Posted on 03/14/2003 7:53:16 AM PST by ewing
Email recieved this morning from Lipton to FR protestors: (re: Dixie Chicks Sponsorship Tour and Lipton Foods)
Thank you so much for writing!
We are writing in response to your comments regarding the Dixie Chicks 'Top of the World Tour.' We certainly apologize and are grateful you have chosen to share your thoughts.
As a manufacturer we feel it is a major responsibility to provide our friends and customers with the most creative and entertaining means of sponsorship possible.
We have a long history of presenting 'tasteful' advertising, promotional and sponsorship efforts to the public. We certainly do not wish to offend anyone. In developing our promotional efforts, Unilever and its agencies may not always anticpate all possible implications of a specific campaign.
We will certainly forward all of your comments to our marketing staff.
(Excerpt) Read more at lipton.com ...
The DC's are under contract to Sony Music and out of all of the millions of $$$ that their music earned, the majority of all of it went to Sony and other business interests in the DC project.
The DC's sued Sony and in a settlement were given better royalty options, their own record label and a cash settlement.
At that point the DC's hadn't even earned 1 million $$$.
Now this event will actually effect the DC's as it is coming out of their side of the pile being they have their own production and royalties coming in after the suit.
However, entertainers make most of their money by touring, as not all of them write their own music. They need to entertain to make money. The tour costs are outrageous with travel and hotel/motel expenses and sound equipment, stage costs and lighting. Then paying all of the people that do setups and takedowns.
All of that said, no matter what anyone says, it would be highly unusual for any of the concerts to be cancelled, due to contractural obligations by both promoter and entertainers. What could end the tour or cancel shows is for the fan-base to not show up for the concert or to demonstrate their displeasure towards the DC's for their statements.
Since this thing is really snowballing, I'd bet we see the DC's on TV real soon, making a sincere apology and them doing so at the beginning of every one of their concerts on this tour.
But then I'm an optimist in my own negative way.
Someone has mentioned it here already, but imo, Luzianne is a far *better* tea than Lipton. And it truly does remain clear :-) I moved to CA from Texas 7 years ago. I can't find it in the stores out here so I have it brought in or mailed from Texas. Some restaurants (like Outback) serve Luzianne out here. Try it. You just might be quite pleasantly surprised. It's possible this Dixie Chicks blunder turns into a boon for Luzianne as once you try it, bet you don't go back.
Uh... you are comparing the Dixie Chicks and their fan base with the Beatles and _their_ fan base? Different music, totally different demographics. Liberal fans are more likely to forget religious swipe than conservative fans are going to forget swipe at POTUS, especially when done outside the country to a cheering anti-American crowd.
Cost of a Dixie Chick demo-CD for radio station... $0
Cost of hammer used to destroy CD.... $7
Cost of sweeping the CD off the floor.... $2
Cost of presenting a profound mental image of a singing career gone south via a major radio station... priceless.
bingo.
And proving it more so by first offering a non-apologetic excuse lumped with a disingenuous claim to freedom of speech and concern for "the children" followed by a limp apology once they realized their business might suffer greatly back in the good ol' US of A. Not exactly words of conviction spouted off in front of a huge, anti-American crowd. DC are simply cheap crowd pleasers minus character. Not real Texans.
Depends of course, our local radio station dropped the Chicks yesterday (WZOB). He destroyed the cd's (though there was not a burning per say). That does affect airplay in this small town (where maybe 50-100 people may hear them enough to want to buy them). I am working on WQSB (the largest listening station in Alabama). They are being pressured and they have a strong leaning on loving our military and supporting our President. (google WQSB them and look at their home page banners).
http://www.wqsb.com/
Their values and most of their listener's values center around our President. Their fan base centers around the group "Alabama" mostly which are staunt conservatives. Proof is the listeners top "100" songs of last year as voted by the listeners (not the number one song and how many other top 100 are voted by the "public"). WQSB is close IMHO to pulling the Dixie Chicks. Perhaps they will not "burn" the Chick's cds, but dropping the largest FM radio station in the state from airing them does not help them either.
I'm not so sure. In any case, it does come down to the meaning of words, and it's important that we make the case for the reasons I outlined in my post #80 on the thread.
I'm not by any means suggesting 'government' action against them, as our liberal friends have done with the fallacious 'hate crimes' drivel. It whould be enough for all of us to shout them down and ruin them financially through their sponsorships.
Now, on the other hand, if you were to be talking about those idiot American "human shields" that are conducting sit-ins at obvious military targets around Baghdad, that'd be a whole different ball game.
Agreed. But the good part of the 'human shields' game is that they tend to take care of themselves in a 'Darwin Award' sort of way.
prisoner6
With all due respect, the only relevant definition of treason is in the Constitution
Article III
Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
While there statement is offensive it is not treason as defined by the Constitution. Treason is the only law defined by the Constitution I think we should be careful how we use it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.