This story from msnbc discusses the new Dixie Chicks single, "Not Ready to Make Nice" which is about the controversy that erupted in 2003 when Natalie Maines, the frontwoman, said she was ashamed that W was from her home state at concert in London. As you may recall, country music fans got their feathers in a tizzy and not only stopped listening to the Chicks' music, but held cd burning bonfires and demanded radio stations remove them from the airwaves. While I don't have a problem with what Maines said, I suppose I can understand that the "patriotic" among us may not have liked the way she said it, but they completely missed the point - her comment was in the context of expressing outrage against the war in Iraq. And if those people truly understood the "freedom" that we're "fighting for" in Iraq, they might understand that in America it's ok to disagree with the president and to voice that opinion. Yes, even when we're at war.
But I digress. My main concern is about what's going on with this new single. There is drama and no doubt meetings and watercooler talk about whether to play their new song. The article says that fans in St. Louis have already complained enough to get it taken off the air. Some radio stations it seems just flat out aren't playing it. From the station's point of view, I understand that it's a business and they must play what the customers want, but one station is not even seeing what the listener reaction might be because he doesn't like the confrontational nature of the song. He feels like it's too in your face. So, instead of letting the listeners hear the song and decide for themselves, he's just going to flat out censor the Dixie Chicks until they have a more friendly, lovey-dovey song. This is why radio in the U.S. sucks. But again I digress.
What I honestly do not understand is how people are so irate that 3 years later they will call in to boycott a new album, but fucking R. Kelly not only has sex with little girls, but videotapes it and no one bats an eyelash when he makes a comeback. And Roman Polanski was arrested and about to go on trial for rape back in the 70s when he fled to Europe - a couple years ago the Academy gave him an Oscar. Hundreds of entertainers are charged with assault - of women and men - but that gets nicely swept under the rug and no one gives a shit. Why? Because everybody is focused on the "art."
The Dixie Chicks haven't done anything half as bad as those people. Honestly, they didn't do anything bad at all - they exercised their First Amendment right to political speech, what I'm learning is THE core value of speech intended by the founding fathers - and people want to read them the Riot Act. If you don't like their music, don't listen to it, but damn, at least give it a chance. You liked it before you knew how they voted, didn't you?
2 comments:
this reminds me of teenage girls burning their beatles records after john lennon said the beatles were more popular than jesus.
but, you know, i think they bounced back pretty well....
I know I'm a little late coming to this so I apologize... My take on this: When any celebrity decides to stand on a soapbox and express their opinion, they run the risk of people disagreeing with it and chosing not to support them anymore. She didn't get thrown in jail for saying it so it really has nothing to do with the first ammendment. Maybe other celebs have gotten away with much worse because the fan base is different?
Post a Comment