Texas Rainmaker » Dixie Chicks Learn the Difference Between Censorship and Capitalism

Dixie Chicks Learn the Difference Between Censorship and Capitalism
May 23rd, 2006 9:39 am

Back on March 13, 2003, this blog was born out of my desire to correct the record on the Dixie Chicks self-induced saga. Tired of calling in to all the talk radio shows about this topic, I finally ventured into the blogosphere with my very first post.

I find it amusing when the entertainers spout off whatever mantra is cool for the day and then complain when consumers start talking about boycotting their services (ACTING!) or products (items they endorse as celebrities). You see, somewhere down the line the concept of “free speech” has been confused with the economic concept of supply and demand. If you’re livelihood depends on something and you take actions (whether protected or not) that alienate a portion of that collective ’something’, you’ve got to expect a reduction in demand for your product. Look at it this way… do you see top executives of companies making public statements about politics? NO! Taking it a step further, do you hear business owners making personal attacks or snide comments about politicians or religious figures in public? NO! Why, you ask? Because they know that there are differing viewpoints in the world… a world which comprises their entire customer base… a world which does not care to hear their latest rant about foreign policy or their stance on global warming. They understand that while they too enjoy freedom of speech, the wise move is to shut up when it comes to hot topics. Sure, you say, they are afraid to voice their opinions…. I counter that it is intelligence, not fear that guides them. The entertainment industry for the most part has elevated many of these ‘activists’ to a financial position that boycotts of their goods and services may not completely destroy their way of life, and for that reason they have nothing to lose. But for those who are on their way up, or require continual support from the audience, it might be wise to shut the hell up…. unless of course the cost of their free speech is worth a reduction in lifestyle and livelihood.

The “right to free speech” is not being attacked. Stop the spinning. They have the right to say whatever they want (obviously) and we as the consumers, the people who can put money in their pockets or not, have the choice to stop purchasing their products and services. The beauty of capitalism.
…
This is not about freedom of speech, it’s about business. Supply and demand.

The only difference is this time next year, she might not have a world stage on which to spew her idiocy, she’ll be relegated back to a local bar or street corner… but her free speech rights will remain fully intact.

And here we are three years later and my point has been proven.

It appears the war U.S. country radio stations mounted against the politically outspoken Dixie Chicks has not abated in the least.

The band is promoting “Taking the Long Way,” its first album since Natalie Maines told a London audience in 2003 she was ashamed to be from the same state as U.S. President George Bush. The comment sparked a radio boycott of the group’s music.

Although the album hits stores Tuesday, the first two singles from the album are not getting widespread airplay, Billboard.com reported Monday.

The first single, “Not Ready to Make Nice,” only peaked at No. 36 on the Billboard Hot Country Songs chart and the second single, “Everybody Knows,” is moving downward after its peak at No. 48.

WKIS FM in Miami reported it pulled “Not Ready to Make Nice” due to listener complaints after only one week.

The program director at KUBL/KKAT in Salt Lake City told Billboard he was angered by its “self-indulgent and selfish lyrics.”

Neither the Chicks or their label, Columbia Records, would speak to Billboard for its article.

Looks like they waited a little too long to finally stop speaking. Welcome to the world of capitalism.

106 Comments »

I have only heard one of the singles, but I can say that from my point of view this is an excellent lesson in capitalism: the single that I heard stinks. They may not get the audience that they once got because of what Natalie Maines said, but it doesn’t matter. The single I heard is self-indulgent crap.

Comment by kevino — 1:52 pm
What the Chicks seem not to have understood is that it is far more admirable to wield the First Amendment like a dagger than like a shield.

Comment by Michael Andreyakovich — 1:57 pm
Amazon ranks Taking The Long Way #1 in Music. Welcome to the world of capitalism…

Comment by scott ferris — 1:58 pm
Do you have any evidence that Maines or either of the other two women in the band ever claimed their free-speech rights were being curtailed? If not, then this whole post seems much ado about nothing. Maybe other people did it on their behalf, but I don’t recall any of the Chicks crying censorship three years ago after Maines’s original comments.

I do, however, recall specific instances in which both Laura Schlessinger and Michael Savage whined about “free speech” after each of their shows were spiked by Paramount and MSNBC, respectively. Just out of curiosity, do you think they have any more claim to free speech “martyrdom” than Natalie Maines?

[TexasRainmaker Comment: Many claimed it was “Mcarthy-era” censorship]

Comment by Doug — 1:59 pm
This has always been my argument from the very beginning. Freedom of Speech does not mean freedom from the consequences of that speech. Just because they are free to speak does not mean I am forced to listen or agree.

I’ve never really minded that they were outspoken against Bush, what bothered me from the get-go was that they believed they should be immune from the backlash and fell upon the tired cliche of “free speech” as a defense. Instead of sticking to their guns and sucking up what happened, they instead whined and bemoaned the reaction. They could have apologized if they didn’t want the heat, or stood defiantly and accepted the criticisms. I wouldn’t necessarily respect an apology but I would understand why they would issue one. I would have respected them sticking to their guns. Whining like a bunch of spoiled children because they didn’t get their way was probably the worst thing they could have done.

Comment by Jason O — 1:59 pm
I couldn’t agree more. They obviously have not learned a thing from the boycott, and came back with a “in your face” song to underscore their point. I told my favorite local country station that every time they play “Not Ready To Make Nice,” I change the station to their competitor or turn the radio off. They are free to do with that information whatever they please, with my blessing and no ill will whatsoever toward the station.

Comment by Scot — 1:59 pm
I swear I proof-read the above before I posted it. I still let ytpos get through some how.

Comment by Jason O — 2:02 pm
Scott Ferris
Sorry, but most people don’t buy their music at Amazon.com. It’s probably selling well in many Blue States, but the Dixie Chicks gave their collective finger to their audience in the Red States years ago.

Some people call it Karma; I call it chickens coming home to roost.

Comment by Scott Kirwin — 2:07 pm
this was my argument from the beginning, but you put it so much more eloquently than i did.

i do believe that every american has the right to criticize the president — and plenty of them do, and i still respect them. but there is a line which separates criticism from judgement. i feel the group that deserves the right to judge the president (any president) is a much, much smaller one.

what’s the toughest decision that natalie maines/susan sarandon/random celebrity has to make in a day, and what are the consequences of that decision? do you think that qualifies them to judge the president, as a person or as a leader?

and if “right to free speech” meant that you get radio airtime, then we wouldn’t have enough slots on the dial to cover the 290 million new voices that MUST be heard.

perhaps even a worse decision than her original statement, and sticking to it for so long, was that the first single (”Not Ready to Make Nice”), more or less, says “i’m still right and you’re still wrong.”

maybe it would have been wiser to go back to singing songs everyone can enjoy about topics everyone can relate to. but then, that would only make one a more successful musician. exactly what do the dixie chicks want to be?

Comment by mike — 2:14 pm
What’s apalling is the 180 degree spin they pulled after the comments about Bush were made.

They made their fame singing songs about “empowered” women - leaving home and facing the world on your own (”Wide Open Spaces”), killing your abusive husband (”Goodbye Earl”), sexual freedom (”Sin Wagon”). “Girl Power” from the sticks…

Then, soon after they get criticized for their rude behavior, they whine and complain of censorship and assume the mantle of helpless victims of a conspiracy. feh.

Comment by DeluxeReverb — 2:23 pm
Rainmaker: Bingo! And congrats on your Instalanche!

The other funny thing is to hear the outspoken libs (generally, they are the anti-Bush libs) making widely disseminated public statements, then making even more widely disseminated public statements that someone is abridging their free speech rights. Hint to libs: In places where free speech is squelched (like Iraq under Saddam and Afghanistan under the Taliban or Iran now… or China and Cuba) you don’t get a chance to publicly complain about it… you’re dead or in jail. Though Saddam was a softie and merely cut out tongues.

Comment by Pat — 2:25 pm
Number 1 on iTunes as well!!!

Comment by Dallas Texan — 2:26 pm
What annoys me even more about them is that, recently, Maines has taken back her apology for her statement.

If you’re going to going to take a stand, you should stick with it. It indicates character.

They’re like Green Day, a “revolutionary” band who decided not to burn the flag on-stage because they feared the reaction.

Comment by Bill Peschel — 2:29 pm
“It appears the war U.S. country radio stations mounted against the politically outspoken Dixie Chicks has not abated in the least.”

- AND -

“WKIS FM in Miami reported it pulled “Not Ready to Make Nice” due to listener complaints after only one week.”

The “war” as it is described by UPI, is NOT being mounted by the radio stations. Instead, their CUSTOMERS have decided that they don’t like the product. Radio stations maintain listenership by satisfying their CUSTOMERS.

If you offend your CUSTOMERS they may not buy your products. It doesn’t matter if your selling sneakers or pithy tunes.

dung.

Comment by Moose Dung — 2:40 pm
Despite the obvious fact thay Maines’ international outburst of criticism of the President was the death knell for the ‘Chicks, I suspect their career started a steep slide downhill with the release of “Goodbye Earl,” an anti-male anthem that advertised murdering your husband as a justifiable solution to domestic violence.

It came out at a time when American women were beginning to turn away from feminism in droves and the “woman as perpetual victim/man as perpetual criminal” meme began it’s steep decline. Maines hasn’t learned a thing from her spat with Toby Keith. She remains an annoying shew, and frankly, I don’t know any man who would actually want to be married to her.

Comment by Frank H — 2:44 pm
Country Music sucks anyway…..their latest apparently sucks worse than the norm….The Amazon phenomenon is probably the result of the Time magazine article and all of their readers feeling they “had to do something”.

There is a reason the back catalog sells as well or better than current releases. The quality of the music is better. These days spin and smoke seem to dominate the music industry.

Comment by obliquo — 2:53 pm
“Free speech is not without cost” — mantra learned by every law student who ever studied the First Amendment, as far as I can tell

Comment by Ken Pierce — 2:55 pm
Thanks for this piece. I see the Dixies on the cover of Time magazine; yeah, that’ll help…

My husband and I started getting into the D.C.’s in a huge way toward the end of 2002. They had a couple of concerts that aired on TV and we were fast becoming addicted to their music and loved the new CD, “Home.” I was about to buy it when Natalie opened her big, fat, ugly yap in spring 2003 on the eve of the war.

We have not spent 1 more dime on them nor have we listened to their music. The betrayal and outrage I felt by a group from the South that should have fundamentally understood patriotic behavior (i.e. do not badmouth the U.S. president overseas on the eve of war) is hard to describe. I’m not southern but I fully support the country music stations’ boycott. I have been known to complain to store management when I hear a D.C. song playing.

Your freedom of speech is not my obligation to listen, much less buy. Nor is anyone obligated to listen to anything I say. That these obtuse broads don’t understand this, much less the fundamentals of capitalism, shows me my time and money are far more deserved by others elsewhere. They became persona non grata to me 3 years ago and so they remain, along with a whole host of America-hating Hollywood libs who cannot keep their big yaps shut. When you’re selling a product to the public, don’t offend or you reap what you sow. Period.

Who says boycotts don’t work? By the way, did you see the nasty expressions on their faces on the Time cover? They have not learned one thing in 3 years.

Comment by Peg C. — 2:58 pm
I’m glad. If they are embarrased to be from Texas, then fine. Perhaps they should move out of the country.

Comment by Lewis Salem — 3:04 pm
They’re going a different way and bypassing radio-as-promotion, methinks. Last nite on the popular NBC drama, “Medium,” one of the songs from the new album played throughout the episode; so often, in fact, it seemed the episode was written to enhance the music, rather than the other way around. Like an hour-long music video.

Comment by Trudy W. Schuett — 3:11 pm
Amen Jason O! Is anything more annoying than the confusion between the right to say what you’d like, and the freedom from having other people think you’re an idiot because of what you said?

Comment by Peter McNaughton — 3:15 pm
Tou ignorant, selfish, free-speech-hating people just don’t get it: the Dixie Chicks DO have the right to speak out and say things that offend you, but you DO NOT have the right to stop buying their music and making them rich. They’re CELEBRITIES dammit. Only THEIR rights are important, you stupid non-famous peons.

Now march over to Wal-Mart and buy what your superiors have determined is best for you. Because THAT is freedom, not thinking for yourself.

Comment by TallDave — 3:21 pm
It is a truism that while the First Amendment protects your right to make an ass of yourself, it does not actually require you to do so.

Comment by Stan — 3:21 pm
You can listen to their entire album here. It’s not nearly as good as their older material and many of their lyrics are, in fact, whiny and self-indulgent. I mean, they need to get out more if they are going to do some decent song-writing.

Comment by Indigent Blogger — 3:27 pm
I don’t know how much I trust Amazon ranking. I mean their other album is number 23 (Wide Open Spaces) and Neil Young is number 4.

I don’t know anyone that has brought Young’s album. I know alot of ex-chick fans that won’t buy this new one.

Like Jason stated - it’s not that she bashed Bush, everyone does that. She is free to speak her mind. It’s where she did it (London instead of having the courage here). After she did it, they went on Primetime (With Diane Sawyers) and whined like selfish little girls. They complained and complained while taking no responibility for their actions.

Of course the Toby Keith war of words was pretty funny.

Comment by Nick O — 3:30 pm
This would be more galling by far if the fundamental, Aristotilian truth were not so glaringly borne out here. Crappy philosophy leads, at best, to crappy art. I would dearly love to see (or hear) Maines try to defend her ignorant Saddamophilia against, say, an educated and urbane victim of sharia. Oh, to explore the depths of Natalie’s stupidity! I might never return. Nearly as gratifying is the universal judgement on this latest work.

Comment by megapotamus — 3:43 pm
Trashing any US President to a foreign audience is poor taste; disloyal; like trashing your mom to other parents. Your company to competitors. It bothered lots of people who wouldn’t have been so upset if the vapid, clueless “chick” (VCC) had said the same thing in Miami.
The VCC is as clueless as Jane Fonda posing in Hanoi while Texas boys were being shot in Vietnam and later wondering what all the fuss was about. “I am just small-brained entertainer that alienated half my audience–maybe more since liberals in Manhattan don’t like Country music!”
Are the Chicks being treated unfairly? Ask Anita Bryant who lost her Orange Juice commercials after evidently taking a pot shot at gays; OJ who lost all his commercials for whatever he did. News Flash to the Chicks: “No we don’t have to buy your CD.”

Comment by DixieCup — 3:48 pm
Dixie Chick’s album is also today’s top album download at the Apple iTunes Music Store. Not that that is a full representation of the industry at large as not every music label is working with Apple’s iTunes Music Store…. Plus, I have seemed to notice that musicians who are publically leftist/progressive are very high in the Apple iTunes charts… so that probably says more about the customer-base who purchases from that store.

Comment by Eric Anondson — 3:51 pm
Amazon as the arbriter of music? Surely you jest. Sales is the arbriter. It’s a measure of market appeal.

Comment by Garrett — 3:57 pm
Yes, the essential factor in free speech is you have to stand behind what you say, not pout if you end up having to pay for it. Otherwise, hold your breath until the urge goes away.

I suspect Maines (who may still live in Austin, where everyone she knows probably agrees with her opinions) was overcome with self-importance and blurted it all out. Too bad; not only poor taste to bad-mouth your Pres to outsiders, not only impractical to misread your country-music audience and their opinions, but also immature and dumb to complain (as noted in #3) when the people you depend on for your prosperous living decide they don’t want to buy.

Maybe they’ll make it in pop music; they’d better because–speaking personally–I never thought their music was all that good anyway.

Comment by Gordon Daugherty — 3:59 pm
Scott, Amazon is offering their CD at a 47% discount, so I’m guessing most of the online folks who want a copy are buying it on Amazon. Wait until their Billboard ranking comes out before you leap to any conclusions about capitalism working for or against your argument….

Comment by Mark — 4:09 pm
I feel pretty much the same way as Jason. What really sank them was the self-pity and their attempt to paint themselves as somehow heroic and martyred. Like the American public has a duty to pay them millions of dollars or we don’t support free speech!

Frankly Maines comes off in interviews like a self-absorbed sorority girl who’s long on snyde opinions and short on facts - maybe this is where the ’self indulgence’ comes from. Who wants to pay for that?

Comment by Jack — 4:10 pm
The thing that always annoyed me about the Chicks thing was how it was a typical example of a certain species of American liberal who sees Europe as the center of Enlightened Thinking, and who go out of their way to inform Europeans that they aren’t like those other redneck neaderthals, that really they’re the DECENT sort of American. I don’t mind if you’re against the war, I don’t mind if you hate Bush, but sucking up to a bunch of clueless eurotrash is just sad…

Comment by jimbo — 4:20 pm
I remember the initial comment. I nearly went out and bought a Chicks CD just so I could throw it in the trash.

Comment by Lastango — 4:28 pm
I would agree that the reason the Dixie Chicks aren’t selling is capitalism. It’s why most of the best country music artists today, like Willie Nelson, Emy Lou Harris, and Merle Haggard don’t sell, but pretty-boy garbage like Rascall Flats and Tim McGraw do.

The real story here is that ever since the 1980’s mainstreamed country music has turned its back on authentic artists like George Jones, Loretta Lynn, etc. in favor of packaged stars who put on a cowboy hat and boots and sing pop music. Artists who actually play instruments and don’t play by the formula, like the Dixie Chicks, have no place in this system. Mainstream country music fans want whitebread, watered-down songs that conform to their very narrow views of family, country, and religion. This is the last place an adventurous music trio to survive long-term, regardless of any political controversy.

And by the way, the Dixie Chicks received legitimate death threats. I’d say that legitimates any complaints they might have about how redneck country radio reacted to a casual comment.

Comment by Nate — 4:41 pm
“Freedom of Speech does not mean freedom from the consequences of that speech.”

Amen! You have the freedom to speak about anything you wish (with the exception of yelling FIRE! in a crowded theater), and I have the right to listen or not, and to make purchasing decisions based upon what you said. Its a free country, and the concepts of free speech are pretty simple. My refusing to purchase your products based upon what you said is not censorship, nor is my trashing all of my Dixie Chicks CD’s after they said what they said censorship. You are still free to say what you want. That has not changed one iota.

I still don’t understand the insanity of celebrities cutting their own throats. Who really cares about their political leanings as long as they keep it to themselves. But as soon as they espouse some political ideology, I’m now free to take that into account when I make purchasing decisions, which is only natural. The Dixie Chicks came off as very anti-American, in a genre known for its very basic American values. The best way to make those kind of celebrities go away is to not put any money into their pockets, and thats just exactly what happened with the Dixie Chicks. Welcome to freedom of choice, Natalie.

Comment by Vulgorilla — 4:45 pm
Plucked

(Hat Tip: Instapundit) Texas Rainmaker uses the Dixie Chicks as Exhibit A when disputes the notion that the concept of free speech and the laws of supply and demand are identical….

Trackback by Pajamas Media — 4:55 pm
And of course, so-called “news magazine” Time puts the Chicks on the cover and lauds them for their brave speaking of truth to power.

Being so out of touch with mainstream opinion of the US populace, it is no wonder Time’s circulation is plummeting.

Comment by Kosmopolit — 4:57 pm
Speaking Truth To Poseur

The Anchoress has some suggestions for Madonna, on how she could improve her rather worn-out stage act. Update: The recipe for McDonald’s Secret Sauce is still a closely-guarded secret, but the current formula for McRockStar isn’t. Related thoughts, …

Trackback by Ed Driscoll.com — 4:59 pm
Jason O: “I’ve never really minded that they were outspoken against Bush,..”

The thing is, they weren’t outspoken about Bush, they insulted Texas, Texans and every American who voted for Bush. They had no intelligent comment, only disdain for their audience. And the audience knew it, which ties right into the topic here.

Comment by Jabba the Tutt — 5:01 pm
Precisely. I find that many on the Left these days do not understand that free speech does indeed carry consequences. While they are constantly screaming ‘hate speech’ or ‘racism’ at those with whom they disagree, they seem to think that they should be free to utter whatever nonsense they wish without having to endure the consequences. The Dixie Chicks have now discovered this fact. They are perfectly free to voice whatever opinions they wish. However, if their intended audience disagrees with them, that auience is also perfectly free to refrain from purchasing the Dixie Chicks’ product. That is not censorship- it is freedom of choice. The Dixie Chicks MIGHT have finally learned that lesson.

Comment by Rich N — 5:08 pm
“Medium” used a DC song from the new album throughout the finale last night, and displayed a picture of the album with the title and the name of the group before the credits rolled. The WB does that sort of thing (crossover ownership of networks and record companies, I assume) but I don’t recall ever seeing this on a major network. Hmmmm.

Comment by Squashblossom — 5:15 pm
I listened to “Not Ready to Make Nice” on their website and I like it - both the music and the words. The theme actually fits both sides of the debate, since neither side seems willing to move on. But then I’m not a country-western music fan, so my opinion is probably suspect to most of this blog’s readers…

Comment by Adam — 5:25 pm
Bush should invite the Dixie Chicks to the White House to perform. I’m serious about this.

It would be like Lincoln, after Lee’s surrender, requesting that the band play “Dixie.” Lincoln reached out to the other side, and we could use a similarly conciliatory gesture now.

Comment by Frank Warner — 5:39 pm
I am from Alabama, the “Heart of Dixie”. Myself and my friends would all appreciate it if the Chicks would stop using our regional moniker in their bands name, as we are all ashamed of them and their behavior.

Comment by Bluce Ree — 5:43 pm
Just heard an interview with DC on NPR. Whatta loada crap. First they complained about just trying to show that they didn’t agree with Bush (of course the quote was about being ‘ashamed’ of being from the same state, not about disagreeing with a policy) and it was free speech. Then Natalie Maines whined about seeing a mother holding a two-year-old and saying “Screw you” to the DC and encouraging the two-year-old to say “screw you” to them and saying that was teaching ‘hate speech’. Seriously (or, serially if she liked AlGore), she equated that free speech with hate speech.

I’m beginning to think that if you added all three of their IQs it would hardly reach room temperature.

Comment by JorgXMckie — 5:48 pm
[…] For those of you that don’t know anything about country music and have never heard of the Dixie Chicks, they have been kind of on “vacation” for a few years. Their vacation was fan imposed after they began bashing the United States while visiting other countries. Since most country fans are very very American, that was a quick way to alienate their core fans. Not too smart on their part. To read all about it, visit here. It is a great blog that shares the whole story. […]

Pingback by odds and ends » sometimes consequences are rough — 5:58 pm
When I think of the Dixie Chicks I think of the nugget supposedly said by Hubert Humphrey:
“The right to be heard does not guarantee the right to be taken seriously”

Comment by gkirk — 6:03 pm
> And by the way, the Dixie Chicks received legitimate death threats. I’d say that legitimates any complaints they might have about how redneck country radio reacted to a casual comment.

Actually, it legitimates nothing.

I’ve received death threats. ESR has received death threats.

Which reminds me - what evidence is there that they’ve received death threats as a result of this? (Like most celebrities, they probably get death threats all the time. The fact that a recent batch mentions the eurotrash suck up does not mean that the eurotrash suck up actually motivated these death threats.)

Comment by Andy Freeman — 6:37 pm
1. They have ALREADY sang for Bush. A few times in fact. Once was at his innaguration when he was govenor. Another was when he was the owner of the Texas Rangers. They would have the announcer introduce them as “personal friends”.

2. Natalie Maines ALREADY took back her apology back in 2004 to Vogue Magazine. She didnt get the traction she was looking for then, so is restating it again for the sake of selling cd’s.

3. Amazon nor Itunes is a guage for album sales. Bruce Springsteen was on top of both of their charts for weeks. Yet in his first week of sales only managed to sell 145K adn has sold less and less every week since. However hitsdailydouble.com is reporting “early” reporting numbers to show them selling around 300K their first week. Their last album, Top of the World, had similar sales, it has yet to sell a million copies. I am not sure if these are the same “early” reports that had Kerry winning the election. LOL~

4. They rights were never in jeapordy. Freedom of speech is not free from consequences nor is it a guarantee of airplay. The rights of the artists NEVER trump the rights of the comsumer.

5. They moved out to Los Angeles a few years ago to undergo an extreme makeover which includes but is not limited to reconstructive surgery.

7. The have stated on several occasions that they are “no longer country” In fact they went so far as to say country music is NOW “redneck” despite previosuly signing songs about “white trash weddings”. In fact they say they want only “cool” fans now and that they dont want their cd’s om the same player as the cd’s of Toby Keith & Reba McEntire.

6. They dont even vote, yet feel the stage afforded to them by those they NOW call “Rednecks” and not “cool”, is the place to preach to those who DO vote.

8. BOYCOTT THE DC EVERYDAY ALL THE WAY!

Comment by figgins — 6:38 pm
What I find interesting is that now the Dixie Chicks are saying that country music was never what interested them anyway and now they are able to do the kind of music they always wanted to. I would bet that the boycott and the dwindling sales of their albums and the lack of airtime had a lot to do with that statement of theirs. They realize that they have cut themselves off from their background so now they want to make it seem as if it were their choice. Fat chance of that succeeding.

Comment by dick — 7:11 pm
#44: I wholeheartedly approve of your idea… under the same conditions that applied to Lincoln’s gesture; i.e. an end to sedition and an unconditional surrender of the Democratic traitors.

Until then, like Lincoln and Grant, I feel that there can be no compromise with those who would rip apart and destroy my nation.

Comment by DaveP. — 7:14 pm
Frank

you are a moron. the country doesnt need to make up with some self-absorbed, immature, blowhard millionaire musicians. that is the dumbest thing ive ever heard. Abraham Lincoln?? wtf??? the president of the most powerful country in the world needs to concern himself with some shrills, for what??? wow, what a moron.

Comment by jojo — 7:33 pm
Frank Warner

you are a moron. the country doesnt need to make up with some self-absorbed, immature, blowhard millionaire musicians. that is the dumbest thing ive ever heard. Abraham Lincoln?? wtf??? the president of the most powerful country in the world needs to concern himself with some shrills, for what??? wow, what a moron.

Comment by jojo — 7:34 pm
I’m kind of surprised to hear the Dixie Chicks aren’t doing so well. I saw a recent picture of Natalie Maines and she looked very well fed. Go figure.

Comment by El Duderino — 7:50 pm
Furtive Glances - Mr. Mom Edition

I stayed home from work today so that the lovely Gwendolyn could further her education at a seminar in Boston. I found myself busy with childcare, chauffeur duty, food preparation, medical liason, housekeeping - all of those things that Gwendolyn

Trackback by Joust The Facts — 7:57 pm
The Chicks are toast. They are too stupid to know what they want to be. Don’t cite their current rankings on Amazon or Itunes. They play crappy country music to an audience they have nothing but contempt for. If you think non-country fans are going to warm to their nauseating sound, think again. Blue state hipsters will give them some attention for a while and then move on to better music. They will all weigh 400 pounds and being playing sweaty dives in El Paso in ten years.

Comment by Gus — 7:59 pm
To the person who listed a number of artists as examples of good country versus what is on country radio today, two of the individuals you listed have recently had country hits: Willie Nelson had a country/reggae number that charted well this year and Merl Haggard has a duet with Gretchen Wilson that is on the charts now. Both are revered. They’re just older so they put out less material.

I’m not interested enough to analyze the sales data. It’s entirely possible the DC will find success with a new liberal fan base, but I doubt they will ever come home to country. I bought all of their albums before the gaffe and listed to them all the time. I have thrown them all away. I will never, ever buy another. I turn the station if I hear a song of theirs. If I hear it in a store, I leave if possible and complain to the management.

They are traitors to the country family. And we take that sort of thing seriously.

Comment by Jon in Tennessee — 8:19 pm
And by the way, the Dixie Chicks received legitimate death threats. I’d say that legitimates any complaints they might have about how redneck country radio reacted to a casual comment.

Comment by Nate — 4:41 pm

Well, Nate, they’re still alive, so the threats weren’t legitimate. If they die an unnatural death, that may be the time to begin considering whether the threats were legitimate, but certainly not a time to jump to conclusions.

Comment by Nathan — 8:25 pm
Hey El Duderino: The United States is the “land of the overweight poor people”.

Maybe they don’t have the money for the spa membership anymore.

just sayin’

Comment by The Machine — 8:29 pm
Um, this latest round of stories is clearly about capitalism. The DCs have little real chance of the sort of success they had in country radio again. So they’re rebranding themselves. They said as much in a 60 minutes interview where they talked about going after the adult contemporary audience where this sort of faux liberalism and looking like the victim is a seller.

Comment by Brian Carnell — 8:34 pm
I doubt most people thought Maines’ initial apology was real to begin with — it came across more in the “I’m sorry for getting caught” category by the way they staged it — so her taking back the apology also comes as no surprise.

But aside from Bush, the Lubbock native seems to have a thing for wanting vengance against those who she feels done her wrong, including her hometown, which she claims on the new CD had treated her badly in the same way they treated Buddy Holly badly — which led to Holly’s brother telling the media he had no idea what Natalie was talking about.

This desire to lash out and seek revenge against people in your music’s likely target audience is self-defeating, unless you can get enough Blue State people (who usually disdain country music as yahoo noises about white trash folks) to go shell out $18 for your new release just on liberal solidarity. But her Truth to Power rantings will probably be enough to get her some TV or film roles in the near future, if she can lose some weight and keep the pounds off (or if she can’t, she can always be put into one of those supporting player spots Margaret Cho has been relegated to due to her excess poundage). And 5-10 years from now, the Chicks will probably be one of the featured acts on the bi-annual PBS Pledge Week fundraising concert show.

Comment by John — 8:40 pm
Frank Warner #44,

One problem with your Lincoln-Lee analogy is that I’m not sure it’s a true story. The closest I could find is the following (http://hippolytos.kalyptomenos.en.infoax.org/en/Dixie+(song)):

“… [f]or most Americans, “Dixie” was synonymous with the South. On 10 April 1865, one day after the surrender of General Robert E. Lee, Lincoln addressed a White House crowd:

“I propose now closing up by requesting you play a certain piece of music or a tune. I thought “Dixie” one of the best tunes I ever heard…. I had heard our adversaries over the way had attempted to appropriate it. I insisted yesterday that we had fairly captured it…. I presented the question to the Attorney-General, and he gave his opinion that it is our lawful prize…. I ask the Band to give us a good turn upon it.”

Thus, Lincoln wasn’t conceding anything, rather he was reappropriating for the United States a song he liked. Spoils of war, in a sense.

The other problem with your analogy is that the Dixie Chicks never “surrendered” to George W. Bush and it strikes me as singularly unfair to ask Bush to be conciliatory with an “enemy” that is still “fighting”.

Comment by DRJ — 8:55 pm
“I’d rather have a small following of really cool people who get it, who will grow with us as we grow and are fans for life, than people that have us in their five-disc changer with Reba McEntire and Toby Keith,” Maguire said. “We don’t want those kinds of fans. They limit what you can do.”

Martie Maguire

Not quite sure what the deal is with the insults to their fan base?

If it’s over for them they get what they deserve - too bad becasue they are talented.

Comment by AMDG — 9:19 pm
I’m kind of surprised to hear the Dixie Chicks aren’t doing so well. I saw a recent picture of Natalie Maines and she looked very well fed. Go figure.

Depends. Was she actually well-fed, or were her clothes merely under-fed?

Comment by anony-mouse — 10:47 pm
Adam,

Get George C Looney’s schwanz out of your rear and have a nice cup of stfu. Weenie.

Comment by Jaibones — 11:09 pm
> It would be like Lincoln, after Lee’s surrender, requesting that the band play “Dixie.” Lincoln reached out to the other side

Lincoln said that the Union “won” Dixie as a spoil of war so playing Dixie wasn’t “reach out”; it was “we won, it’s ours”, AKA “in your face, losers”.

Comment by Andy Freeman — 12:13 am
Jojo

You are very smart, I’m sure much smarter than I. But even the president of the most powerful country in the world has to remember he is the president of all the American people. Inviting the Dixie Chicks to the White House would not be making up with “some shrills.” It would demonstrate he’s not sealed off from his opposition, that he recognizes them as part of the American family. And you are smart.

Andy Freeman

Lincoln probably did view “Dixie” as the victorious Union’s lawful prize, but his request that it be played after Lee’s surrender also showed a sympathy for the vanquished. Heck, North and South could tap their toes to the same tune.

According to figgins, Bush already has tapped a toe to Dixie Chicks music. Having them over to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue wouldn’t hurt. It probably would help to calm the tempers that, until now, have poisoned the national debate over the liberation of Iraq.

Comment by Frank Warner — 12:57 am
John,

Who’s defending death threats, and which bastard am I fucking?

Asshat.

Comment by Son Of The Godfather — 2:33 am
“But her Truth to Power rantings will probably be enough to get her some TV or film roles in the near future, if she can lose some weight and keep the pounds off (or if she can’t, she can always be put into one of those supporting player spots Margaret Cho has been relegated to due to her excess poundage). And 5-10 years from now, the Chicks will probably be one of the featured acts on the bi-annual PBS Pledge Week fundraising concert show.”

Exactly. They’re positioning themselves as a more commercial version of the Indigo Girls. Blah.

Comment by Brian Carnell — 5:38 am
[…] The Dixie Chicks’ Business Move Is Not Working Out — Call me cynical, but I think their leader’s statement a few years ago while overseas (”Just so you know, we’re ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas.”) was a short-sighted business move to get that crowd on their side at that moment. That business move is not paying off so well, if early sales and audience reaction to their new album is any indication. Opposing the Iraq war is one thing; disrespecting your home audience by dragging an entire state into the matter was simply a bad business move. Similar thoughts come from Texas Rainmaker (HT Instapundit). […]

Pingback by BizzyBlog.com » Bizzy’s AM Coffee Biz-Econ-Life Links (052406) — 6:59 am
To Doug at 1:59 pm who seems to think the Dixie Twits never complained that their free speech were being curtailed.

Take a look at the cover of Entertainment Weekly where they posed nude. Maines has “free speech” written on her arms.

Comment by ST — 7:17 am
I loved the Chicks, when they played texas swing with a celtic tinge. then they split up, reformed and moved to NashVegas - sold out for the big money, which bless their hearts they made, but they lost me. The other day one of them was quoted as saying she was fine not having widespread popularity because it allowed them artistic freedom. Right. Honey, you all sold out a long time ago, and now I just don’t give a damn. Thank heavens for Dale Evens, too bad she couldn’t make cowgirls out of ya’ll.

Comment by paul — 9:13 am
#64 has the quote - what a load. Was Martie Maguire one of the orginial chicks? Or is she one who joined with Natilie to “sex” them up, and was willing to sell their souls to music row instead of staying true to their texas country roots?

I mean come on, its one thing to be a whore to The Man, its another to pretend that you are really his girlfriend and you really are an honost working girl.

someone should’ve explained to the girls what those Thunderheads in the western sky meant.

Comment by paul in Alabam — 9:35 am
Take a look at the cover of Entertainment Weekly where they posed nude. Maines has “free speech” written on her arms.

Sounds like an issue you need to take up with EW’s art director, but if that’s the best example you can come up with, my point still stands.

And to Nathan (#59), I just couldn’t let this pass:

Well, Nate, they’re still alive, so the threats weren’t legitimate. If they die an unnatural death, that may be the time to begin considering whether the threats were legitimate, but certainly not a time to jump to conclusions.

By that rationale, since Iraq never attacked us, the “threat” that President Bush used as a reason to go to war wasn’t legitimate either, wouldn’t you agree?

Comment by Doug — 9:55 am
Apparently there is some confusion here about the definition of censorship. Here it is:

“The act, process, or practice of censoring”

And the definition of censore is:

“to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable”.

No where does it it mention the government or the constitution.

When radio stations don’t play their album because they consider it objectionable, that is censorship.

When people don’t buy their album because they consider it objectionable, that is capitalism.

Comment by DR — 10:15 am
“When radio stations don’t play their album because they consider it objectionable, that is censorship.”

When radio stations determine a majority of their listeners (ie. “consumers”) don’t want to hear the music, it’s a business decision not to play the music. Hence, capitalism. They’re not going to play what consumers don’t want to hear. If they do, it affects their revenue. If consumers wanted to hear it, you can bet they’d be playing it. It wouldn’t be smart business to offer that which your consumer does not want.

Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 10:35 am
The Dixie Chicks are now known as “The Dixie Turkeys”.

Comment by Jim White — 10:58 am
“When radio stations don’t play their album because they consider it objectionable, that is censorship.” DR

Actually DR, it’s both, it’s censorship and capitalism. (At least so using your broad definition of ‘censorship’, which includes both legal and illegal forms.) However, the focus is censorship infringements protected against by Constitutional and statutory guarantees, not censorship in the most general sense. The general definition you’re using would include something as common as parents censoring what their five or ten year old may watch on tv. The focus is codified forms of censorship protected against by the law - and that form is virtually always in reference to government sponsored censorship, not privately initiated forms.

“They had no intelligent comment, only disdain …” Jabba the Tutt

Precisely, this gets to the heart of so much of it. It was the voluble lack of anything which was intelligent. Their comments were those of pampered girls expressing disdain, not serious comments on global affairs.

Comment by Michael B — 10:59 am
The other thing I thought was funny when the initial 2003 ruckus broke out is that the supporters of the Chicks were lambasting Clear Channel Communications for the decision by many of their country stations to take the girls’ songs off the air. The accusation was that Lowery Mays, CEO of Clear Channel and supporter of George W. Bush, was the one secretly behind the decision, as opposed to any public outcry among their fan base.

At the same time, many people were irate not only at the Chicks, but at the fact that they could not get refunds for the girls’ summer concert series, which began around Memorial Day in 2003. The evil company refusing to refund the money, assuring the Chicks of a big payday no matter how many fans actually went to the shows? Rainbow Ticketmaster, a subsidiary of Clear Channel Communication, Lowery Mays, CEO.

In both case of their airplay and the non-refunds of tickets, it was all about business and the bottom line. And if radio stations aren’t playing the songs now, it’s about the exact same thing.

Comment by John — 11:19 am
The Dixie Chicks aren’t less popular; it’s just that their appeal is becoming more selective.

Comment by Ian Faith — 11:52 am
74) I think Martie and her sister were original DC’s and Natalie joined later.

“people that have us in their five-disc changer with Reba McEntire and Toby Keith,” Maguire said. “We don’t want those kinds of fans.” I am happy to comply with that wish. Seems real stupid to say ‘we don’t want fans of another artist in our genre` to be our fans’, but then again the DC’s have never shown themselves to be very smart.

Somebody needs to sell a T-shirt with FUDC on the front

Comment by anon — 12:07 pm
“We don’t want those kinds of fans.”

They ran a commercial during the country music awards last night for those same fans.

Comment by Ken H — 3:11 pm
Freedom Of Speech And The Extreme Left

Reading about the rude reception that Senator John McCain received at New York’s New School and the diatribe unleashed upon the graduates at the University…

Trackback by Weekend Pundit — 3:58 pm
Boycotting an artist or corporation because of something they say or advocate isn’t a violation of the First Amendment, it is an expression of that Amenndment — specifically, the right of freedom of association.

Anyone who starts whining about the First Amendment in response to free criticism and/or free boycott, immediately confesses to a great yawning ignorance of that Amendment’s nature and the principles it recognizes. Such people should subsequently be treated with the condescension they deserve until they wise up.

The principles of freedom do not cease to apply when a certain action is deemed “economic”.

Comment by Jimmay — 4:52 pm
“The real story here is that ever since the 1980’s mainstreamed country music has turned its back on authentic artists like George Jones, Loretta Lynn, etc. in favor of packaged stars who put on a cowboy hat and boots and sing pop music. Artists who actually play instruments and don’t play by the formula, like the Dixie Chicks, have no place in this system. Mainstream country music fans want whitebread, watered-down songs that conform to their very narrow views of family, country, and religion. This is the last place an adventurous music trio to survive long-term, regardless of any political controversy.”

Buy and listen to a copy of “Shouldn’t a Told You That” or any other album with Laura Lynch instead of Natalie Maines and you’ll realize how silly that statement was.

Was a fan starting in ‘91, heard them play upstairs at the Third Floor Cantina in Bryan-College Station and have Emily Erwin’s autograph to prove it.

They sold out when the hired Maines.

Comment by Kicker — 7:06 pm
I thought that the two sisters had stayed, and they hired Maines. As I recall (I was in The Fort - as in Worth at the time) the sisters wanted to move to NashVegas and hit it big, and they knew they’d have to change their tune, while the thrid wanted to stay texas.
So what fans were they looking for? Sure looks like this is a case of buyers remorse “we sold our souls to music row, but we didn’t really mean it and want to take it back now.”
Sorry, can’t shake hands with the devil and say you are only kidding (thanks they might be giants)
HATTIP to Instapundit who led me here.

Comment by paul in Alabam — 7:55 pm
“We don’t want those kinds of fans”? Something tells me that their record label feels quite differently!

Comment by Jonathan — 8:49 pm
Why haven’t I heard about Reba’s comment on the ACM Award show;

“I was really nervous about doing this show, but I figured what the heck, if the Dixie Chicks can sing with their feet in their mouths, I can do this show.”

It got a standing ovation from the audience.

Comment by Mike — 3:05 pm
Sunday Song Lyric:

Back in 2003, the Dixie Chicks alienated a good portion of their fan base when lead singer Natalie Maines told a London concert audience that she was embarrassed to be from the same state as President George W. Bush. Many country music stations respon…

Trackback by The Volokh Conspiracy — 3:59 am
Looks like they waited a little too long to finally stop speaking. Welcome to the world of capitalism.

#1 on Billboard.

“Chicks have become the first female group in chart history to have three albums debut at #1″

Welcome indeed!

Comment by City of Canals — 7:49 am
Hmmm… Billboard’s own website doesn’t have them listed anywhere in the Top 200. But hey, why should I believe the actual chart over the record company’s press release?

Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 7:56 am
I don’t get it about the charts not listing the album, either, but here is an article confirming the #1 debut from Billboard’s news section:
http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/news/index.jsp

Comment by Openmouthedfool — 10:45 am
There they are.

Comment by first time visitor — 8:24 am
Let’s see if their position is sustained beyond the initial bulk purchases from record labels and institutional buyers.

Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 8:29 am
I find it interesting to see all the “defenders” of the Ditzy Twits here all puffed up like Blowhardfish in pride of these bubble headed bleach blonds and in defence of their statements. The Blowhardfish seem to also think that no one should speak ill of them, either. Typical. The Blowhardfish here also tend to overlook the fact that they insulted a good 95% of their potential audience with their other statement in their interview about Country music fans which probably has more to do with their lack of airplay then their statements about Bush. In reality any one who has their political views shaped by some dipstick “celebrity” has no right voting in the first place, which I know would leave out alot of people who vote for Democrats but that is too bad.

I would imagine that their sales are mostly comprised of LLL’s who are buying their album because of their political views and the massive free publicty campaign in the MSM for them (a freaking WEEK on GMA? Give me a break, they are not that good!) and not because they necessarily like their music.

In the end these “wymyn” are just another bunch of loons from the Texas State Mental Institution aka Travis county.

Comment by Nahanni — 8:35 am
From Reuters:

Initial ticket sales for the Dixie Chicks’ upcoming tour are far below expectations and several dates will likely be canceled or postoned.

Ticket counts for the 20-plus arena shows that went on sale last weekend were averaging 5,000-6,000 per show in major markets and less in secondaries, according to sources contacted by Billboard. Venue capacities on the tour generally top 15,000.
…
The plug was pulled on public on-sales for shows in Indianapolis (August 23), Oklahoma City (September 26), Memphis (September 27) and Houston (September 30) because of tepid pre-sales in a national promotion with Target stores.

Oops.

Comment by Texas Rainmaker — 6:39 pm
[…] Continuing their capitalism vs. censorship lesson, the Dixie Chicks are quickly finding out that industry-bloated record sales numbers don’t really reflect consumer interest. […]

Pingback by Texas Rainmaker » Dixie Chicks’ Lesson Continues… — 6:56 pm
Frank Warner #68

Once again you are missing something very basic. The nation DOES NOT CARE about the dixie chicks, and they mean NOTHING to our nations well being. Only their record company and the media who wish to make them martyrs, along with people who simply like their music, care about them. They MEAN NOTHING. Why would a President of the United States care about these whiny millionaires??? I would be furious as would most people if the president wasted the peoples time reaching out to the whiny self indulgent ignorant entertainers who think they are entitled to a one on one dailogue with the president.

Dude, whatever utopia you are living in take a look around, there isnt anyone else with you. That should tell you something.

Comment by JoJo — 5:06 pm
Smile

Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with your Microsoft product.

Trackback by Joseph — 7:26 am
Generic pharmacy online

Generic pharmacy online - The best way to purchase RX drugs

Trackback by Generic pharmacy — 1:20 pm
Tramadol cod.

Buy tramadol online save wholesale price yep. Buy tramadol. Tramadol.

Trackback by Tramadol. — 12:41 am
Bleeding and amoxicillin.

Amoxicillin.

Trackback by Amoxicillin. — 10:40 pm
Buy ambien online.

Internet-rx.com ambien. Does ambien cause fetal birth defect. Ambien latest side effects. Ambien. Where can i buy ambien for next day delivery. Ambien coupon abate.

Trackback by Ambien cr. — 7:51 pm
Dextroamphetamine adderall comparison.

Adderall xr side effects. Dexadrine adderall comparison. Adderall. Adderall treating anxiety in adults. Adderall idiopathic edema. Adderall xr. Snorting concerta adderall.

Trackback by Dextroamphetamine adderall comparison. — 2:15 pm
Buy no prescription carisoprodol

Lookup for a no prescription carisoprodol in the following address

Trackback by carisoprodol — 8:13 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI