• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

dixie chicks

  • Thread starter littleredridinghood
  • Start date

L

littleredridinghood

Guest
Do you think KMPS and the Wolf should play Dixie Chicks even after what they said?? I know both don't play the newer songs...It's funny to me that we care so much about artists' political views...but I guess they are a big influence..however maybe they should keep their mouths shut so we can just enjoy the music. What do you think??
 
I think these are two different things. I would only stop listening to something because of content ... in other words, the DC's would fall off my list because an album is bad, not because of a press conference in another context. To me art, politics, religion all get different buckets. I enjoy talking with people who disagree with me on any of these issues and wouldn't "denounce" hanging with them because of that kind of disagreement.

My standards for broadcasters differ depending on the context. I would NEVER want "news" from Rush, but consider his program a form of entertainment ... same with Al Franken, Howard Stern, etc. But I go nuts when people who ARE delivering news begin to speculate about facts, or fill the air with a bunch of analysts who basically "gossip" about whatever they are SUPPOSED to be "analyzing" (definitely visible this week in Ramsey story). Difference is one billed as "programming" for entertainment; the other supposedly a public service -- so for me easy to determine when to let blood boil and when to simply "shrug it off".

Does that jive with what you are saying ... or am I way off base?
 
Being from the great state of Texas, it made me sad to hear what Natalie had done, their band will NEVER be as successful as they could of been. In the middle of their greatest moment, a few words changed their future forever. Most country fans are very loyal to their country first, their country music second. Their lack of ticket and album sales show that the wound is still fresh. It is up to The Dixie Chicks to make ammends, NOT country radio. However, old morals still run very deep in the south, it will take along time to forgive if at all.

Should radio play thei music? Yes, because not playing it is to me a form of censorship. Just becasue it gets played, does not mean it will sell. That is up to the fans.
 
Seattle is a market where a country station could play The Dixie Chicks and doubtfully would have a problem. Unfortunately, I doubt CBS Radio has any interest messing with the #1 station rating, particularly as The Dixie Chicks did not need to be aired to get that rating. And competition from The Wolf would keep KMPS from wanting to add them.

As a state, Texas thinks as highly of itself as does New York City, as a city. People from those places think they are the greatest. TeeTaw, if it is so great, go back. People from the northwest couldn't care less about Texas, any more than they give a rip about us.

The Dixie Chicks' new album has sold 1.5 million copies to date. They are not lacking album sales. They will continue to have to fight a system that does not want to look weak, nor offer the impression that the girls were treated wrongly all this time.
 
GOD, wake up people...and I'm not being cynical here:
============================================
Whether it's good or bad press, it all 'MEDIA ATTENTION and HYPE'...!!

Who really GIVES a rat's patootie what Dixie Chick Natalie says or feels strongly about...??
..and how do we know she really MEANT it?....

..for all we know it could be entirely one shrewd PLOY - only to get public attention and sell music..

Celebrities in this day and age 'CAN' afford not to give a damn about their own selves
when it all comes down to actually 'SELLING' their wares - (i.e. THEMSELVES)...

You think Mel Gibson's truly unhappy with his life still after his recent scuffle with the law?...

Does Martha Stewart truly have ANY conceivable PANG of conscience now??...

You think I'm going to rush to the cinema and pay $10 to see the new movie "Snakes on a Plane"??

>>>> NOT ON YOUR FIRELESS COOKER FOLKS!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Stars are always shinin' - doesn't matter if it's day or night"
- Richard Marx
 
airwaver, do us a favor and write with an ounce of sensibility. As for your points:

"Whether it's good or bad press, it all 'MEDIA ATTENTION and HYPE'...!!"

Uh ... were The Dixie Chicks on KMPS, The Wolf, or other country stations where they are not played, don't you think they would have sold more than 1.5 million copies? As it stands, without the media attention and hype, they have still sold 1.5 MILLION COPIES of that album. Where they have struggled is in concert sales in red state areas, and they have still done well with that album.

"Who really GIVES a rat's patootie what Dixie Chick Natalie says or feels strongly about...??
..and how do we know she really MEANT it?...."

Clear Channel clearly cared about what she stated and proceeded to ban her from their airwaves. Clear Channel also monopolizes many venues for major concerts (i.e., Whiteriver Ampitheater). John Hogan was a major contributor to the 2004 Bush campaign, and Natalie Maines' embarassment of being from the same state as Bush was a clear threat. The last thing the Bush campaign needed was three moms making it big in the morning talk show circuit, informing other stay at home moms to vote against Bush. So, they sought immediately to trash them. Natalie Maines indicated that she meant what she said (embarassed to be from the same state as the President) but she would have used different words could she say them again.

"..for all we know it could be entirely one shrewd PLOY - only to get public attention and sell music.."

The ploy must have been to attract blue state fans, and they have done a good job of that.

"Celebrities in this day and age 'CAN' afford not to give a damn about their own selves when it all comes down to actually 'SELLING' their wares - (i.e. THEMSELVES) ... You think Mel Gibson's truly unhappy with his life still after his recent scuffle with the law? ... Does Martha Stewart truly have ANY conceivable PANG of conscience now?? ... You think I'm going to rush to the cinema and pay $10 to see the new movie "Snakes on a Plane"?? >>>> NOT ON YOUR FIRELESS COOKER FOLKS!"

Uh ... (had to include the dot dot dot), none of this has anything to do with the topic of this string. But since you mentioned it (dot dot dot) Mel Gibson's net worth was estimated at 1/2 BILLION in a recent article. Who knows and frankly who cares if he is unhappy with his life, he's friggin rich. Maybe he has sold his wares (dot dot dot) with that net worth it certainly seems that he has done a lot of it. What does Martha Stewart's conscience have to do with anything? She lied under oath and went to Camp Cupcake for it. She did her time and has since done nicely. Now (dot dot dot) when did she not have a conscience?

Lastly (dot dot dot) Samuel L. Jackson is also super rich. He does not need your money anyway.
 
Sidebar to this ... MANY celeb's have taken major public position on all kinds of things. Ted Danson big on envrionment, Woody H. big hemp supporter/protestor, Martin Sheen's arrest record for protesting not exactly short, Barbara Streisand and Jane Fonda positions well known. We hear ... and do "whatever".

But these days ... someone says something bad about those "certain topics" and all h%ll breaks loose. More than anything I'm concerned about selective censorship and even moreso about our individual capabilities to show tolerance for differing points of view. Apparently that's not in the mix any more ... but sure seems to offer great fuel for "some" of those favorite talk shows!
 
I've always found it hypocritical of country, with an audience base who are passionate about America and its freedoms, to be bashing one of its own performers over speaking their mind. The president can go on TV and talk about the freedoms Iraqis have, such as speaking out, and Natalie Maines gets tarred and feathered over something that is pale in comparison to what others have said.

What I really enjoyed, at the height of the protests against DC, was how people were hammering and steamrolling Dixie Chicks CDs -- after they went out and BOUGHT THE CDs.
 
Amen, AQH. Country fans indeed seem to be stupid. I have never understood the idea of waving our great American flag of FREEDOM and while at a lynching party bashing the Dixie Chicks for using that freedom to express their political views. Disagree with them? OK, disagree with them. But ban them from country radio? All of the other hoopla? What a disgrace. Celebrate America's freedom by celebrating the freedom to express differing opinions and honoring those whose ideas are not your own. The day I heard KMPS had stopped playing the DC's was the day I took them off the presets on every one of my radios.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom