when one takes in to consideration the mindset of their audience at the time.
There are still radio stations out there that refuse to run ads for their shows. They certainly won't do promotions to even give away tickets.
The country listening audience, especially in certain areas around this country, still holds a strong resentment of these ladies.
Country radio does research out the wazzoo and knows this about their listeners. They are not about to alienate their audience and therefore destroy their livelihood because one set of hotheaded young ladies didn't put any forethought into an insensitive remark that was simply poorly timed.
Had they waited until just 3 or 4 years later they would've probably been part of the majority of thinking.
It was the Chicks willingness to be defiant of the country listening audience and insult them that has brought about the continued animosity.
Besides Natalie did a recent interview where she called patirotism "stupid" and that she didn't understand it at all and even wondered why it was needed. With those comments I'm wondering what her level of maturity is!
Jus' sayin'
Since cd sales numbers are influenced by the piracy phenomenon that has all but destroyed the music business, perhaps I should've relied upon concert ticket sales numbers which is maybe a bit more "democratic" when discussing an artists influence or lack thereof.
Since that is the main form of income for popular artists and ticket sales speaks directly to the overall popularity of an entertainment artist.
The Chicks concerts after "the incident" have sold so poorly that many concerts and tours were cancelled or moved to much smaller venues. They sell better mostly in the northeast and Canada. British radio also continues to play their music.
Their tours have been busts ever since. Even their recent spate of OPENING slots for the Eagles has been met with cancelled shows and poor ticket sales. (of course the economy has played a part as well)
As tax paying Americans, those ladies had every right to speak their mind. But as entertainers, who obviously wore their feelings on their sleeves, and wished to continue with their very high level of popularity maybe the better career decision would've been to simply keep their opinions to themselves. Especially when one takes in to consideration the mindset of their audience at the time.
There are still radio stations out there that refuse to run ads for their shows. They certainly won't do promotions to even give away tickets.
The country listening audience, especially in certain areas around this country, still holds a strong resentment of these ladies.
Country radio does research out the wazzoo and knows this about their listeners. They are not about to alienate their audience and therefore destroy their livelihood because one set of hotheaded young ladies didn't put any forethought into an insensitive remark that was simply poorly timed.
Had they waited until just 3 or 4 years later they would've probably been part of the majority of thinking.
It was the Chicks willingness to be defiant of the country listening audience and insult them that has brought about the continued animosity.
Besides Natalie did a recent interview where she called patirotism "stupid" and that she didn't understand it at all and even wondered why it was needed. With those comments I'm wondering what her level of maturity is!
Jus' sayin'
Because it's as stupid to dismiss them solely because of their celebrity status as it is to give them added credibility solely as celebrities without them putting in the effort first.
I won't spend too much time defending Jane Fonda, because while her heart may have been in the right place as an anti-war protester she clearly forgot to pack her brain in the overhead compartment before traveling to North Vietnam, hopping on a NVA anti-aircraft gun, and repeating their propaganda verbatim. That wasn't the last time she had a misguided way of expressing her beliefs that resulted in her having to backtrack and apologize for her actions later in life. That being said, she has also done a lot of good as an activist.
But your complaints about George Clooney and Sarah McLachlan don't make a bit of sense. Which one of these things do you think is wrong and unworthy of receiving the kind of publicity only a celebrity can sometimes bring to a cause?
George Clooney:
- Went to Sudan and filmed a TV documentary (donating all the profits from DVD sales), appeared in another two documentaries on the subject, spoke at a rally, and petitioned the UN and several world leaders on behalf of stopping the genocide in Darfur.
- Organized fundraising telethons for 9/11, the Indian Ocean tsunami, hurricane Katrina, and the earthquake in Haiti.
- Co-founded a group to raise awareness of and try to prevent mass atrocities around the world.
For this he has been awarded the Summit Peace Award voted on by the Nobel Peace Prize laureates, the Bob Hope Humanitarian Award by the Emmy's, and has been made a UN Peace Ambassador. I think he's put in the time and effort to be afforded a little respect and not just dismissed as a loudmouth celebrity who should shut up about his pet causes.
Sarah McLachlan:
- Performed on both the American telethon and Canadian concert to benefit the Indian Ocean tsunami victims.
- Supports the ASPCA and raises funds on behalf of animal shelters. Filmed an ASPCA commercial and loaned two of her songs for their use, which generated a huge amount of interest and donations.
- Performed at a benefit concert to appeal to the G8 for debt relief to poverty stricken African nations.
- Funds a program in Vancouver to provide music education for inner city school children.
Again, I'm not seeing what's so offensive about them using their celebrity to raise awareness for worthy causes, and they actually seem to follow through and put in the effort instead of just relying on that celebrity alone and doing nothing else.
That depends on the kind of patriotism.
There's the healthy kind of patriotism that accepts criticism, acknowledges the mistakes your country has made in the past and present, and through love of country (the people and the ideal) inspires you to want to improve it and not let its principles be compromised.
Then there's the unhealthy kind of patriotism that is a jingoistic "we'll put a boot in your ass" and "you're either for us or against us" dick-measuring contest that preaches national superiority and is often tied to other forms of thinking your particular group is superior, unaccountable, and above the laws that apply to everyone else.
I'll let you guess on which side of the patriotism spectrum the "shut up and conform with the majority opinion" complaint falls on.
Last edited:
I didn't single out any particular celebrity for their endorsement, whether I agreed with their comments or not, it's that because there's this assumption being a celebrity, having a famous face/voice is enough that people should listen to them, above any one else. There's plenty of evidence such endorsing can have an effect on people's opinion which is where I think there is a problem.
Do I think most of them are wrong in their opinion? No, but just like the previously referenced Conway Twitty/Harold Jenkins, they should not use their status as a celebrity to try and influence popular opinion on political or religious subjects especially. They want to make a change? They should not step up on a podium, declare their celebrity status and start telling people what they should think or do.
Of course there's degrees to how far they go but in general I just think it's a bad idea.
I'm sure you can understand the way people can abuse that. You obviously know the references I made to them to know it's just like anyone else who has a popular name going and saying for their fans to follow them in something. It's akin to endorsing a commerical product. Not the same thing exactly but the same idea. If this popular person is endorsing this, maybe it isn't so bad.
That's a very slippery slope to go down. What if instead of endorsing something good or positive with no question to the intent or results, they do that with something else? Jane Fonda is the most infamous example of a celebrity endorsing a dangerous and entirely wrong sentiment shows what can happen. She tried to use her influence to say there were no war crimes (or at least fewer) than were actually perpetrated by the NVA. Also that communism was great and the future. Amongst other less than truthful endorsements.
We all know that was wrong, and that she has backtracked, apologized (though the sincerity part I find dubious) and it did nothing positive for her career or for anyone else involved.
Do I think most of them are wrong in their opinion? No, but just like the previously referenced Conway Twitty/Harold Jenkins, they should not use their status as a celebrity to try and influence popular opinion on political or religious subjects especially. They want to make a change? They should not step up on a podium, declare their celebrity status and start telling people what they should think or do.
Of course there's degrees to how far they go but in general I just think it's a bad idea.
I'm sure you can understand the way people can abuse that. You obviously know the references I made to them to know it's just like anyone else who has a popular name going and saying for their fans to follow them in something. It's akin to endorsing a commerical product. Not the same thing exactly but the same idea. If this popular person is endorsing this, maybe it isn't so bad.
That's a very slippery slope to go down. What if instead of endorsing something good or positive with no question to the intent or results, they do that with something else? Jane Fonda is the most infamous example of a celebrity endorsing a dangerous and entirely wrong sentiment shows what can happen. She tried to use her influence to say there were no war crimes (or at least fewer) than were actually perpetrated by the NVA. Also that communism was great and the future. Amongst other less than truthful endorsements.
We all know that was wrong, and that she has backtracked, apologized (though the sincerity part I find dubious) and it did nothing positive for her career or for anyone else involved.
If we're worried about people misusing their celebrity, we should ban commercial endorsements.
Bit if the difficulty instead is that they're using their social position to speak outside their area of authority, such as sports products and the like, then we should ban clergymen from ever talking about politics and science and history.
There are two issues about the Dixie Chicks. One is the role of corporations in organizing boycotts, instead of just responding to popular opinion. That is not the Dixie Chicks offending their audience and paying the price and it's a damned lie to pretend it is. And it's about the self image of country music as the real American music, which is a bigoted and narrowminded idea. If that's what country music is about, fuck it and its fans.
Bit if the difficulty instead is that they're using their social position to speak outside their area of authority, such as sports products and the like, then we should ban clergymen from ever talking about politics and science and history.
There are two issues about the Dixie Chicks. One is the role of corporations in organizing boycotts, instead of just responding to popular opinion. That is not the Dixie Chicks offending their audience and paying the price and it's a damned lie to pretend it is. And it's about the self image of country music as the real American music, which is a bigoted and narrowminded idea. If that's what country music is about, fuck it and its fans.
I'm actually behind that. Celebrity endorsements are not a good idea and there's plenty to back that up. Children especially are easy to influence and they grow up with it. Call it cynical but I'd rather celebrities just do their films or movies or focus on what they are famous for than becoming another pundit or talking head for someone else's agenda.
And to slightly veer back on track, I don't agree with country music being the "patriotic, American" music either. It might be American in that it's mainly produced here but it's not the only music made here and it's not representative of all or even most Americans. God forbid people think it is. Love songs about trucks, guitars, hunting dogs and guns? Or how a woman left you and how heart broken you are? Exaggeration to be sure but that's the joke everyone gets and it's not the representation of all Americans any more than any other supposed representation is for any other country. You can just as easily claim rap music is the same thing although I doubt you'd get many agreements on it.
And to slightly veer back on track, I don't agree with country music being the "patriotic, American" music either. It might be American in that it's mainly produced here but it's not the only music made here and it's not representative of all or even most Americans. God forbid people think it is. Love songs about trucks, guitars, hunting dogs and guns? Or how a woman left you and how heart broken you are? Exaggeration to be sure but that's the joke everyone gets and it's not the representation of all Americans any more than any other supposed representation is for any other country. You can just as easily claim rap music is the same thing although I doubt you'd get many agreements on it.
My interest, and listening to, Country Music faded out when it (mostly from the female singers) became mostly pop, teeny-bopper sounding crap.
Even though it's true.
