DIXIE CHICKS and the freedom of Speech.?

Question

It Seems that Freedom of SPEECH is not a two way street, how come its ok to bash Bush but when people bash the Dixie Chicks, its not Politically correct.....When people stop buying their albums or attending their concerts, its considered Black listed instead of the people fundamentals right to boycott. Why does the Dixie Chicks step up for the rights of people to bash BUSH but try to step on those that BASH them. Are they two faced? Did they earn the Grammy's? WHY, WHY, WHY.....

Answer 1

DIXIE DUCKS DID U SAY????????????

Answer 2

First, there is an important difference between boycotting and blacklisting. You write as if you might think they are the same. I think even the Dixie Chicks would agree that people have the right to boycott their concerts and refuse to buy their CDs. On the other hand, when they are blacklisted by the companies owning radio stations, that's a bit stronger. It may still fall under freedom of speech, but it doesn't allow consumers to make a choice. The choice is made for them. By comparison, it's the difference between a television network carrying commentators who criticize President Bush, and a television network refusing to carry anything Bush does to express himself (press conferences, major speeches, etc.). Would you think the latter was a legitimate exercise of free speech, or actually an attempt to inhibit it?

Concerning whether they deserved the Grammys . . . It's interesting that once again NO ONE who has claimed that the awards were politically motivated has made a case that someone else in any of the categories was more deserving of one of the awards based on a musical basis. Tell exactly who deserved the awards more and why. These knee jerk responses are the definition of prejudice unless they provide arguments to back their opinions. See for instance the person who thinks it's relevant to talk about one of the group members being a bad waitress back in the day. This is the level at which this conversation is usually held.

And if the awards are politically motivated, you should be able to name OTHERS who also got their awards for political reasons and cite others who were more deserving. Why would the academy choose to favor only one group for political reasons? I don't see any sensible opinions, let alone facts.

I didn't have many facts when I started thinking about this because I don't care that much about The Dixie Chicks. So I had to look up some information to find out if they had ever won a Grammy award before. (I had no idea.) It turns out that they have won seven previous Grammys in various categories. Therefore, it's not surprising that they would win awards at this level. They have won Best Country Album three times before this, and they have won the award for Best Country Duo or Group three times. So again, their awards in these two categories shouldn't be a total surprise, regardless of the genre discussion. Then they won Song of the Year, Record of the Year, and Album of the Year (and I've NEVER understood the difference between the last two). Will someone at least make a persuasive argument that someone else should have won in these categories and therefore you are suspicious? Name the person or group that was better and explain why.

Answer 3

Obviously it wasn't OK to bash Bush and that's why the Dixie Chicks got so much negative responses for it. People will always defend themselves and their positions when attacked, as does Bush. It's not like they are saying it's okay to bash Bush but not themselves. They believe in free speech just as much as anyone else, but they will defend themselves like any other person. I don't listen to their music or country music at all, or really even care about them, but I did think it was unfair that so many people hated them b/c they chose to express their freedom of speech. Blacklisted/boycotted.... it's the same thing in the entertainment industry. They got so much crap b/c they said something that many country music fans didn't like. People thought they shouldn't have said what they said; how is that not trying to supress someones free speech and opinions? You're right freedom of speech is not a two way street b/c many of the same people the talk about how that's one of the great things about America wanted to shut the Dixie Chicks up for using that right. You can say whatever you want about them and no one is stopping you just as they should be allowed to say what ever they want about whoever they want. Don't get all mad at them b/c they are defending themselves, any red blooded American would do the same.

Answer 4

YES they earned the grammys based on their musical abilities, which is what the grammy is for. The people have finally been allowed to speak. Regardless of their political views (Dixie Chicks or judges) the music was good.
Explanation (you asked why?)A woman who sings for a living said she was ashamed that the president was from her home state. You can choose to buy her albums or not. It would have been interesting to see how much that affected (or didn't) her ability to sell her music. However, that's not what happened. Her and her entire group were prevented from making and selling music for several years by major corporations. Clear Channel completely blocked the entire musical group from playing their music. The number of stations, etc that they own is phenomenal. Had it been simply up to individual purchasing power, business as usual, this would have been both sides exercizing their freedom of speech. But there's a difference between individually boycotting someone for an offhanded comment and using big business and wealth to completely silence someone and ruin their career because you disagree with their comment. The Dixie Chicks as a group did absolutely nothing you or I haven't done...ie making a comment others disagree with. We do it every day. And they did not one thing to interefere with or ruin the free speech of anyone else.

Answer 5

Everyone is entitled to FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Natalie Maines was exercising her right to that when she spoke out about Bush. If she is ashamed he is from her home state then good on her. Stand up, say it. But dont whine and whinge when it comes back to bight you in the ****. If people stopped buying her records because they didnt like what she said, so be it. She should learn to keep her mouth shut if she wants to sell records in America.

I dont agree in death threats. No body has the right to take somebody elses life, no matter who it is or what they have done.

But what the group did after those events was to write about it and express their views and feelings through their music which earned them several Grammy Awards. Good on them. They won the awards for their musical ability which is what they are good at.

There is nothing worse than someone who opens their mouth and doesnt like the consequences or their actions. If Natalie Maines is happy with her life and the consequences of her actions than thats all that matters.

Answer 6

I totally agree. I live in Natalie Maines home town. We do not play their music on radio here. She is a big mouthed, spoiled rotton little brat. She was a waitress at a local Italian restaurant and she sucked at that. Her Grandparents owned a business across the street from my Parents and they are not like her at all.
They were very nice people. I was shocked when they won all those Grammy's for that album. Natalie is ruling this group of women and until the sisters take back some control it will just get worse. They now say no more political bashing will be associated with their music. Yeah, right! Not unless you duct tape Natalie's mouth shut.

Answer 7

They are not being played in Texas, and there are a lot of country stations here. Doesn't matter how many grammies they win, you just don't go into a foreign country and ridicule the leadership of your own country. Very poor taste, and it does not matter how many terrific songs they write. If they don't get air time, what's the point? When scheduled for Houston, their tour was cancelled because of poor ticket sales.

Answer 8

Well I hate to say this but it's because there are a lot of hypocritical, self-serving rednecks in America...and if you're not "with them" you're "against them." That's pretty well what free speech means to them.

It has nothing to do with 9/11 either, it has to do with the mentality that everything is their way or no way. The rest of the world can see this clearly and I think a lot of Americans obviously are seeing it too.

Answer 9

Muzzled no. Blacklisted specific. i do no longer think of their rights have been violated in any criminal sense. What I do discover exciting approximately them is for one they have been staggering. For each and every of the mouth-breathers who coated as much as denounce them as evil, no longer considered one of them has had the wherewithal to admit they have been incorrect and the Dixie Chicks have been staggering. What they verified is the single flaw with unfastened speech it incredibly is stupid human beings get to communicate too. it relatively is a tragic demonstration of yank politics whilst particularly of asking question brainless twits have been too busy cheerleader for conflict.

Answer 10

As a Marine, I will defend their freedom of speech with my dying breath. I believe what they said was stupid, but when they say it in a foreign country and make all of us look stupid. Well look how stupid they look, one minute on the top of the mountain, the next at the bottom of an outhouse. It is almost as bad a Kerry calling the US a pariah of the world.

Answer 11

sure, they have the freedom of speech, and they exerczed it in an agressive manner. but it also came back around to them for the worst. because of those bad remarks about bush, peopel across the country have been boycotting them so that is thier fault.