NASHVILLE SKYLINE: Shut Up and Sing? (Free Republic Mentioned, Defended)

So, what to make of the Natalie Maines mess? Because that's just exactly what it is, a big mess. Maines seems afflicted with chronic foot-in-mouth disease.

In her latest lecture, on March 10 at a Dixie Chicks concert in London, Maines felt compelled to tell the audience, "Just so you know, we're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas." She could not have made a stupider mistake. First of all, if she really has strong convictions about the war, she should spell them out. And stand up for them. Most sensible people will respect her right to do that. But don't make what amounts to a personal attack on Bush.

And secondly, since she obviously has no strong convictions, she apologized. But, it took her four days -- after the implications of an audience groundswell of protest resulting in radio boycotts of the Chicks began sinking in and the commercial implications of career suicide became apparent. Then, the apology that came actually felt scripted, mealy-mouthed and insincere. Never mind all the clichés about arrogant, airhead celebrities mouthing off about foreign policy or anything else. Hey, Natalie Maines has the same qualifications to speak out on U.S. foreign policy as does Sean Penn, say. Or Martin Sheen or Madonna or Charlie Daniels. Which is to say: no qualifications at all.

What is really surprising is that the Chicks, their record label, their management and their PR firm seemed to have been caught with their pants down by the firestorm of protest and had absolutely no idea how to respond. Country music fans are largely conservative and patriotic -- as is well-known -- and the U.S. was only days away from a possible war. What do you expect country fans to say when a country star dumps on the president? That tells me that none of them -- Chicks, label, PR, management -- knows anything about the country music audience. That audience is usually loyal to a favored country artist for life. And that audience is tolerant of artists' mistakes and foibles: drunkenness, drug use, adultery, no-shows and any amount of indulgent behavior. What that audience will not tolerate is an artist turning on that audience. And Maines' attack on Bush was in effect a direct attack on the country music audience. And its values. And its patriotism.

The reaction was unprecedented in country music history. Listeners bombarded country radio stations with protests. Large numbers of influential country radio stations banned the Chicks' current single "Travelin' Soldier." Many stations organized public rallies to destroy the Chicks' CDs.

Just as many or more stations refused to ban the Chicks, laudably citing freedom of speech. One Houston station began playing Bruce Robison's version of "Travelin' Soldier" (he and Farrah Braniff co-wrote the song) to demonstrate the song's beauty and its relevance to the current war situation.

Chicks' manager Simon Renshaw suggested, in an e-mail that the Chicks' label Sony Music sent to country radio stations, that the protest against the Chicks was orchestrated by the Free Republic, a right-wing Web site. The Free Republic certainly had -- and still has -- its share of anti-Chicks postings. But I also have read literally hundreds of Chicks postings the last few days on a number of Web sites across the political spectrum, and they show a genuine consensus from country fans saying that Maines in effect filed for divorce from country audiences.

What I'm starting to wonder about is the actual career damage the Chicks have sustained. As I said, country fans are incredibly loyal. But how many angered country fans will once again embrace the Chicks? In the half-week of charting after Maines' sermonette, the Chicks dropped on Nielsen Soundscan sales charts: their current album Home dipped 22,000 copies in sales, although it's still No. 1 on the Billboard country album chart. The video sales of the Chicks' live An Evening With the Dixie Chicks dropped by 3,000 copies and the single release of "Landslide" dropped by about 1,200 in sales.

They also lost at least 15 percent of radio spins for "Travelin' Soldier" and it dropped from No. 1 to No. 3 this week on the Billboard Hot Country Singles and Tracks chart.

And another lingering question is: how much of a steadfast country audience base have the Chicks actually built? A look at the Chicks' career suggests that much of their audience pull has been teenage girls, whose musical attention span traditionally has not been long and which certainly does not translate into the long-term loyalty that country artists have enjoyed.

Further, in looking over CMT.com reader polls over the last few months, I see a decided lack of support for the Chicks. In the most recent poll, on March 15, in response to the question, "How do you feel about the Dixie Chicks following Natalie Maines' comment regarding President Bush?," 68 percent of respondents said, "I don't like them at all." Even back on Feb. 21, when CMT.com asked readers if they would attend any of the Chicks' shows on their upcoming tour, 69 percent answered that they would rather stay home. On Feb. 8, a CMT.com poll question said that the Chicks' Home was selling well and asked readers if they had bought it. The response? "No way, I don't care for them," said 53 percent of respondents.

The Chicks' upcoming tour will be the litmus test. The tickets have already been sold and Ticketmaster, in its certain wisdom, gives no refunds. Will angry fans will tear up their tickets? Already, a talk show host on influential Texas radio station WBAP is talking about organizing a boycott of the Chicks' Dallas-Fort Worth show. And a conservative talk show host in South Carolina is organizing an alternative concert to the Chicks' U.S. tour kickoff date in Greenville, S.C., on May 1.

You know, there have been many activist artists who have made a difference. Two who come to mind recently are Bono, with his worldwide AIDS efforts, and Emmylou Harris, whose efforts to ban and remove landmines have been significant. And their good works speak for them. Unfortunately, there are many other artists who are patriotic blowhards, whose contributions consist mainly of issuing self-serving press releases -- and those are coming fast and furious in these war-torn days.

Memo to Natalie Maines: You're an artist? And you have a message? Hey, put it in a song. We'll listen to that. But, otherwise -- shut up and sing.

Anyone look at the REPLY to "Shut Up And Sing" now published in the same space on the CMT web site?

http://www.cmt.com/news/feat/nash.skyline.032703.jhtml

NASHVILLE SKYLINE is a column by CMT/CMT.com Editorial Director Chet Flippo.

Today's column is devoted to a reply to my column from last week, "Shut Up and Sing?" I received many, many replies to that column about the Dixie Chicks' lead singer Natalie Maines' remarks regarding President Bush. I feel strongly that you should read this response to that column from my old friend and mentor and fellow Texan Bill C. Malone. Bill is the dean of country music historians. His groundbreaking book Country Music USA in 1968 set the standards for country music scholarship, and Bill has kept those standards high with a series of books ever since. Bill sent a response to my column, and it is well worth your attention.

Chet, I have always valued your friendship and the incisive commentaries that you have made about country music over the last 30 years or so. But I think that the viewpoints expressed in your column concerning the Dixie Chicks controversy were dead wrong, and I hope that you will permit my response to your remarks to be circulated among your readers.

In my opinion, you had every right to question the wisdom, timing and context of Natalie Maines' remarks, but after having done that, you should have asserted her right to express her opinions. You would agree, I hope, that our great virtue as a nation comes from our constitutional liberties. We should not wish to be a nation like Iran or Iraq where criticism of the government is curtailed and punished. Natalie Maines' right to express her opinions is God-given and constitutionally-protected. The correctness or non-correctness of her statement has nothing to do with her right to say it. Our democracy is imperiled if we selectively decide who has the right to speak. You declare that "airhead celebrities" like Sean Penn, Madonna and Charlie Daniels have "no qualifications at all" to speak about U.S. foreign policy or anything else. I must respectfully disagree, and would remind you that Americans don't have to be "qualified" to speak on any issue (just take a look at the First Amendment). I am appalled at the elitism implied by your statement, and by the presumption that you can decide who is eligible for protection under the Constitution.

It is particularly mind-boggling to read in your column that "Maines' attack on Bush was in effect a direct attack on the country music audience." Old friend, I am sorely offended by your attempts to argue that the country music audience is monolithic, or that some of us are more patriotic than others because of our attitudes toward the current president. Many of us spend large sums of money on country music concerts, CDs and literature, and have done so for many years and we were part of the majority who voted against George Bush back in 2000. Some of us vehemently oppose the war that Bush has instigated, and, like Natalie Maines, we worry about the consequences that the war will have not only for men and women who have to fight it, but also for other people who may suffer from its ravages. And we insist on our right to assert our dissent.

I also wish you had spoken up against the highly-organized campaign to damage, or even destroy, the Dixie Chicks' career. I don't question your assertion that thousands of country fans deplore Natalie's remark, or that they want to punish her for her statement. But as a reputable and highly-visible columnist, you should equally deplore any concerted effort to stifle freedom of speech. In your column we find not one word of caution or concern about the systematic campaign being waged by radio stations, right wing Internet Web sites and others to stifle the sale of their CDs and concert tickets. And it seems not enough for you to question what the results of these efforts will be, you then go on to question the nature, authenticity and durability of the fan base that the Dixie Chicks already have. You make a snide remark, for example, about "teenage girls, whose musical attention span traditionally has not been long." Part of the Chicks' audience, in fact, is made up of the same non-traditional fans who made O Brother such a huge success. In liking the Dixie Chicks, people of disparate ages and incomes have also been introduced to good acoustic music and songs, and to young women who can skillfully play string instruments. I think that we ought to value the contributions that the Dixie Chicks have made, and recognize that none of us really know what the long-term consequences of their popularity will be. I only know that many people are now listening to acoustic string music, and that such interest might persuade other mainstream musicians to make similar experiments.

Finally, Chet, I found your column to be profoundly disappointing because it was patronizing and one-sided. It purports to know what the true views of the country music audience are, and who is and who isn't qualified to speak on public issues. In your stern lecture to Natalie Maines, you advise her to shut up and put her message in a song. And you conclude with the statement, "We'll listen to that." I too would love to hear such a song, but Chet, you know full well that the song would never receive airplay on Top 40 country stations. Corporate sponsors, marketing "specialists" and other censors would never permit the song to see the light of day.

I respectfully urge you to defend Natalie Maines' right to speak, and ask you to remind your readers and all other fans of country music that the First Amendment and other constitutional liberties should be ardently guaranteed now more than ever.

-- Bill C. Malone

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.