Dixie Chicks

Ennia · Post by **Ennia** » April 24, 2003, 2:11 pm

all I gotta say is WTF??

Cheap_way_to_get_popularity_03

I think they should reissue their new CD and stuff it with that picture, possibly more, that sure will bring new fans and makes people who broke their CD's to buy them again

Crav · Post by **Crav** » April 24, 2003, 2:45 pm

Shrug, it's not like every other artist hasn't gone and posed like that in other magazines. At least this one had some sort of relevance since the ignorant masses that didn't agree with their comments basically made them feel like the way they are seen on the cover. Just to clarify I am not saying that they made them feel like that by not buying their cds or having radio stations boycott their songs, I am saying it because of the attacks calling them unpatriotic. No one should ever be called unpatriotic and a traitor when they voice their opinions in this country.

Lalanae · Post by **Lalanae** » April 24, 2003, 2:49 pm

/agree Crav

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » April 24, 2003, 5:41 pm

THE BAYBE JESUS WOULD NEVER APEER ON NO COVER OF NO ENT'AINMENT MAGAZEEN WITHOUT HIS CLOATHS ON

masteen · Post by **masteen** » April 24, 2003, 5:46 pm

I was hoping for teh Playboy...

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » April 24, 2003, 5:57 pm

masteen wrote:I was hoping for teh Playboy...

nah Hustler would be much better. they'd be getting it on, etc.

Kluden · Post by **Kluden** » April 24, 2003, 6:15 pm

I'd crush'em

Acies · Post by **Acies** » April 24, 2003, 6:24 pm

bling bling

Spangaloid_PE · Post by **Spangaloid_PE** » April 24, 2003, 6:32 pm

Acies · Post by **Acies** » April 24, 2003, 6:47 pm

Ennia · Post by **Ennia** » April 24, 2003, 7:59 pm

it's not the right to pose nude that irks me, it's that they're doing it now as an answer to the wallet beating they got

The trio, who saw sales of their latest release plummet and fans smash their CDs after Maines' comment protesting the U.S.-led war on Iraq, said in a separate ABC TV "Primetime" interview to air on Thursday night that they fear for their lives amid criticism they say is "out of control."

yeah right, I bet someone out there is probably scheming to have them all killed

and this tidbit made me laugh

Bandmate Maguire said she understood why some fans would be upset by the remark but found much of the reaction to be disproportionate.

So they put a nice airbrushed nude photo with, what looks like, digitally added text in an atempt to proportionally answer/appologize?

P.S. their Stevie Nicks' rendition of Landslide sucks

noel · Post by **noel** » April 24, 2003, 8:24 pm

I just wonder how much airbrushing/photoshopping that took.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » April 24, 2003, 9:37 pm

wow they are really unattractive.

What were they doing in London anyway? Europeans actually listen to the dixie chicks? I find that to be mildly improbable.

Legenae · Post by **Legenae** » April 24, 2003, 9:41 pm

I don't think it's the wallet beating that's concerning them.

They are actually receiving OMGIAMRETARDEDCAUSEALOTISTWOWORDS of threats, and property trashing.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/Music/0 ... index.html

*edit*

I wonder if people are going to boycott Bruce Springsteen's stuff now that he's voiced support for the Dixie Chicks.

The Dixie Chicks have taken a big hit lately for exercising their basic right to express themselves. To me, they're terrific American artists expressing American values by using their American right to free speech. For them to be banished wholesale from radio stations, and even entire radio networks, for speaking out is un-American.

The pressure coming from the government and big business to enforce conformity of thought concerning the war and politics goes against everything that this country is about - namely freedom. Right now, we are supposedly fighting to create freedom in Iraq, at the same time that some are trying to intimidate and punish people for using that same freedom here at home.

I don't know what happens next, but I do want to add my voice to those who think that the Dixie Chicks are getting a raw deal, and an un-American one to boot. I send them my support.

Bruce Springsteen

http://www.brucespringsteen.net/news/index.html

Krimson Klaw · Post by **Krimson Klaw** » April 25, 2003, 9:22 am

As long as Justin Timberlake says nothing dumb, I am straight. he's the OG playa....from the Himalayas....damnit white boy!

Silvarel Mistmoon · Post by **Silvarel Mistmoon** » April 25, 2003, 10:24 am

It isn't that she used her freedom of speech, its not that the other celebs used their freedom of speech its how they did it.
Had they been at a private party or a dinner it's the fact that several choose award shows or press conferences for tours or coming out of movies that piss's people off.
If they want to entertain the do it if they want to use a public forum to voice their feelings in politics then run for office.

Funny she says she isn't ashamed Bush is from Texas, then why did she make the comment? Did she say it to try to make the Brits accept her? Did she take the statement back because she woke up the next morning and said "OH SHIT! I am a country singer!!!"

How many really believe Madonna really gave a flip about the war BTW? I think she was hoping to use it to make a lot of money off another album. She usually uses what is going on in the world to make her money.
If you think bout it, she will make a good bit off this one also, so much press about it so every one will run out and buy it just to see what is really on it. She is not a dumb blonde!

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » April 25, 2003, 10:39 am

Number one, if those gals think this is going to address their current dive in popularity, I got news for ya, ladies.....

Two, if you think they are unattractive after the airbrushing.....

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » April 25, 2003, 10:59 am

The problem is, they're being wishy washy. They should just say "Yes, I said I'm ashamed of George Bush. So fucking what?"

They're currently pussy-footing around thier inbred country music fans' feelings too much right now. Be an individual. Stand up for yourself and your opinions. Stop being a door matt, it's embarrassing.

I've been to several concerts where the artists voiced thier opinions about the war and about our President. They all said a hell of a lot more offensive things than what the Dixie Chicks said. The problem is perception. The fans of the Dixie Chicks have this image in thier head about how they want them to think and act. They broke the mold thier fans had cast them in and now they want blood.

I think the whiny ex-fans are perpetuating the ignorant, inbred, country music fan stereotype. And I HATE it when any group perputuates thier stereotype. It just bugs me.

On the plus side, the Dixie Chicks definately have a wider audiance of listeners compared to the majority of country bands, so that will be thier saving grace IMO. The downside, of course, is that country music fans are thier prime target and they'll never forgive or forget.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » April 25, 2003, 11:04 am

their biggest problem is that corporations like Clear Channel Communications, which owns 1100 stations nationwide and is a substantial donor ot the Republican party, control their access to large portions of the marketplace.

if i recall correctly, all of those stations are prohibited from playing the Dixie Chicks, and probably always will be.

"liberal media" and all

Crav · Post by **Crav** » April 25, 2003, 11:29 am

Do you really think people destroyed their cds and called in to ask the radio stations to boycott the Dixie Chicks songs because they disagreed with the manner in which they used their freedom of speech? While I don't particular care what celebrities say or where they say it, I do care when people are called unpatriotic, traitors or un-American when they used their freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is not restricted to private parties or small social gatherings, as long as you are not breaking the law you are free to express yourself anywhere you wish to.

Now as to why they decided to appear on the cover of Entertainment the way they did, I can't really answer since I don't know them. Is it likely that they did it to try to win back some fans? It's probable, but there are other reasons. I mean there is the old corny line about artists wanting to express themselves and appearing in a magazine is a way of doing that. However, I will point out that lucky for most artist, people today have the attention span of about a month or so at most, so if it's a publicity stunt it wasn't really necessary. Again I do not know them so I can not answer why they did the cover, and I doubt anyone on this board can.

One last thing, I fail to see what relevance whether they are attractive or not has to do with them posing on the cover. From my point of view they wanted to express themselves in a way that would portray the way they have been made to feel.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » April 25, 2003, 11:42 am

as for the people who are saying they are ugly etc.

i am betting $20 that none of you have girlfriends/wives who would look better on that magazine.

to receive your $20 (and i will send it), you must provide at least a bathing suit picture of your sig other

Crav · Post by **Crav** » April 25, 2003, 11:50 am

Voronwë, I would suggest that they send accompanying proof that it is their girlfriend/wive, otherwise you'll end up with hundreds of pictures of local underwear models

!

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » April 25, 2003, 11:57 am

I didn't marry my wife because she was a lingere model or had any aspirations of becoming one.

I would sure as hell let her know that posing naked on the cover of a magazine was not in her best interests...

miir · Post by **miir** » April 25, 2003, 11:57 am

It isn't that she used her freedom of speech, its not that the other celebs used their freedom of speech its how they did it.
Had they been at a private party or a dinner it's the fact that several choose award shows or press conferences for tours or coming out of movies that piss's people off.

So it's OK for them to say whatever they want but only when you can't hear it?

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » April 25, 2003, 11:58 am

Voronwë wrote:their biggest problem is that corporations like Clear Channel Communications, which owns 1100 stations nationwide and is a substantial donor ot the Republican party, control their access to large portions of the marketplace.

if i recall correctly, all of those stations are prohibited from playing the Dixie Chicks, and probably always will be.

"liberal media" and all

"Retracted my Statement after Further research (Calling the station), Voronwe was correct."

Looks like I need to take them off my Radio in the car. I dont understand all the fuss though, Like a watch a movie or listen to a band because of there political views.

miir · Post by **miir** » April 25, 2003, 12:06 pm

Yeah, I just looked at the site and their playlist.... other than the blurb about them on the front page, there was no Dixie Chicks to be found.

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » April 25, 2003, 12:11 pm

Bastards

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » April 25, 2003, 12:12 pm

I wouldn't consider them unattractive by any stretch. I mean. they're not porn stars or anything, but they're certianly not ugly.

Oh yeah, this whole cover thing is golden for both Entertainment Weekly and the Dixie Chicks. It's everywhere I look. Both parties will benefit and that's what it's all about. Think about it, who gives a flying fuck what was on the cover of any other magazine this month? Everything else has been overshadowed by the Dixie Chicks and Entertainment Weekly.

It's kinda like the whole Michael Moore thing. Does anyone remember or even care about any other speech that took place that night? I certianly don't.

It just goes to show that there is no such thing as bad publicity.

Crav · Post by **Crav** » April 25, 2003, 12:24 pm

It just goes to show that there is no such thing as bad publicity.

I don't know I think Michael Jackson would disagree with you

. Then again nowadays Justin Timberlake does a better of Michael Jackson impersonation.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » April 25, 2003, 12:28 pm

MJ's album sales increased after that British docmentary a couple of months ago. It was part of the reason he did the Fox special last night.

miir · Post by **miir** » April 25, 2003, 12:30 pm

Michael Jackson does a bad negro impersonation.

Ennia · Post by **Ennia** » April 25, 2003, 12:38 pm

Fairweather Pure wrote:The problem is, they're being wishy washy. They should just say "Yes, I said I'm ashamed of George Bush. So fucking what?"

They're currently pussy-footing around thier inbred country music fans' feelings too much right now. Be an individual. Stand up for yourself and your opinions. Stop being a door matt, it's embarrassing.

I've been to several concerts where the artists voiced thier opinions about the war and about our President. They all said a hell of a lot more offensive things than what the Dixie Chicks said. The problem is perception. The fans of the Dixie Chicks have this image in thier head about how they want them to think and act. They broke the mold thier fans had cast them in and now they want blood.

I think the whiny ex-fans are perpetuating the ignorant, inbred, country music fan stereotype. And I HATE it when any group perputuates thier stereotype. It just bugs me.

On the plus side, the Dixie Chicks definately have a wider audiance of listeners compared to the majority of country bands, so that will be thier saving grace IMO. The downside, of course, is that country music fans are thier prime target and they'll never forgive or forget.

I couldn't have said it better.
As far as I'm concerned they can say what they want as long as they stand by it and not spin around like a weather vane. Either shove your foot in your mouth or grow a spine and some balls.

Both incidents (the comment at the concert and nude pic) are just poorly timed marketing jabs. That's my opinion of course, wasn't a fan and am not now.

Watch out for VH1 special Behind the music in a couple months

Fallanthas · Post by **Fallanthas** » April 25, 2003, 12:41 pm

Standing by what they said isn't really a problem.

Standing by it and then whining about the heat is the issue.

It's great that they hold an opinion strongly enough to vocalize. That beats the shit out of kow-towing to someone else.

HOWEVER!!!!

Taking a stand and then bitching that people who don't agree with you won't support is pretty fucking stupid.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » April 25, 2003, 12:53 pm

I'm surprised I haven't heard one single comparison to the Beatle's infamous "We're bigger than Jesus" statement.

It's easily the best analogy.

Crav · Post by **Crav** » April 25, 2003, 12:57 pm

While I agree that standing by what you said is very important and that I have more respect for those people who stand by what they say no matter what it is, I would not agree that it would have helped in this situation at all. Most people don't care if you honor what you say and stick by it. I personally think they were spineless for retracting the statement that was made at the concert. However, that doesn't mean that they should be labeled unpatriotic, traitors, or be associated with Saddam just because they voiced their opinion. The people in the wrong are those that would ignore what this country was built on and which btw continues very well on this board, our right to disagree and voice that disagreement.

Legenae · Post by **Legenae** » April 25, 2003, 2:04 pm

Fallanthas wrote:I didn't marry my wife because she was a lingere model or had any aspirations of becoming one.

I would sure as hell let her know that posing naked on the cover of a magazine was not in her best interests...

I really don't think they were posing nude to gain more fans.
Read the CNN article.

On the May 2 issue of Entertainment Weekly, the three appear naked with epithets such as "Traitors," "Boycott," "Proud Americans" and "Dixie Sluts" printed on their bodies.

"It's not about the nakedness," the New York Post reported Maguire as saying. "It's about clothes getting in the way of labels."

As for them being unattractive... let's see your pics.

noel · Post by **noel** » April 25, 2003, 2:47 pm

Incidentally, my 'airbrushing/photoshopping' comment was not saying they're ugly. On the contrary, the one in the center is pretty hawt. My point was, even models that spend all of their time in bathing suits require it, I bet this took a lot.

Legenae · Post by **Legenae** » April 25, 2003, 3:01 pm

Well, I was referring to the other people on the thread calling them unattractive.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » April 25, 2003, 3:19 pm

Does it count if we send Voro bathing suit pics of ourselves? I want my 20 dollars!