I'm Pro Choice (When it comes to the Dixie Chicks)
My good friend, author, raconteur, newspaper editor, ultra-suave man-about-town, and fellow blogger Jimmy Patterson argues eloquently and passionately on the front page of today's local newspaper that the Dixie Chicks are being given a raw deal by local radio stations who are apparently still refusing to give airplay to the group's music in the wake of Chickita Natalie Maines's assertion a couple of years ago that she was ashamed to be from George W. Bush's home state.
I'm in complete agreement with a couple of Jimmy's assertions. First, Ms. Maines's right to publicly express her opinion is constitutionally protected. Second, any threats of death or harm to her or her family (assuming they're real and not planks in a PR platform) are despicable.
Where I think mi amigo wanders into the weeds is when he implies that local radio stations have some kind of obligation to play the Chicksters's music, and that music consumers have a similar obligation to listen to it or even *gasp* buy it because not to do so somehow stifles The Dialogue.
To my way of thinking, Dixie Chicks, Inc. is a business, and if it's not a publicly traded corporation in the traditional sense, it still has stakeholders who determine its success. The product DCI is pitching has a lot to do with music, but it's more than that. It's a shrewdly marketed package that owes a large amount of success to the fact that the Chicks are relatively young, relatively fetching, and generally astute about the preferences of their "stockholders," who may also be referred to as "those who buy their CDs or pay to download their music, including but not limited to young hormone-driven guys." Part of their business strategy -- no doubt worked out in detail in a boardroom filled with lots of young marketing gurus with soul patches and PowerPoint presentations -- is to be a bit edgy, a bit controversial (which Jimmy astutely acknowledges in his article), and if you don't buy that, just take [another] look at the cover of Entertainment Weekly where the Chicklets choose to appear in their birthday suits. Think that wasn't a stroke of marketing genius (or desperation? Hard to distinguish the two, sometimes)?
Anyway, what Ms. Maines did on that London stage in 2003 was commit the cardinal sin of forgetting that she's both a marketer and a product, and, worse, of failing to understand the desires of her stockholders. Chalk it up to hubris, sincere exuberance, or plain old ignorance -- and it's probably a combination of all three -- but for whatever reasons, she stepped over the strategic line that was drawn for her a long time before, and in doing so made a lot of "investors" decide to realign their portfolios.
Ms. Maines is not guilty of treason, or of giving aid or improving morale of the enemy. Lord help us if country music -- especially the Nashville variety -- is that influential. No, it seems to me that her sin is primarily that of being an incompetent businesswoman. Unfortunately for her and her fellow Chickories, the wages of sin in this case are manifest on the demand side of the equation, and continuing to harp on "stockholders" for their unwillingness to invest in damaged goods just compounds the error.
It should be further noted that local radio stations are apparently unwilling to make a similar mistake -- that of ignoring the wishes of their customers -- and I was educated to believe that giving the customers what they want (or not giving them what they don't want) is fundamental to our great American Economy. I suppose we can argue that their marketing research is faulty, but I'm pretty sure they know more about that than we do.
So, while I support mi amigo Jimmy's right to buy and listen to everything the Chickorettes choose to put on the market, I don't think he's made a particularly compelling argument as to why anyone else should jump on the bandwagon. It might help, however, if they'd do another magazine cover, perhaps for Guns and Ammo.
Disclosure: I wouldn't know a Dixie Chick song if it bit me on the iPod. But since when has being informed been a requirement for punditry?
I welcome the commentary. But only if you're nice; I'm very sensitive, you know.
Posted by: Eric at April 24, 2006 04:52 PMHA! Just like I said in my comment to Eric's last post ...
I just KNEW it wasn't me ...
I KNEW it was Jimmy's fault! Jimmy did it!
:-)
Posted by: Jeff at April 24, 2006 05:07 PMC'mon, admit it. You cut that post short because you couldn't come up with anymore playful turns on the word "Chicks".
As for how I feel about this controversy... well, uh, not only do I not know who the Chicks are, I also have no idea what comment you guys are talking about. Guess I qualify as a pundit then.
Posted by: Jim at April 24, 2006 05:52 PMOooh, poor Jimmy. 8-}
Posted by: Gwynne at April 24, 2006 06:17 PMI'm essentially in agreement with you - definitely in agreement that chickiepoos (you missed that one, I think) didn't clearly think through the marketing aspect of their stupidity. And I wholeheartedly applaud radio stations that listen to their listeners and don't play crud that people don't want to hear - either because the music is crud or because the people playing the music make questionable statements with particularly poorly thought out timing.
That said (here's where I begin to disagree with you) - while yes we have free speech (yay, rah, 1st amendment and so forth) there is such a thing as traitorous language that crosses lines and becomes something more than someone's right to free speech. Whether or not the chickadoodles crossed that line, well that's probably open for interpretation, but I am a big fan of "You really hate it that bad, please, please please, go become a citizen elsewhere - I hear they have openings in Mexico."
Because right now, there are thousands of women and men who are putting their lives on the line to protect your right to say hateful things about them and the man who sent them there and whether or not you agree with it or him, you owe it to them (I feel) to zip your lips on the negative stuff when you, a public figure, are out on tour, and just simply say thank you to them for being willing to answer the call.
Then if you're dissatisfied, go use your free speech for something useful - vote. Volunteer for the political party of your leanings. Do something to make your criticism something more than random words uttered to large audiences simply because you have a platform. If you seriously think you know better and can do better, heck, run for office. Or at least find ways to make your criticism constructive and not demeaning to those whose lives are on the line.
Posted by: beth at April 24, 2006 08:32 PMIs this going to be a regular front-page feature? The number of artists who don't get airplay is quite large. I want to see Hank Williams 3 featured tomorrow. Then Waylon Jennings. Then the Thrift Store Cowboys. In fact, I can help fill the next 12 months of daily moans about the lack of airplay with far more deserving artists than the over-exposed, under-talented Dixie Chicks.
Posted by: Scott Chaffin at April 24, 2006 08:42 PMI used to see the Chicks in Dallas performing with their family's bluegrass band, back when they were just young Chicklettes. I liked them.
However there are consequences we must live with in this world. If you offend a large section of your audience then you live with the consequences. One of the obvious consequences in this case is that you lose buyers of your records and listeners on the radio who don't agree with your beliefs. That's America.
Posted by: Wallace-Midland, Texas at April 24, 2006 11:21 PMFor someone hailing from the Lubbock area, the problem Ms. Maines had was misreading her group's core market, and not comprehending the interconnectivity of the Internet, which makes things said 3,000 miles across the ocean as instantly accessable as if she had said it at the United Spirit Arena on the Texas Tech campus.
The other problem she and the rest of the Chicks have had in the aftermath was their non-apology apology, which compounded the problem -- not only was Maines' politics to the left of most of her fan base, but the halfhearted apology they offered up to win back those fans came across to many as insulting their intellegence (and as further events showed, Natalie really was unapologietic about her remark). It came across more as one of those "I'm sorry for getting caught" mea culpas, which didn't help their cause.
That's the environment radio stations are dealing with today, in connection with their fan base. No one begrudges Willie Nelson his political beliefs as a liberal Democrat, because he doesn't try to either sneak it in behind their backs or offer up insincere apologies for anything he's done or said. But Maines' actions still rub some people the wrong way, and the stations have to decide whether they can get more listeners by playing the DCs' songs than they'll potentially lose by playing those songs. Right now, they seem to be opting for the former, though I suppose if country stations in some of the more hospitable sections of the U.S. start playing the new album and don't receive any complaints, those songs will start showing up in Midland and elsewhere in the Red States.
Well put.
Except, I'm not fully understanding how a boy from Fort Stockton Texas can go through life and not know a Chicks tune if it bit him in the Apple. A minister from Pennsylvania I can understand. A Texan leaves me scratching my head.
Posted by: jimmy at April 25, 2006 09:21 AMSimple: Buck. Johnny. Merle. Jim (Reeves). Ferlin. Loretta. Waylon. Charlie (Pride). Conway. Tammy. Porter. Bob (Wills). George (Jones).
Any questions? ;-)
Posted by: Eric at April 25, 2006 09:25 AMI had your reaction to the article yesterday, Eric. I only wish I could articulate my thoughts as well as you did! We chickled, I mean chuckled, our way thru your post last night. I just had to re-read it this morning!
Posted by: Phyllis at April 25, 2006 09:58 AMSo ... you're putting ... oh, never mind.
Posted by: jimmy at April 25, 2006 10:11 AMCareful...you're venturing into weedy territory again...
Posted by: Eric at April 25, 2006 10:18 AMEric - I have questions...who are those people you're listing?
*ahem* I suppose I should clarify that my musical taste, while ecclectic, is specifically ecclectic in a non-country way. You can guess which Osmond I most resemble. :)
Posted by: beth at April 25, 2006 10:57 AMEric, I have not seen the hard-copy of Jimmy's piece in the paper, but I did read through his post at "Sticky Doorknobs" a couple of times ...
So, I may be missing something, somewhere ...
Such as, where Jimmy, "implies that local radio stations have some kind of obligation to play the Chicksters's music, and that music consumers have a similar obligation to listen to it or even *gasp* buy it because not to do so somehow stifles The Dialogue."
Huh? ... Where? ... Help!
Posted by: Jeff at April 25, 2006 11:11 AMOkay. You know what? I admit it, I am a minister from Pennsylvania (er... I used to be one). And I don't know from country music. At. All.
But I do recognize all but one of the names Eric listed (except for Porter... you got me on that one. I assume you're not referring to Cole), and can even sing the first line of a few of their tunes.
Though I may have to Chick out a Dixies tune or two just so I know what I'm missing, or not.
Posted by: Jim at April 25, 2006 11:15 AMBeth, I'm going to assume that your question is sincere, recognizing that not everyone had the good fortune to grow up in Texas. ;-)
You know the movie, The Blues Brothers, don't you? Well, these folks play(ed) BOTH kinds of music, country and western:
Buck Owens. Johnny Cash. Merle Haggard. Jim (Reeves). Ferlin Husky. Loretta Lynn. Waylon Jennings. Charlie (Pride). Conway Twitty. Tammy Wynette. Porter Waggoner. Bob (Wills). George (Jones).
These, and a whole bunch of others, are the musical ancestry of the country (and western) genre. That genre is not always recognizable anymore, much to the chagrin of many fans.
I'm not as dogmatic, personally. I have on my iPod music by Brooks & Dunn, Alan Jackson, Travis Tritt, Son Volt, Faith Hill, Shania Twain, Dwight Yoakam and many others who may or may not meet with approval of "traditionalists." But I gotta tell you that if you're not giving any of this music a chance, you're missing out on some creative and satisfying work. I wouldn't want a steady diet of it (just as I wouldn't want to listen to nothing but U2 or Coldplay or Third Day or Mercy Me or Beck or...well, you get the picture), but I think it's part of a nutritional well-balanced audio diet. ;-)
Posted by: Eric at April 25, 2006 11:23 AMIf the execs at the radio stations don't want to play the Dixie Chicks, that's their right. And I personally applaud their decision NOT to help Natalie Maines make one more dime.
Buck Owens, Johnny Cash, Merle Haggard, Ferlin Huskey, Loretta Lynn, Waylon Jennings, Conway Twitty, Tammy Wynette, Porter Waggoner
and I'm not even a country western fan!
Posted by: julie at April 25, 2006 11:29 AMJeff, I don't know what to tell you. If you come to different conclusions reading the same thing I did, that's fine. And I admit that Jimmy's article wasn't quite as dogmatic (man, I've used that term twice in consecutive comments now!) as I made it out to be. Call it editorial hyperbole, if you wish. But, I stand by my interpretation of the article, although that part of it was really meant simply as a jumping off point for my rant about the lack of business judgment by this particular musical group.
Besides, if Jimmy won't write anything controversial, it's up to us to do it for him! ;-)
Posted by: Eric at April 25, 2006 11:32 AMI'll have to join with Jim on this one. I grew up mostly on the East Coast ... and most of that time, just an hour's drive, or so, from where he lives ... and I, also recognize all those names on Eric's list including, I think, Porter (Waggoner?) ...
No surprise there ... country was an Eastern phenomenon in the early years ... both in its roots in the 17 and 1800s, and in it's 20th-century heyday, in Nashville ...
Even as the focus of country(/western) music shifted west with the expansion of our country, those roots remained buried deeply on the east side of the Mississippi, and continue to bear wonderful fruit today ...
Works in both directions, by the way ... I remember being in New mexico, in 1979 or 1980, trying to convince some college freshmen that there was such a thing as 'Bruce Springsteen' ... this was in those dark years between "Born to Run" and "Born in the USA" ...
Posted by: Jeff at April 25, 2006 11:33 AMI was only half-serious. I figured out most of them with a little thought - my dad is an old-school country junkie. So I've heard some, long long ago before I was old enough to reach the dial to change it. (:
I may have to give it another shot (balanced audio diet sounding like a reasonable thing to which I should aspire).
Posted by: beth at April 25, 2006 11:52 AMBeth, if you come at Country from the Southern Gospel angle (as opposed to the Western angle), you'll find some good stuff, especially the old timers. I don't consider myself a country music fan, at all, but I've got a whole bunch of Johnny Cash on my pod and who can not like The Dukes of Hazard theme song, by Waylon Jennings? ;-)
Posted by: Gwynne at April 25, 2006 12:38 PMY'know, I had about six comments, probably more, just from people telling me I was suggesting people should be MADE to listen to the Chicks whether they like it or not. And every time I read one of those comments, I said to myself, 'Huh?' Until finally, I just decided I must've written it, maybe imbedded in the first letter of the first word of each paragraph or somewhere I DON'T KNOW. But it's like when someone lies so much he convinces himself he's not lying and believes his own lie. I just thought, hey, so many people are getting this impression, did I really write that?? Because I sure the heck didn't read it.
My point was actually NOT to force the Chicks' on anyone or that radio should be forced. My No. 1 point was we should really just move on. It's time. My No. 2 point frankly was to create a little discussion. Whe we can have a nice healthy little disagreement I think it's good.
So, Eric, much as I like you, bud, I'm gonna have to withdraw my first statement. The one that said 'Well put.' See, this is healthy discourse. Breathe in the good, out with the bad. I feel better already.
By the way, the gang over at Mike & Dana's radio station have asked me to come on their air tomorrow morning between 730 and 8 and show my face. Just in case you wanna hear me skewered. Have you ever heard someone skewered before? Because it SOUNDS painful.
Posted by: jimmy at April 25, 2006 01:31 PMWell, obviously, you're in the best position to know what you meant to say, and I would never try to convince you that you meant to say something you didn't really intend. I'm just saying that the couple of remarks to the effect that "you better download or buy the CD 'cause you're sure not gonna hear it on the radio" and the inclusion of the lengthy quote by "CC from Bandera" taken in sum may have generated a different understanding and reaction than you intended.
Almost like...well...um, never mind...
And, it's apparent from this discussion that the feeling that "it's time to move on" is not universally shared. Personally, I'd rather spend time discussing something else, because this is one of those issues where both sides are righteously sincere and unswayable.
Good luck with the skewering. I hear it's only painful if you fight it. ;-)
Posted by: Eric at April 25, 2006 01:47 PMJimmy, in one respect, at least, in this particular debate, Eric and I share the same sentiments ... "Good luck with the skewering."
You and I both know - better than most on this forum - that these skewerings are a part of our 'job description' as journalists ... you and I both know how petty and how nasty they can get, sometimes ... and you and I both know, in the grand scheme of things, just how unimportant those little barbs really are ...
Eric, with that nastiness in mind, I'd like to thank you for providing this forum, which has always endeavored to take the high road in discussions and disagreements ...
Posted by: Jeff at April 25, 2006 01:55 PMI'd be really amazed if Mike and Dana permit any serious "skewering." They strike me as "high road" types, although I don't know either of them personally.
Jeff, this forum is only as good as its contributors, amigo.
Posted by: Eric at April 25, 2006 01:59 PMWould you believe the quote from CC in bandera was cut, almost in half?
Posted by: jimmy at April 25, 2006 03:18 PM
I'm stewin' on this. I have a LL baseball game, and then I'd love to comment on your comments. I am, in the meantime, flattered that you have chosen to write on it :)
Posted by: jimmy at April 24, 2006 04:49 PM