|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
 Posted - 02/16/2007 : 21:38:11 [Permalink]
|
| Found some stuff on the Free Republic but it deserves its own thread. |
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 02/16/2007 22:07:01 |
 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2007 : 21:55:47 [Permalink]
|
I wouldn't rule out some political motivation for giving the Dixie Chicks all of those Grammy's. Look at it this way. It could be that the leading contenders for the awards were very close, artistically, which is completely subjective anyway. And let's just say that the time was right to make a statement about free speech, one theme of the winning album, from a group with some credentials in that department. In my opinion, that could legitimately push them over to top for the awards.
There are many way's to judge the quality of art. And one of those ways is, is this what is needed to be said at this time…
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2007 : 22:06:02 [Permalink]
|
I wasn't ruling it out, Kil. I was merely asking for evidence if it was going to be claimed.
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2007 : 22:11:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
I wasn't ruling it out, Kil. I was merely asking for evidence if it was going to be claimed.
Yes, but my point is, so what if it was? Art and protest often go together. And if some people don't like it, they can pretty much lump it...
I don't think it was an accedent that the Chicks were introduced by Joan Biaz at the show. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2007 : 23:30:30 [Permalink]
|
The Dixie Chicks......
This whole ordeal is full of so much bullshit...
They said something really stupid, made worse for being outside of the US. They pissed a lot of folks off. They bitched about people being pissed off, becuase they had the right to say what they want?
They are entertainers and should know their main audience. If you alienate them, you are eiter shooting yourself or giving the gun to someone to do it for you.
The chairman of Cumulus does his job and protects his shareholders within the law by pulling the Chicks off the air because of the controversy. If his listeners get pissed off, his shareholders get pissed off. His job is to protect the shareholders. Then the Government crtitisizes him for doing his job within the confines of the law that the government gave them? On top of that, there are worse problems with larger companies deciding what is news and what is not news then Cumulus and the Dixie Chicks. Did they drop it because one of the mega-providers pointed it out? Were they scared that if they pushed on this little issue, Murdoch might stop giving money and start taking shots?
This is the question that needs asking.
Peace
Joe |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2007 : 02:05:31 [Permalink]
|
Well you left a bit out of your version, Joe. You left out death threats for making a simple comment you had a right to make.
You left out the fact that's a lie about the radio customers because their record sales only dipped then they went back up and stayed up. People wanted their music. Only some people wanted to make it look like there was this uniform boycott.
And you left out the power which goes with media consolidation which threatens free speech for all of us. Do you think it's fine for one person to own every TV station, radio station, and newspaper for a third or more of the country? Do you think it's dangerous for someone to control the means to control so much of what you hear? Didn't you hear those stories of the evil communist countries where the government controlled the news when you were younger? Is that what you want for America?
|
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 02/17/2007 02:07:37 |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2007 : 02:09:23 [Permalink]
|
| You have a point about Baez, Kil. |
|
|
|
Chippewa
SFN Regular
USA
1496 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2007 : 13:40:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
The Dixie Chicks...They are entertainers and should know their main audience. If you alienate them, you are eiter shooting yourself or giving the gun to someone to do it for you.....The chairman of Cumulus does his job and protects his shareholders within the law by pulling the Chicks off the air because of the controversy....
Peace
Joe
Another tired old rightwing excuse - i.e. it's just business - just looking out for our clients - i.e. shut up and know your place (as our corporate radio executives define it). i.e. Support the Prezinut.
Well the Dixie Chicks are now more popular with more fans than ever and without dumb-down corporate radio so that argument falls flat.
|
Diversity, independence, innovation and imagination are progressive concepts ultimately alien to the conservative mind.
"TAX AND SPEND" IS GOOD! (TAX: Wealthy corporations who won't go poor even after taxes. SPEND: On public works programs, education, the environment, improvements.) |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2007 : 14:49:40 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Joe:
The chairman of Cumulus does his job and protects his shareholders within the law by pulling the Chicks off the air because of the controversy. If his listeners get pissed off, his shareholders get pissed off. His job is to protect the shareholders.
Radio Radio
by Elvis Costello
I was tuning in the shine on the light night dial
Doing anything my radio advised
With every one of those late night stations
Playing songs bringing tears to my eyes
I was seriously thinking about hiding the receiver
When the switch broke 'cause it's old
They're saying things that I can hardly believe
They really think we're getting out of control
(CHORUS) Radio is a sound salvation
Radio is cleaning up the nation
They say you better listen to the voice of reason
But they don't give you any choice 'cause they think that it's treason
So you had better do as you are told
You better listen to the radio
I wanna bite the hand that feeds me
I wanna bite that hand so badly
I want to make them wish they'd never seen me
Some of my friends sit around every evening
And they worry about the times ahead
But everybody else is overwhelmed by indifference
And the promise of an early bed
You either shut up or get cut up, they don't wanna hear about it
It's only inches on the reel-to-reel
And the radio is in the hands of such a lot of fools
Tryin' to anaesthetise the way that you feel
(REPEAT CHORUS)
Wonderful radio
Marvelous radio
Wonderful radio
Radio, radio
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2007 : 18:23:35 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
Well you left a bit out of your version, Joe. You left out death threats for making a simple comment you had a right to make.
You left out the fact that's a lie about the radio customers because their record sales only dipped then they went back up and stayed up. People wanted their music. Only some people wanted to make it look like there was this uniform boycott.
And you left out the power which goes with media consolidation which threatens free speech for all of us. Do you think it's fine for one person to own every TV station, radio station, and newspaper for a third or more of the country? Do you think it's dangerous for someone to control the means to control so much of what you hear? Didn't you hear those stories of the evil communist countries where the government controlled the news when you were younger? Is that what you want for America?
You left out a bit of your version, where free speach is only allowed if you agree with it. I guess you blame all the Seattle protestors, not just the few idiots? It's amazing how you read shit into stuff that isn't there, because you don't actually have an answer.
And you never read the thing, just saw something you disagreed with and started spewing a bunch of bullshit.
Did you entirely miss the point on them bitching at Cumulus for exercising the power given to them without actually doing something about the power they have given them? You see them bitching at them and say "Ya-hoo", but what did it accomplish? Has anything changed? Have large corporations divested themselves out of market share? Has Congress bit one of the hands that feed them? Hell no, business as usual.
If I didn't think Congress reacted poorly, I never probably even posted to this. I am pretty much with Cune.... They can win 18. Cruise can win an Oscar, Liza a Tony... Life goes on....
Joe |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2007 : 20:24:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Nelson and Jennings would have had the courtesy of doing so on American soil.
The firestorm wasn't about what they said so much as where they said it.
We are talking about the average Country and Western audience.
I don't agree. There were 49% of the American voters (or more) who were terribly upset over 4 more years of Bush. Remember that whole book of "I'm sorry" signs and pictures? The DCs were hardly the only famous people in the news upset over re-electing a president who had so lied us into a war and then bungled it on top of things.
What was different was the "Swift boat Red neck campaign" or whatever you want to call it. If you get a chance to see the documentary you'll see the intense media attention paid to a small but very vocal group. If the owner of 250 country music stations decides to broadcast condemnation of 3 women over all the stations, it isn't hard to see both, people who think the protest is much bigger than it is, and sheep who go along when they hear their local DJ telling them everyone else is mad.
The campaign is iffy at best. They continued to make it news due to the start of and continuation of a public feud with Toby Keith. Heck, my inlaws refused to listen to any radio station that played the Dixie Chicks because of the Chicks chickenshit way of expressing their opinion.
The local radio station here, WUSN, conducted a poll of their call in line concerning the Chicks and the response was overwhelmingly "don't play them because they were cowards". WUSN then stopped playing their songs.
The mentality fits the small town audience of Country and Western music.
Did some people go over the top? You betcha.
Was this an organized smear campaign? Doubtful. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2007 : 22:04:24 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
...
You left out a bit of your version, where free speach is only allowed if you agree with it. I guess you blame all the Seattle protestors, not just the few idiots? It's amazing how you read shit into stuff that isn't there, because you don't actually have an answer.
And you never read the thing, just saw something you disagreed with and started spewing a bunch of bullshit.
Did you entirely miss the point on them bitching at Cumulus for exercising the power given to them without actually doing something about the power they have given them? You see them bitching at them and say "Ya-hoo", but what did it accomplish? Has anything changed? Have large corporations divested themselves out of market share? Has Congress bit one of the hands that feed them? Hell no, business as usual.
If I didn't think Congress reacted poorly, I never probably even posted to this. I am pretty much with Cune.... They can win 18. Cruise can win an Oscar, Liza a Tony... Life goes on....
Joe
Oh come now, Joe. How is objecting to a media monopoly and death threats over a minor dissing of Bush equal to, "free speach is only allowed if [I] agree with it"?
You lost me on the thing I didn't read and the Seattle protesters comments. What didn't I read? I'll be happy to see what I missed.
As far as the testimony in Congress, I watched the video of it on Democracy Now!'s news broadcast. I posted the transcript. Mr Dickey just bald face lied in that hearing. "We are a confederation of 270 individual stations." He could hardly keep a straight face. It was as blatant as all the tobacco execs testifying one after the other that nicotine wasn't addictive. If this was just a corporate business decision, one, Dickey claims they aren't a corporation, and two, why would he need to lie about it then?
As to nothing has been done, that is correct. But there is a large ground swell against media consolidation. More than a few of us recognize what a danger to free speech and democracy it is for media monopolies to continue and it will be worse if they grow. The oversight hearings are a start. The Take Back the Media movement is growing every day. You should look into joining. They promote low power FM stations controlled by people the broadcasts reach rather than absentee owners. And that includes red states as well as blue. The idea is local control, not right or left control.
How would you feel if the Moonies who own the WA Times and currently print out right fabrications, were to buy all of the East Coast papers? Would you want them to own one of these media monopolies? You know if you believe it's OK because you like the monopoly owners, you run the risk monopolies will be held by the other side one day.
|
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 02/17/2007 22:07:06 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2007 : 23:04:56 [Permalink]
|
beskeptical wrote: quote:
Listen to the album. It really is great...
I'm not impressed. But music can be so subjective. I've never liked their music, and they were huge before all this shit hit the fan, so I have no doubt that this album which won all these awards is "good" by the standards of its genre, despite the fact that I personally don't dig it.
It is certainly possible that the judging was partially influenced by what happened to them in the media, rather than pure, objective judgment of the quality of the music. It is also certainly possible that this album was written from a place of extraordinary passion and inspiration in the musicians because of what was happening. But there is absolutely no way to know for sure, so who cares. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 02/17/2007 23:08:14 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2007 : 23:26:23 [Permalink]
|
OI wrote: quote:
They are entertainers and should know their main audience.
This is a half-truth. It is plainly clear from their music that the Dixie Chicks are not and never have been merely entertainers. They are also artists. And just so we are on the same page, I am using this definition of "art" from Wikipedia: quote:
Art is that which is made with the primary intention of stimulating the human senses as well as the human mind or spirit.
An artwork is normally assessed by means of the amount of stimulation it brings about. The impact it has on people, the amount of people that can relate, the degree of their appreciation, and the effect or influence it has or has had in the past, all accumulate to the 'degree of art'. Timeless masterpieces in art all possess these aspects to a great extent.
Something is not considered 'art' when it stimulates only the senses, or only the mind, or when it has a different primary purpose than doing so.
The fact that their music is entertaining does not mean that entertainment is the primary purpose, and thus, to call them "entertainers" in the context that you have (which implies that that is all they are as musicians) is to liken them to Britney Spears, whose music's primary purpose is pure entertainment. That is not a totally accurate or useful comparison.
Artists encounter this problem all the time, and usually not with so happy and successful outcomes. For example, visual artists will create a body of work that gets them a commercial gallery contract which results in high sales. Then they are pressured to keep creating similar work, and when their work changes, sales drop and the gallery dumps them.
Art is one of those things that doesn't fare well in a purely capitalist-based economy. This is why the arts and individual artists are publicly funded (most poorly in the United States as far as the first world goes.) Not that that is a perfect solution either because it sets up another type of institution which can also inhibit the honesty of artists. The only good solution really is a society which provides basic food, shelter, and health care for everyone, regardless of their socially-valued labor - a sort of gentile poverty for those who are disabled or otherwise do not or cannot produce or do something of market value.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 02/17/2007 23:29:52 |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2007 : 23:48:15 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chippewa
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
The Dixie Chicks...They are entertainers and should know their main audience. If you alienate them, you are eiter shooting yourself or giving the gun to someone to do it for you.....The chairman of Cumulus does his job and protects his shareholders within the law by pulling the Chicks off the air because of the controversy....
Peace
Joe
Another tired old rightwing excuse - i.e. it's just business - just looking out for our clients - i.e. shut up and know your place (as our corporate radio executives define it). i.e. Support the Prezinut.
Well the Dixie Chicks are now more popular with more fans than ever and without dumb-down corporate radio so that argument falls flat.
Another tired retort without sustence. Another person too lazy to read past any critisicm. Business for the corporation, business for the government. If the government wasn't getting some cookies, would the cookie jar be so big?
Cumulus serves a certain market, it dosen't matter how popular the Dixie Chicks are outside of their listeners, for them it's their listeners that matter. What is so hard to understand about that? Or is it the tired, they're red-necks, so they don't count bullshit?
Please let me know how you guage popularity. I personally don't know how one would go about doing that considering you have to ccompare before the remarks with after. I don't know how one would make a comparrison wth album sales, as the face of music distribution has changed. Can't use play time, becuase just as the lack of playtime is forced on one end, it is pushed on the other.
Can't use the Grammys, without saying the Grammy's are a popularity contest, which makes the Grammy's more worthless then they already are.
Joe |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
