yall Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 So I'm doing my usual 7:00 AM news site surfing today, and I'm seeing a ton of "Defiant Dixie Chicks" type of headlines. On top of that these stories seem to have the common theme that the Dixie Chicks were somehow censored and their constitutional right to freedom of speech was violated. Could someone please let the press know that an artist who says something that pi$$es off 50% of their core fan base, and then those fans choosing to ignore that artist's product, is neither censorship nor is it a violation of 1st amendment rights? My fiancee, who likes the Dixie Chicks, didn't seem to think they deserved 5 grammys, although she said it was their best album yet. I'm not much of a fan (I think the lead singer has a pig face and she rubs me the wrong way. I would like the other two to just rub me... ) and I have to wonder how much the controversy they have created impacted their nominations/awards. Not that I think the grammys are a measurement of anything that resembles artistic merit. (*Cough* *Sham!* *Cough*..) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Did you get the memo? When someone from the left has something to say, they are just "dissenting" and "excersing their patriotic 1st Amendment Rights." They are practicing the rights held near and dear to all of us! But, of course, any "dissent" to their "dissent" is nothing more than blatant "censorship", carried out by fascists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Did you get the memo? When someone from the left has something to say, they are just "dissenting" and "excersing their patriotic 1st Amendment Rights." They are practicing the rights held near and dear to all of us! But, of course, any "dissent" to their "dissent" is nothing more than blatant "censorship", carried out by fascists. RkFast: Copying and pasting his way to 4,000 posts in the PPP Forum... Don't you ever get tired of reading your one weak thought over and over again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 (edited) Did you get the memo? When someone from the left has something to say, they are just "dissenting" and "excersing their patriotic 1st Amendment Rights." They are practicing the rights held near and dear to all of us! But, of course, any "dissent" to their "dissent" is nothing more than blatant "censorship", carried out by fascists. The Dixie Chicks freedom of speech issue is/was one driven solely by the right wing media. As far as I know (I don't like, or listen to the musical genre) none of their music had a liberal, or even a political, bent. In fact, the only political statement that was made prior to this becaming(edit:sp) becoming a big deal was that one of them said something about Bush from the stage at a show in England (a country that was/is overwhelmingly anti-dubya). This was picked up by the right wing noise monkeys and pushed to "newsworthy" headline status. The Dixie Chicks just happen to play music in a genre that is usually pro-right, hyper-nationalist, thus the backlash (manufactured and beaten into the ground by the right wing media) from radio stations that cater to that style. Any other genre of music and this doesn't even register as news, as you could go out to any club in the US on any given night and hear much worse being said about Bush. Edited February 12, 2007 by Johnny Coli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 I'm not a Dixie Chick fan, nor could I name one of their songs, but when Clear Channel Communications bans your records it is significant - don' t they control over 80% of the commercial radio market in the country? It was clearly censorship. It was not, however, a 1st Amendment issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 RkFast: Copying and pasting his way to 4,000 posts in the PPP Forum... Don't you ever get tired of reading your one weak thought over and over again? Says the guy whose last contribution to a thread on PPP was posting quotes from the movie "Major League." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Says the guy whose last contribution to a thread on PPP was posting quotes from the movie "Major League." Runs like Hayes, hits like Mays? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 The Dixie Chicks freedom of speech issue is/was one driven solely by the right wing media. As far as I know (I don't like, or listen to the musical genre) none of their music had a liberal, or even a political, bent. In fact, the only political statement that was made prior to this becaming(edit:sp) becoming a big deal was that one of them said something about Bush from the stage at a show in England (a country that was/is overwhelmingly anti-dubya). This was picked up by the right wing noise monkeys and pushed to "newsworthy" headline status. The Dixie Chicks just happen to play music in a genre that is usually pro-right, hyper-nationalist, thus the backlash (manufactured and beaten into the ground by the right wing media) from radio stations that cater to that style. Any other genre of music and this doesn't even register as news, as you could go out to any club in the US on any given night and hear much worse being said about Bush. I dont think their actual music has anything to do with it, really. Sure...the fact that they were considered Country musicians probably affected the issue, but others have endured similar criticism for going overseas and bashing the U.S. It was always about what Maines said on that stage in the UK, which I thought was pretty terrible. And FWIW, I dont think criticism for bashing the home Country in a time of war is unwarranted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Runs like Hayes, hits like Mays? And who post total is only 300 behind mine! Love the movie, though. At least the sod has some taste, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 I dont think their actual music has anything to do with it, really. Sure...the fact that they were considered Country musicians probably affected the issue, but others have endured similar criticism for going overseas and bashing the U.S. It was always about what Maines said on that stage in the UK, which I thought was pretty terrible. And FWIW, I dont think criticism for bashing the home Country in a time of war is unwarranted. Was this the quote she was pilloried for something like, "I am embarrassed George Bush is from Texas." ? And wasn't it before the Iraq war? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 I'm not a Dixie Chick fan, nor could I name one of their songs, but when Clear Channel Communications bans your records it is significant - don' t they control over 80% of the commercial radio market in the country? It was clearly censorship. It was not, however, a 1st Amendment issue. True...and no different than when Wal-Mart wont carry it becuase it doesnt agree with their values. Id rather see a Country where companies can decide what to sell and what not to sell, based on their own values. When the day comes that companies are FORCED into what to sell, then we have a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Was this the quote she was pilloried for something like, "I am embarrassed George Bush is from Texas." ? And wasn't it before the Iraq war? It was during the time of the war. And I beleive that was the quote, yes. I..me...myself thought what she did was bad. YOUR mileage may vary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Says the guy whose last contribution to a thread on PPP was posting quotes from the movie "Major League." I'm surprised you caught the reference, seeing as it was in a film from the Leftist bastion that is Hollywood. Those jokes about Harris and his relationship with Jesus only furthered the movie studio's clear liberal agenda, right Rk? You are entitled to your views, I respect them as much my own or anyone else's. I don't pretend to have all of the answers and am always fairly open-minded. I don't post in PPP that often because, frankly, a lot of the 'issues' that are brought up, I don't consider to be issues at all (like the Dixie Chicks or macaca or crap like that.) I like when people link to articles that I wouldn't find elsewhere on my own, and that's usually how I spend my time here. Immediately dividing every single issue into left vs. right in post #3 of the thread (like you seem to do) forces a division into sides, promotes arguing and name calling, and limits open-mindedness and true discussion. Every thread turns into a blame game where your side is wrong and my side is correct, and it's my observation that you have a lot to do with steering the threads that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 I'm surprised you caught the reference, seeing as it was in a film from the Leftist bastion that is Hollywood. Those jokes about Harris and his relationship with Jesus only furthered the movie studio's clear liberal agenda, right Rk? You are entitled to your views, I respect them as much my own or anyone else's. I don't pretend to have all of the answers and am always fairly open-minded. I don't post in PPP that often because, frankly, a lot of the 'issues' that are brought up, I don't consider to be issues at all (like the Dixie Chicks or macaca or crap like that.) I like when people link to articles that I wouldn't find elsewhere on my own, and that's usually how I spend my time here. Immediately dividing every single issue into left vs. right in post #3 of the thread (like you seem to do) forces a division into sides, promotes arguing and name calling, and limits open-mindedness and true discussion. Every thread turns into a blame game where your side is wrong and my side is correct, and it's my observation that you have a lot to do with steering the threads that way. Post #2, actually. Post #3 is your fault. And there's something seriously wrong with any country in which the no-talent Dixie Chicks are political standard-bearers, and the first anniversary of the Iraqi Civil War is ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 I dont think their actual music has anything to do with it, really. Sure...the fact that they were considered Country musicians probably affected the issue, but others have endured similar criticism for going overseas and bashing the U.S. It was always about what Maines said on that stage in the UK, which I thought was pretty terrible. And FWIW, I dont think criticism for bashing the home Country in a time of war is unwarranted. Absolutely the musical genre had something to do with it. Country music is largely pro "god, guns and county". Any other musical style and most people wouldn't bat an eye. You could count the number of pro-Bush punk rock bands on the fingers of a double amputee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted February 12, 2007 Author Share Posted February 12, 2007 I'm not a Dixie Chick fan, nor could I name one of their songs, but when Clear Channel Communications bans your records it is significant - don' t they control over 80% of the commercial radio market in the country? It was clearly censorship. It was not, however, a 1st Amendment issue. I don't know that I would call it censorship. A media outlet can pick and choose what they want to play. CC probably felt that enough of their Nashville Pop audience would bristle at any Dixie Chick song, and felt it would better serve their customers/listeners by not playing the material. Their record sales and concert attendance figures probably suffered more from their ticked off core fanbase than it did CC deciding to not play their material. I don't really care, but it irks me to see the press calling artists "brave" for speaking their minds, as if there is a real danger of jack-booted goverment agents coming into their homes and pistol whipping them with broom handled mausers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Absolutely the musical genre had something to do with it. Country music is largely pro "god, guns and county". Any other musical style and most people wouldn't bat an eye. You could count the number of pro-Bush punk rock bands on the fingers of a double amputee. That the Dixie Chicks are country is arguable, at best. Have you heard their music lately? Okay, stupid question... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted February 12, 2007 Author Share Posted February 12, 2007 That the Dixie Chicks are country is arguable, at best. Have you heard their music lately? Okay, stupid question... As I refered to it earlier... it's better described as "Nashville Pop". Country music changed for the worse when they dropped the "& Western". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivier in france Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Absolutely the musical genre had something to do with it. Country music is largely pro "god, guns and county". Any other musical style and most people wouldn't bat an eye. You could count the number of pro-Bush punk rock bands on the fingers of a double amputee. exactly! All the Dixie Chicks have to do is to say that they're not a country band anymore but a folk band (after all isn't folk music just country music with leftist lyrics?!!) and suddenly everything we'll be back to normal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 True...and no different than when Wal-Mart wont carry it becuase it doesnt agree with their values. Id rather see a Country where companies can decide what to sell and what not to sell, based on their own values. When the day comes that companies are FORCED into what to sell, then we have a problem. Wasn't it said that their music was apolitical - so they were banned based on something they said, not on the content of their product. I don't think Market Censorship is such the benign force as you construe it to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 As I refered to it earlier... it's better described as "Nashville Pop". Country music changed for the worse when they dropped the "& Western". True enough. I was going to describe them to Coli as "Britney Spears with banjos." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 I don't know that I would call it censorship. A ban is clearly censorship, isn't it? All media have their censorship standards. I am not disputing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Desperately trying to care about mainstream corporate radio and their censorship of the Dixie Chicks. Sorry, can't pull it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 I'm surprised you caught the reference, seeing as it was in a film from the Leftist bastion that is Hollywood. Those jokes about Harris and his relationship with Jesus only furthered the movie studio's clear liberal agenda, right Rk? You are entitled to your views, I respect them as much my own or anyone else's. I don't pretend to have all of the answers and am always fairly open-minded. I don't post in PPP that often because, frankly, a lot of the 'issues' that are brought up, I don't consider to be issues at all (like the Dixie Chicks or macaca or crap like that.) I like when people link to articles that I wouldn't find elsewhere on my own, and that's usually how I spend my time here. Immediately dividing every single issue into left vs. right in post #3 of the thread (like you seem to do) forces a division into sides, promotes arguing and name calling, and limits open-mindedness and true discussion. Every thread turns into a blame game where your side is wrong and my side is correct, and it's my observation that you have a lot to do with steering the threads that way. For a dude who "smokes and jokes", you sure are uptight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Desperately trying to care about mainstream corporate radio and their censorship of the Dixie Chicks. Sorry, can't pull it off. Particularly since the free advertising sent their CD, concert, and merchandise sales through the !@#$ing roof. They're such victims... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 For a dude who "smokes and jokes", you sure are uptight. Damn it, I had $10 on you calling him a liberal for that post. Thanks, bastard... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Desperately trying to care about mainstream corporate radio and their censorship of the Dixie Chicks. Sorry, can't pull it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted February 12, 2007 Author Share Posted February 12, 2007 Particularly since the free advertising sent their CD, concert, and merchandise sales through the !@#$ing roof. They're such victims... I think that was only in Canada though. I think their stateside sales of merch, cd's, and tix went down siginificantly. What was funny was their audience got a slight augmentation from people who hated the President, but normally wouldn't touch country. I also recall them having some feud with the "Ford Truck Man". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 I think that was only in Canada though. I think their stateside sales of merch, cd's, and tix went down siginificantly. What was funny was their audience got a slight augmentation from people who hated the President, but normally wouldn't touch country. I also recall them having some feud with the "Ford Truck Man". I thought I head that nearly every American concert of theirs sold out - usually rapidly. Now I have to see if I can confirm that. As though I hadn't wasted enough time on this topic today... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted February 12, 2007 Author Share Posted February 12, 2007 I thought I head that nearly every American concert of theirs sold out - usually rapidly. Now I have to see if I can confirm that. As though I hadn't wasted enough time on this topic today... I'll help ya... (Man, I'm REALLY bored today... ) http://www.cbc.ca/arts/story/2006/06/10/di...tour.html?print The Dixie Chicks' Natalie Maines in New York in 2003. Maines's anti-Bush remark has had an effect on the band's concert sales in some cities. (AP Photo/Frank Franklin II) "This time around, we are willingly feeling our way through unchartered territory," said the statement. "Things don't come as easy as they might have come in the past, and it makes each accomplishment more exciting and appreciated. We will go where the fans are with great anticipation and no regrets." The group's spokesman is also quoted in a Saturday Los Angeles Times article as saying there has been "some reshuffling of dates" and additions to the itinerary. The Dixie Chicks' latest album, Taking the Long Way, opened in the No. 1 spot on the U.S. charts, selling 526,000 copies in seven days. Continue Article Industry reports say ticket sales are sluggish in Republican states because of the prolonged backlash to a 2003 comment by singer Natalie Maines at a British concert. She had said the group is ashamed to come from the same state, Texas, as President George W. Bush. "Basically, they're having to rethink the entire tour at this point," Gary Bongiovanni of the concert industry magazine Pollstar told Reuters. Concert schedule changes Bongiovanni says dates in Memphis, Tennessee, Oklahoma City, Indianapolis, Houston and Fresno, Calif., might have to be dropped from the tour. An extra date has already been added in Toronto." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 As far as Cumulus and Clear Channel goes, it definitely was censorship and a federal crime I think. Clear Channel ordered all of their program directors to completely stop playing the Chicks records, and since that crossed state lines, it became a federal issue. That's not company policy, that's censorship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted February 12, 2007 Author Share Posted February 12, 2007 As far as Clear Channel goes, it definitely was censorship and a federal crime I think. Clear Channel ordered all of their program directors to completely stop playing the Chicks records, and since that crossed state lines, it became a federal issue. That's not company policy, that's censorship. Huh? What exactly about that is a criminal act? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Huh? What exactly about that is a criminal act? It was an act of censorship and first amendment violation. They held Senate hearings on it over the media consolidation issue and this case was one of the major elements of it. In fact, even though I hate John McCain he did something extraordinary in those hearings for a guy I know, and McCain was the strongest critic of Cumulus and Clear Channel. he was the one that brought up the federal crime issue. Cumulus later lifted their ban. And now Clear Channel is selling off stations. This is not specifically related to the Dixie Chicks (the Clear Channel thing) but somewhat is, since that is what McCain was complaining about. That they had a monopoly on the marketplace, and then used that monopoly for censorship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted February 12, 2007 Author Share Posted February 12, 2007 It was an act of censorship and first amendment violation. They held Senate hearings on it over the media consolidation issue and this case was one of the major elements of it. In fact, even though I hate John McCain he did something extraordinary in those hearings for a guy I know, and McCain was the strongest critic of Cumulus and Clear Channel. he was the one that brought up the federal crime issue. Cumulus later lifted their ban. And now Clear Channel is selling off stations. This is not specifically related to the Dixie Chicks (the Clear Channel thing) but somewhat is, since that is what McCain was complaining about. That they had a monopoly on the marketplace, and then used that monopoly for censorship. But wasn't the criminal issue related to their monopoly, and not what they chose to play? Granted the two are related in that CC had to much power in that they controlled too much, but there is no crime in what they choose to play or not play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 As far as Cumulus and Clear Channel goes, it definitely was censorship and a federal crime I think. Clear Channel ordered all of their program directors to completely stop playing the Chicks records, and since that crossed state lines, it became a federal issue. That's not company policy, that's censorship. Uhhhh...no. There is no FCC regulation saying that a private, multi-state broadcast corporation must play the Dixie Chicks. Seriously...within the guidelines the FCC sets (i.e. decency standards, none of the "seven dirty words", all that nonsense), Clear Channel is well within their rights to set the playlists of their radio stations however they see fit. It may be censorship (one could also call it a freedom of speech issue protected by the First Amendment - specifically, Clear Channel's First Amendment right to decide themselves what they will and will not allow to be said on the radio), but it is company policy, and manifestly NOT a federal crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 It was an act of censorship and first amendment violation. They held Senate hearings on it over the media consolidation issue and this case was one of the major elements of it. In fact, even though I hate John McCain he did something extraordinary in those hearings for a guy I know, and McCain was the strongest critic of Cumulus and Clear Channel. he was the one that brought up the federal crime issue. Cumulus later lifted their ban. And now Clear Channel is selling off stations. This is not specifically related to the Dixie Chicks (the Clear Channel thing) but somewhat is, since that is what McCain was complaining about. That they had a monopoly on the marketplace, and then used that monopoly for censorship. Is the federal "crime" a First Amendment violation, or an anti-trust violation? Either way, it's bull sh--, as there's no federal law requiring the Dixie Chicks get air time. But let's at least be clear if our accusation is illegal censorship, or an anti-trust violation, shall we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 The free speech issue aside, these gals deserve all the awards they get. They are great musicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Uhhhh...no. There is no FCC regulation saying that a private, multi-state broadcast corporation must play the Dixie Chicks. Seriously...within the guidelines the FCC sets (i.e. decency standards, none of the "seven dirty words", all that nonsense), Clear Channel is well within their rights to set the playlists of their radio stations however they see fit. It may be censorship (one could also call it a freedom of speech issue protected by the First Amendment - specifically, Clear Channel's First Amendment right to decide themselves what they will and will not allow to be said on the radio), but it is company policy, and manifestly NOT a federal crime. That's why they held two Senate hearings on the issue, to see if they had violated the first amendment. And while Cumulus and Clear Channel were not officially charged with a federal crime, that is where it was headed. And now they are selling off some of their stations. The article linked doesn't refer to the specific exchange I am referring to, but during the hearings McCain got Renshaw to talk about the ban, and then brought up the crossing state lines issues, which would make it a federal crime. That's how McCain got the whole Dixie Chicks issue into the hearings. http://foi.missouri.edu/firstamendment/radio.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivier in france Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Is the federal "crime" a First Amendment violation, or an anti-trust violation? Either way, it's bull sh--, as there's no federal law requiring the Dixie Chicks get air time. But let's at least be clear if our accusation is illegal censorship, or an anti-trust violation, shall we? well a company having a monopoly and deciding the products it sells IS an anti trust violation. They use their monopoly to sell what they want to sell and not what the market 'd buy, this is a clear anti-trust violation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Is the federal "crime" a First Amendment violation, or an anti-trust violation? Either way, it's bull sh--, as there's no federal law requiring the Dixie Chicks get air time. But let's at least be clear if our accusation is illegal censorship, or an anti-trust violation, shall we? McCain (I can't believe I am sticking up for the bastard but he was great in this) called it a first amendment issue I believe. Perhaps both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts