The FREEPER strategy on responding to Dixie Chicks manager's comments

Cincinatti Enquirer ^ | 3/19/2003 | jagrmiester

[jagrmeister]

Yesterday, we conducted a strategy session (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/868480/posts) on Free Republic on how to respond to the latest remarks by Simon Renshaw, the Dixie Chicks manager. As the thread unfolded, the strategy has crystallized and I have compiled the suggestions into a document which articulates the goals, message, and action items. But first, a recap. We all know the Dixie Chicks went abroad and insulted the President. They then apologized. But now the Dixie Chicks manager has some harsh words for fans complaining to radio stations, describing them as "radical" "weasels" (his own words) engaged in "conspiracy". Now it's time for country music fans to counter-punch in the Dixie Chicks boycott- Round 2.

Observation: The strategy begins with the observation that Renshaw's comments categorize patriotic Dixie Chicks fans who had a legitimate grievance as "radical" "weasels" (his own words) with an agenda. Such disrespect for country music fans adds insult to injury, renders hollow the Dixie Chicks apology, and eviscerates any goodwill gained by Maines' apology. (if you disagree, please private message me; i'd like to keep the thread for those who support this observation and taking action)

Round 2 Strategy Basics: Renshaw said radio stations were being duped by Free Republic (which he then demonized in a dozen ways) and implied that the "public" did not object to the Dixie Chicks' remarks as much as Free Republic made it seem. We refuse to go for Renshaw's bait. The pressure felt by radio stations is indeed a genuine outpouring of indignation and not a cynical political ploy. Because we are independent people and we refuse to be boxed in and demonized, we intend to counter-punch as concerned country music fans, not conservatives or Freepers. Getting into a debate about the merits of Free Republic is a diversion.

Round 2 FREEPER Goal: As a result, we aim to...

1. Continue the boycott of the Dixie Chicks on radio stations and combat Renshaw's propaganda

2. Pressure Sony Music to rebuke Renshaw for his comments.

Round 2 Message: Here is the message that I spent a great deal of time (hours) honing for maximum efficicacy. Feel free to customize this message based on who you are using it with. Also feel free to change words, put it in your voice, etc. But I think the basic "message" is sound. Most of the time spent was choosing the angle at which to approach Renshaw's remarks and simplifying the argument- the emphasis was brevity.

"Simon Renshaw, manager for the Dixie Chicks, recently described country music fans who complained to their local radio station about the band's controversial remarks as "radical" "weasels" acting as part of a "conspiracy". By characterizing patriotic Dixie Chick fans in such a manner, he has rendered hollow the Dixie Chicks apology and eviscerated any goodwill gained by Maines' apology. Rather than acknowledging the genuine uproar that their comments fueled, the Dixie Chicks team is engaged in denial, conspiracy theory, and scapegoating. Rather than mend fences, the Dixie Chicks' representation has chosen to engage in name-calling against country music fans. I was willing to accept the Dixie Chicks apology but it appears that it was not made in good faith. These latest comments made by Dixie Chicks represenatation disrespect country music fans and add insult to injury. The boycot of the Dixie Chicks will continue until a genuine apology is made that respects sincerely the objections that countless patriotic fans have with the Dixie Chicks remarks."

*Let me know if you have any questions with the message. I'd be glad to clarify.

Round 2 Action Items:

1. Contact Radio Stations- Round 2. Emphasize "Message- Round 2" and stress loss of listeners. The Dixie Chicks are not out of the woods yet and this latest insult worsens matters. (In our communication, we may want to rebut the radio station's reply of "we can't practice censorship" ahead of time by justifying the request of their ban of the Dixie Chicks on "listener interest"). Once you do so, please post here. If by e-mail, no need to paste it here (maybe a synopsis) as no point in giving them the satisfaction of tracing the criticism back to Free Republic. *List of radio stations: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/863302/posts

2. Contact Sony Music a. We need to first begin with Sony Music's contact information (http://www.sonymusic.com/sony/corpcomm.html) and find out who was responsible for sending the memo to radio stations containing Renshaw's remarks. Post this information on this thread. b. Address Sony Music with why country music fans are indignant over Renshaw's remarks, how he have added fuel to fire of the boycott, nullified the apology. In other words, as a manager, he has done permanent damage to the reputation and sales of his band. Sony Music must disavow themselves of Renshaw's critical remarks of country music fans since the memo with Renshaw's remarks was distributed by Sony Music. Recommend his termination. ---

I heard that the Dixie Chicks radio airplay was down 15%. We will know that we are successful if we are able to keep their airplay down through constant pressure of radio stations.

[TPartyType]

wizzler, Don't waste your breath. Too many FReepers are convinced that conservatives have to make their voice heard by using the same tactics street activists and radical leftists have employed since the 60s. I think it's because they (a) have no life, and (b) can't differentiate between a true conservative and a radical idealogue.

---

I say "have no life" because I have watched how they wet themselves with excitement any time they get a headline or a mention on C-SPAN. They go out, week after week, standing on street corners, waving clever posters and dressing up like satan (Sorry, Dr. Raoul). They believe they're fighting the good fight and making a difference, but they're just an embarrassment, if you ask me. They organize boycotts, never stopping to consider that radicals are the ones who determine what they eat, what they consume, what they buy and what they listen to on the basis of politics. Conservatives are not idealogues. Conservatives are not street activists. WE are the salt of the earth, hard-working family people who don't have time to battle the crowd nobody takes seriously anyway. (Notice how swayed President Bush and Prime Minister Blair were by the millions of anti-war protestors worldwide?)

Conservatives are not idealogues.

Conservatives are not radicals.

Conservatives do not organize boycotts.

Conservatives do not thrive on street theatre of the absurd (to grab headlines/gain attention).

Conservatives do not worship politics.

---

Hey, look at me. Now I'm wasting my breath! HA!

[jagrmeister]

Nice opposition research!! This is not the first time that Renshaw has cried conspiracy. What happens when you cry wolf like Simon has, you lose your credibility.

[chainsaw]

I'm all for telling Lipton to go back home and take their statue with them.

[GSWarrior]

Your posts have been filed under 'I Couldn't Have Said It Better Myself.'

[way-right-of-center]

Red Adair Bump!

[Revolting cat!]

(if you disagree, please private message me; i'd like to keep the thread for those who support this observation and taking action)

This sentence appears at the top of the original post. If you can't understand and follow such a simple and reasonable request, why should we pay attention to any ogf your vomit you post?

[wizzler]

You don't have to pay attention to anything I post here, vomit or otherwise.

And sorry -- let's just say I decided to boycott the "private message" request that was at the top of the original post.

[Revolting cat!]

There was a post on one of the Dipsy Chix threads by a FReeper who knew what he was talking about, explaining in much detail that concert tickets that had been purchased by credit card, and delivered by mail, can be in fact cancelled. The credit card charges can be reversed, if you haven't received the tickets, or if you state you haven't received them. If someone could find a link to the original post or provide knowledgeable information of the same kind, it would certainly be appreciated.

[Eowyn-of-Rohan]

Gee, I haven't noticed any racist violent homophobic radical unevolved ignorant bigoted irrational simplistic idiots around here, have you?

[longtermmemmory]

A frenchman gave us the statute. The French government thought he was a kook. There were even charity drives by children saving pennies to help assemble it. She's american.

[Revolting cat!]

OK, fair enough, let me just explain a point that is perhaps too subtle to grasp. The Chickens are indeed a disposable pop group. This is indeed a tempest in a teapot. But the Chickens find themselves at the receiving end of a lot of frustrations people in the flyover country feel about the celebrities seeking out television cameras to express their putrid opinions and, knowingly or not, acting as agents of influence, demoralizers in the employ of the enemies of this country! And doing it with no consequences of any kind, because how does the flyover country retaliate against Sean Penn? By not seeing his once a year movie, that hardly anyone sees anyway and those who see it are typically mindless teenagers who for the most part couldn't care less?

Well, here comes a popular group led by a singer with a Julia Roberts mouth, a group that sells CD's every day, sells concert tickets every day, gets song requests phoned in to a thousand radiostations. And sells tjhose things to people who are overwhelmingly patriotic, who overwhelmingly voted for this President. We are sending a warning message to the Seans, Jacks, Julias of Ho-wood and the Chickens will, like it or not, carry it. Clear?

[an amused spectator]

Simon sez... ;-)

[JoJo Gunn]

This is essentially a duplicate thread.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/868480/posts

[wizzler]

I understand your point, and thank you for responding.

But at the risk of making this personal, let me say that your post exemplifies the sort of tone that bothers me. (Not specifically in your post, but in general.) It's the whole "Dipsy Chicks"/"Chickens"/"Tom Dashole"/"Bill Klintoon" type of rhetoric.

I don't want to make too much of the puns themselves, but I can say that as soon as I spot one in a post, I tend to dismiss the rest of that post. It's not even a conscious decision, really. It's just that those puns they tend to accompany a weak argument, and so my brain processes them as a prompt of sorts -- a signal that I don't need to bother with the rest of the presented "argument."

My point? Phrases like "Dipsy Chicks" are cute and clever and what have you, but they symbolize the kind of shrill rhetoric I've lamented throughout this thread. I'm not saying we all have to be academic and somber all the time. But the sort of bombastic name-calling inherent in those nicknames usually tells me that the rest of the argument is to be viewed with suspicion. Because logic and truth don't need cutting nicknames to do their persuasion for them; to paraphrase an articulate poster above, they're tools that are necessary only for ideologues.

[oyez]

They want to destroy wealth and the wealthy so everyone will be equally miserable. In the socialsts world there is no redemption. Everyone are like animals. The only guarantee they have is they become worm food, except a very, very select few that would be preserved in a glass box in a national monument.

[Revolting cat!]

I think I understand your objections, but I think your impression of puns affecting the level of discussion is mistaken. This is not an Oxford debating society, we're having fun, and puns are essential part of it, helping to break up tension and hostility between the debating parties. It's a written discussion not verbal. Editorial writers use them all the time, sometimes nearly as viciously as we do. I wish you'd reconsider! I've seen some well reasoned posts using the "Hitlery" monicker, and I can never bring myself to use the proper _linton family name in my own posts.

[wizzler]

I don't think those nicknames are completely useless. They can be occasionally fun (if less occasionally actually funny).

But in general, that kind of writing is one of the reasons I (and many others) don't take Maureen Dowd seriously, for instance. When it comes down to it, they do nothing to convince an opponent that you're right -- and in fact, can keep an opponent on the defensive and unwilling to listen further. And while this ISN'T an Oxford debating society, it is a place where people debate. (As evidenced by this very thread.)

[Revolting cat!]

Well, all I can say is that you've managed to pick the absolutely the worst debating candidate for this particular discussion. I luv puns, good and bad and have come up with many bad ones myself, as well as my regular "Tomorrow's headline today" series, like this one (previously posted) which is very much a propos here:

Stix Hix Nix Dix Chix

[OperationFreedom]

bump

[wizzler]

You shouldn't be reading so much Mickey Kaus.