The fact remains that the Dixie Chicks spoke out against the president, and got slapped down for it. The question is if the rancor is from the public, or generated by big-business media who wish to control what is said?

Citing its policy barring ads dealing with “public controversy,” the NBC network said on Friday it rejected a TV commercial for a new film documenting the furor over the Dixie Chicks’ criticism of President George W. Bush.

Ads for the documentary “Shut Up & Sing” also were rebuffed by the smaller CW network, though local affiliates of all five major broadcasters, including NBC and CW, ran promotional spots for the film in New York and Los Angeles, the two cities where it opened on Friday.

The ladies in the band certainly think political interests are behind the action, not concern for fans:

“…I think it was originally started by the “Free Republic”.  And they were very organized in calling radio stations across the country and telling them that they would never listen to their station, when they didn’t even live in that town.  And we knew that. 

At the beginning our manager tried to explain that to some program directors and they were not willing to listen.  It looked like we were grasping at straws, so we just sort of kept quiet and let it happen because they are a powerful, organized machine, and they wanted to take us down.  And they did.” 

I think both points have merit from their points of view. There are a lot of underinformed people who believe that Iraq was behind 9-11 and therefore feel that the Dixie Chicks’ action was treasonous, but the radio and TV stations blocking the band are all owned by Big Media.

I do believe that media consolidation will make things like this happen more often, and not just in the political arena. More and more decisions about what you can see and hear are made by fewer and fewer people.



  1. ChrisMac says:

    perfect answer

  2. Named says:

    18,

    9/11 WAS an inside job. Every airport involved had the same company managing security. Inside not meaning the government, but connected people to allow banned items on flights. Box cutters, or grenades, or guns, or whatever the original / modified / vetted story says were banned long before 9/11.

    As for the Dixie Chicks, I always thought that Americans believed in Freedom of Speech and all that good stuff. Guess I was wrong.

  3. John Urho Kemp says:

    #16 Angel Wong farted: When the dixie chicks first talked against Bush. I wanted to see someone kill one of them in retaliation

    You really wanted them to get killed just from what they said? You actually wished death on another human being just because she said some stupid line at some concert? Or was that your feeble attempt at humor or sarcasm?

    Who gives a crap what they said or didn’t say? They DO have just as much a right to talk about politics as anyone else. If THEY have to STFU, then Rush and Hannity and O’Reilly and whoever else have to STFU also. They also are just giving their opinions. If you don’t want to hear it, don’t watch their TV/Radio shows. If you don’t want to hear the Dixie Chicks or whoever spout it, DON’T FRICKEN GO. Sheesh, is someone holding a gun to your head making you listen to them?

    I swear, there are some real kooks that come to this forum. malren is one of the bigger kooks, but at least he actually posts something of substance. I’ve yet to ever read any Angel Wong posts of any substance other than blatant trolling.

    “Wanted to see someone kill one of them”…what the hell is wrong with you?

  4. TEX says:

    # 17 You mean Reagan of course?

  5. stew says:

    Sure they have been b-listed that is why I have heard so much about them this week. This blog along with the MSM have been pimping them all week. the poor little girls being beat up by the mean old bushies. Not my definition of b-listing. or if it is every artist wants it.

  6. ECA says:

    Who remembers ‘Laugh-in’…

    It started getting to political, and was DUMPED, and a few in the group were black listed, the Smothers Brothers, as one.

  7. Mike Voice says:

    21 They degraded our leader and President in a foreign land and that is a big NO NO.

    Why?

    Oh, I see…

    25 Her opinion was about her country and president and she should have had the guts to say it here…

    Hasn’t she?

    Funny how I’d never heard a Dixie Chicks song until Not Ready to Make Nice started getting air-play on the stations I listen to. 🙂

  8. tallwookie says:

    And if I was famous and millions of brainwashed idiots were transfixed on my every word then I’d make political statements too…

    as it stands now I dont give a fuck

  9. Sounds The Alarm says:

    I just wish those stupid bitches would shut up or get put in jail for what they said. Everyone knows the terrorists hate us for our freedom, so bitch slap anyone who has a different opinion. Different opinions are so unamerican.

    BTW Malren – Boo Hoo I’m sorry you feel so put on. Don’t worry, just work to revoke habeas corpus and allow tourchure – and teach us liberals a lesson on the real meaning of freedom. – Oh shit your righties did that already. Sorry I forgot.

  10. Glenn says:

    The Dixie Chicks, as individuals, have just as much right to their political opinions as any other individual in the U.S. The problem lies in two areas, one of which has already been pointed out in these responses, that the original comments were made to a foreign audience in a foreign country, which is a no-no; there are some things you just DON’T do, get over it!

    The second reason is that an audience has PAID to be there, ostensibly to hear them sing and NOT spout their political opinions which the audience member may or not agree with; but by the very act of paying to be there they may be seen to appear to agree with those comments. In this case I certainly do not not agree with them and would not pay to go to a Dixie Chick concert any more than I would go to a political fundraiser that would feature them that was put on by a political party I do not support. They are not going to make money off me so that their opinions can have more weight than mine do by using the “bully pulpit” of their stardom.

  11. George of the city says:

    There was no blacklisting to begin with. If anything they have gained new fans and outlets to perform. If you give your opinion on something publicly you have to be willing to accept the heat of that opinion.

  12. Smartalix says:

    41,

    I addressed your first point earlier in this string, but the point that follows it is absurd in context. If the chicks were in a foreign country preaching to the converted, where’s the fallen expectations? You can’t have it both ways.

    As for patronizing their music here in the US, you know their philosophies and therefore wouldn’t be surprised if they stated them during a concert. if you don’t want to hear those opinions, don’t buy a ticket. That’s how the market is supposed to work.

    However, to have people decide what you are allowed to hear and see just because they have been entrusted (they do not own our airwaves) with the means to reach the public is wrong to me.

  13. Rob says:

    The Dixie chicks made a classic mistake that had killed many in the entertainment industry. They misunderstood their audience.

    Lets be honest here, most people who listen to country music are probably conservative in nature, when you are in the entertainment business you have to realize that expressing a strong political view is probably going to hurt you, especially in today’s politics of personal destruction (I am looking at you neoLibs). That’s not to say that you can’t have political beliefs, or even strong political beliefs, it just you have to be prepared to face the fact that if you scream you political belief loudly enough you could piss off as much as half your audience, and could put off a person who would normally buy your record or pay to watch your movie. It seems that many conservative celebs have figured this out, while liberal celebs, repeat the same mistakes over and over again, then complain that they are having their free speech silenced somehow.

    Typical liberals.

  14. molasky says:

    “They degraded our leader and President in a foreign land and that is a big NO NO.”

    This is something you have asserted a several times. Why don’t you explain exactly why this is? That is, exactly why is what they said a “no no” because it was in England?

    (and don’t just say “if you don’t understand, move to France…” or something on that level.)

  15. Mr. Fusion says:

    #44, Rob

    You missed the whole point here. The Dixie Chicks were blacklisted for what they said. Not because their music was bad. Not because their records didn’t sell. But because a right wing group decided that any disagreement with the party line was verboten. It wasn’t a case that someone could change their radio station if they wanted to hear them, because ALL the country genera stations banned them.

    When one group can convince a few radio station owners to ban a specific act because they don’t like their politics, then it is time to revisit radio ownership standards. The lock that Clear Channel has over radio programming is the problem here, NOT what was said. The Dixie Chicks banning is only a highly visible symptom of the problem.

    Typical neo-con spin.

  16. Mike Voice says:

    41 The Dixie Chicks, as individuals, have just as much right to their political opinions as any other individual in the U.S.

    Is that it?

    We must all act like Stars & Stripes-waving, My Country Tis of Thee-singing, syncophants whenever we are abroad?

    Does the TSA need to post large “If you can’t say anything good, don’t say anything at all!” signs in International departure lounges & terminals, as a friendly reminder to citizens leaving the country?

    Any time I hear bull-crap like that, I think of “The Clinton Test”.

    It goes like this:

    If an Arkansas-based group was on-stage in England during Clinton’s term in office, and mentioned they were embarrassed that Bubba was from Arkansas – would you be equally outraged?

    Or is this a special case, because we were “at War”?

    41 The second reason is that an audience has PAID to be there, ostensibly to hear them sing and NOT spout their political opinions which the audience member may or not agree with;…

    Yeah. Linda Ronstadt found that out, too.

    http://tinyurl.com/yd2u3v

    41 … but by the very act of paying to be there they may be seen to appear to agree with those comments.

    OMFG…

    Every Bush-supporter who attended that concert has had their conservative credentials besmirched???

    Are they really that emotionally insecure?

  17. It’s clearly big media. However, the people in the South are easily manipulated. All you have to do in the South is call someone unpatriotic and everyone says ‘Ok’ and gets ready to attack and call in death threats. Such is the case with the Dixie Chicks.

  18. Wei says:

    Let’s start a boycott on NBC !

    Persuade everyone you know to vote Democrat this coming week !


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 5212 access attempts in the last 7 days.