The Dixie Chicks: Taking the Wrong Way?, by Jeri Lynn Schwietert

The Dixie Chicks: Taking the Wrong Way? (Jeri Lynn Schwietert)

Over four years ago eleven words drastically changed the country music industry. Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks said “…we’re ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas.”

It all started when Maines began bashing well-known, very popular country singers. Just after September 11th, Toby Keith came out with a song called “Courtesy of the Red, White, and Blue (Angry American)” which went to the top of the Country Billboard Charts. The song is geared toward the terrorists responsible for the attacks on September 11th. In the middle of the ballad he sings “’Cause we’ll put a boot in your ass, it’s the American way,” (Toby Keith, 2003). Later when asked how she liked the song, Maines told the press, “I hate it. It’s ignorant.” Afterwards Toby Keith responded with “I’ll bury her. She has never written anything that’s been a hit.” A few months later, Natalie Maines showed up at the ACM Awards sporting a shirt which had the letters (first row) F. U. (second row) T. K. While Maines claimed that the letters actually stood for faith, understanding, truth, and knowledge, it was obvious that Maines was making a show.

Maines truly made a name for herself the day she bashed President Bush. The date was March 15, 2003. A war with Iraq was looming. President George W. Bush had given Iraq an ultimatum—they must relinquish their weapons of mass destruction. The United States military was slowly closing in on Iraq, some bombers taking their stances within distance of Baghdad. The Americans (in addition to some British soldiers) put their boots in the desert sands of nearby Kuwait. Needless to say, the United States was ready to fight (Lyman).

A large fraction of Europeans did not agree with the United States’ reasons for war. While politicians such as Silvio Berlusconi (Italy), Tony Blair (Britain), and Jose Maria Aznar (Spain) openly supported the American cause to put an end to the creation of weapons of mass destruction, these large numbers of Europeans were openly protesting (Lyman). USA Today reported on March 14, 2003, “At least 7 million Europeans marched through their capitals a month ago to protest war in Iraq,” (Lyman). As the week played out, numerous protests would take place in Britain over the next few days. Perhaps such anti-war sentiment prompted Maines to make such an outlandish statement.

In actuality the Dixie Chicks were touring Europe, and happened to be in London at the time of the statement. Perhaps it is more accurate to say that because they were in London, she made the statement, because British citizens were quite angry with the American war sentiments. Reasons aside, the deed was done. Over in London Maines was received with loud cheering. Back home in the United States, Maines’ fellow citizens did not have the same response.

Previous to her statement, the Dixie Chicks had become country music icons. So far they had accomplished six number-one hits in addition to numerous other hits which made substantial gains on the Country Billboard Chart. In addition, they had graced both the Country Music Association (CMA) and American Music Association (AMA) Awards several times. They had won several Grammys, including three-time Best Country Album, four-time Best Country Performance by a Duo or Group, and Best Country Instrumental Performance. In addition, they were nominated twice for Best Album of the Year (Dixie Chicks: Taking the Long Way). As of Maines’ statement, the group had experienced a reign as the “only country group in history and the only female group of any genre to earn back-to-back Diamond Awards signifying 10 million in record sales,” (Dixie Chicks: Taking the Long Way). Needless to say the Dixie Chicks were well-liked and known as the icons of millions of fans everywhere.

Therefore, with this statement, the Dixie Chicks had successfully insulted almost their entire fan-base. They had officially pierced the hearts of listeners who made conservative songs such as “Okie from Muskogee” (sung by Merle Haggard) and “Where I Come From” (sung by Alan Jackson) top the charts. And Natalie was not apologizing. Her regrets came almost two days later when she witnessed her fans’ negative reactions. Even her apology, when it finally arrived, was carefully worded:

"As a concerned American citizen, I apologize to President Bush because my remark was disrespectful. I feel that whoever holds that office should be treated with the utmost respect. We are currently in Europe and witnessing a huge anti-American sentiment as a result of the perceived rush to war. While war may remain a viable option, as a mother, I just want to see every possible alternative exhausted before children and American soldiers' lives are lost. I love my country. I am a proud American,” (Brooks).

While Maines’ apology did come, few Americans found any comfort with her words. She addressed it “as a concerned American citizen” and “as a mother”, not as a singer who made a mistake, or commented on something which was not her place. In addition, she stated that “whoever holds office should be treated with the utmost respect” instead of something along the lines of, “President Bush deserves the utmost respect.” By saying “whoever”, Maines acknowledges the possible opinion that President Bush was along the lines of corrupt leaders who made numerous mistakes during their presidencies. It also seemed as if she was making excuses for her statement with her ending, “I just want to see every possible alternative exhausted before children and American soldiers' lives are lost.” Not only does this statement insinuate that because some Americans might be pro-war they would like to see soldiers and children die, but alienates the military fan-base. It distances Maines from listeners who are family of American solders because it seems she is saying that if these families are in support of the war, then they want to see the lives of their soldiers lost. Overall, many country music and Dixie Chicks fans found this apology to be insufficient, and furthermore insulting.

When the United States caught word of Maines’ original statement, the fans that had made the Dixie Chicks idols called into radio stations, requesting that the disc jockeys not play their songs. Some radio stations reportedly had “chicken toss” events. At such events, disgruntled fans could come to the station to stomp on their Dixie Chicks CDs and trash the pieces, in addition to other Dixie Chick memorabilia. While this was an extreme, other, perhaps more emotional, fans found it necessary to write to Maines and the other two members, Emily Robison and Martie Maguire.

The Dixie Chicks found other ways to draw in the public eye. In April of 2003, they posed nude on the cover of Entertainment Weekly. Their bodies displayed phrases such as “Boycott”, “Opinionated”, and “Proud Americans”. The Dixie Chicks also had comments about the spread. "It's not about the nakedness," the New York Post quotes band member Martie Maguire as saying. “It's about clothes getting in the way of labels,” (Fairfax Digital). Did the Dixie Chicks wish to build or demolish labels? The answer is unclear. With the spread, however, the Dixie Chicks definitely called attention to themselves, even when they knew that their conservative country fans might not approve.

Then there was the Time Magazine interview in which Maines stated that the group would rather have “a smaller following of really cool people who get it,” as opposed to “people that have us in their five-disc changer with Reba McEntire and Toby Keith,” (Sanneh). This statement solidified Maines’ irrepressible need for media attention. However, in 2006, McEntire shot back at the ACM Awards by saying, “If the Dixie Chicks can sing with their foot in their mouths, surely I can host this sucker.” For this statement, she received a standing ovation from their fellow country music artists. It seemed as if everyone had become fed up with Maines’ actions and turned their backs on the Dixie Chicks (Sanneh).

Many broadcasting stations felt obligated to report on the incident. While some did so without any bias, others presented the facts with a twist. This twist usually backed Maines’ statement—and rarely mentioned her other bouts. The fact of the matter is that while some of the media turned Maines into a freedom-of-speech martyr, few accurately portrayed Maines for her true actions.

The most clear-cut view, strangely enough, came from the New York Times.
The Times saw the situation from both aspects—country fans and the Dixie Chicks. While it left out possible views of fellow country singers such as Reba McEntire and Toby Keith, this was the one article which seemed to point out the absolute truth in the situation. It stated, “It's not hard to sympathize with Ms. Maines and her two band mates, Martie Maguire and Emily Robison. They say they have had to contend with violent threats, and former fans call them bimbos and worse,” (Sanneh). However, when it comes to understanding the sentiments of country fans, the New York Times does it best. It says, “But this isn't really a fight about President Bush or freedom of speech. This is a fight about the identity of country music. There's a contract that binds country singers to their fans, and the Dixie Chicks have broken it,” (Sanneh).

Many forms of the media took the Dixie Chicks’ side. Quite unlike the New York Times, CNN.com stated in their headline, “There are a lot worse things in country music than your wife leaving you or your dog dying. There's stations not playing your music because you done gone and said some things against the president,” (CNN.com/Entertainment). This was a very narrow statement in itself. It made country music listeners sound inferior with its improper wording and usage. It also made country music itself sound inferior by insinuating that country music is only about “your wife leaving you or your dog dying.” This puts the blame on the fans, not the Dixie Chicks. Lastly, the statement that they were punished because they said something against President Bush was false because, as the Times clearly stated, country music listeners were enraged because the Dixie Chicks broke the “contract that binds country singers to their fans,” (CNN.com/Entertainment). Even Country Weekly found itself on the Dixie Chicks’ side.

An earlier version of Country Weekly presented a pro-Dixie Chicks view. The tone of the article flippantly talked about Maines’ statements as if she were correct. For example, when the article quotes Maines, it states things such as “Natalie shed some light onto…” (CountryWeekly.com). Instead of pointing Natalie out as someone who made a mistake, the article throws her into the limelight, sending her into freedom-of-speech martyrdom. Other statements were made in the article, such as “Fellow country stars like Travis Tritt and Toby Keith have bashed the Chicks for their anti-Bush stance,” (CountryWeekly.com). The article does not express the actual statements of Tritt and Keith nor about the rift between Toby Keith and the Dixie Chicks (which was actually started by an outlandish statement from Maines). Another form of media which interprets this feud incorrectly is the documentary, Dixie Chicks: Shut Up and Sing.

Dixie Chicks: Shut Up and Sing is a documentary made in 2006 which dictates the entire fiasco starting with the Toby Keith feud until the making of the Dixie Chicks’ newest album (produced in 2006). Told from the three members’ points of view, the documentary for the most part accurately portrays the occurrences, although it is weak because its primary focus is the feelings of the individual band members. The documentary, like other articles mentioned, distorts a few true occurrences. One example is the feud between Maines and Keith. In the film, it seems as if Keith started the feud instead of Maines (which ignores the fact that Maines could have a problem controlling her words). In addition, by going into detail of Keith’s actions, it simplifies Maines’ actions during the feud and makes it seem as if Keith was the only one doing harm to the opponent. However, the audience does see Maines blatantly speaking about the true meaning of F.U.T.K.—F*** U Toby Keith (Dixie Chicks: Shut Up and Sing), which nonetheless reveals Maines’ true intentions. This documentary abruptly ends, making the audience feel as if they were back in the beginning, and Maines and Keith were having their original feud.

Although there is no doubt that her feud with Toby Keith shoved Natalie Maines into the spotlight, this was only the beginning of the end of her successful country music career. Previously the Dixie Chicks had won several ACM and AMA Awards, along with intense popularity and public praise. This success, however, came to an abrupt end the day Maines disdainfully spoke ill of President Bush on foreign soil. Many country music fans would not, and to this day will not, see Maines in her original, statement-free light, because the eleven words spoken took place in London amidst anti-American fervor. In addition, such fans found Maines’ statement to be a mere attempt rather than a sincere apology. It is regarded insufficient. While some of the media clearly represented Maines’ actions and country music fans’ true intentions for their reactions, others affiliated with the media put the blame on other factors---backwards fans, emotions in London, and country-loving folks. The New York Times most accurately detailed the occurrences, recognizing that while it is easy to pity the Dixie Chicks, it is also necessary to realize that with the statement the group ultimately alienated their fan-base. Others such as CNN.com, Country Weekly, and the documentary Dixie Chicks: Shut Up and Sing took the Dixie Chicks’ side. These media took the stance that the Dixie Chicks did something wrong, but did not deserve as much negative attention as they received. CNN.com in particular blamed country fans instead of the mouthy singers by making this microcosm of citizens seem inferior with improper word usage. While these are extreme pro-Dixie Chicks articles, it is reasonable to say that once a clear view of the occurrences is established, one is able to decide exactly what kind of attention the Dixie Chicks truly deserve, and this, ultimately, will determine their musical fate.

Works Cited

“It's Dixie Chicks vs. Country Fans, but Who's Dissing Whom?” The New York Times.
25 May 2006. Sanneh, Kelefa. 10 October 2007. .

“Dixie Chick Natalie Maines Apologizes For Anti-Bush Comment.” Yahoo! Music. 17
March 2003. Brooks, Nancy. 10 October 2007. .

“The Dixie Chicks Natalie Maines Speaks Out... Again.” About.com: Country Music.
30 January 2006. Fabian, Shelly. 10 October 2007.

“Dixie Chicks Pulled From Air After Bashing Bush.” CNN.com/Entertainment. 14
March 2003. 10 October 2007.
.

Dixie Chicks: Shut Up and Sing. Dirs. Barbara Kopple and Cecilia Peck. The Weinstein
Company, 2006.

Dixie Chicks: Taking the Long Way. 2006. Frontpage Publicity, Inc. 10 October 2007.
[http://www.dixiechicks.com/06_historical.asp].

“Dixies defiantly disrobe.” Fairfax Digital. 25 April 2003. 10 October 2007.
.

“Dixie Chicks vs. Toby Keith.” Buzzle.com. 5 June 2003. 10 October 2007.
.

“Facing the Music.” CountryWeekly.com. 9 May 2003. 10 October 2007.
.

Gardner, Elysa. “Springsteen, R.E.M., other big acts embark on tour.” USAToday.com.
4 August 2004. 10 October 2007. .

Lyman, Eric J. “Europeans plan anti-war job walkout ; Milan, other cities to see peace
marches.” USAToday.com. 14 March 2003. 10 October 2007. .

Paxman, Bob. “Shut Up and Sing.” CountryWeekly.com. 24 October 2003. 10 October
2007. .

Toby Keith. “Courtesy of the Red, White, and Blue (Angry American).” Greatest Hits
II. Dreamworks Nashville, 2004.

Assignment

Journal 3 - Research Proposal
For Journal 3, you will be proposing a research topic. Review the assignment for Paper 2, below. Pick a topic that you wish to research, and explain and address the following:

*the topic itself and why it is of interest to you
*the form of this article, i.e., informative, entertaining, creative, review, argument/persuasion, etc. Your article may fall into more than one category.
*three or so sources that you think will be helpful in your research.

I am very open to new ideas for this project. If you want to try something bold and out of the ordinary, run it by me. This journal is also my opportunity to figure out if your topics are going to work or not. Remember, you may choose to switch topics at a later date, but I encourage you to figure this out now and stick to it.

As always, at least 250 words. Due by Monday, Oct. 1

Paper 2: Media vs. Reality Article (8 to 10 pages, excluding the works cited page)

What kind of magazines do you read? Do you like glossy high-culture mags, informative news sources, music journals, or d.i.y. zines? Pick one publication and create an article for it. Make sure you’re writing on a topic that interests you, or you’ll get frustrated. Keep the audience in mind! You will be proposing your article topic to the instructor in one of your journal assignments.

Your article will evaluate the following questions: How is mass media representing culture? What messages are being sent? It is your job to evaluate how the message is being conveyed in the medium/media. This does not mean that you must disagree with the messages. You could easily write a paper on an effective message that you agree with. Whatever you choose to do, limit the scope of your essay so that you can create an organized, well written paper. Your paper can be persuasive, expository, entertaining, imaginative, etc., but you must have an analysis backed up with accurately cited research.

Topic options:
*Pick one movie or television show. Pick a specific community that is being represented or misrepresented. Write about why this text is an accurate or inaccurate representation of this group. Other media may be more difficult to analyze, but are acceptable.

*Pick one ad campaign for a particular product or message (opinion ad / public service announcement). Evaluate the effectiveness of the ad, the target audience, hidden or not-so-hidden messages, etc.

*Pick an album of music and evaluate the lyrics. What are they saying? Which messages do you agree with, and which ones trouble you? How does the music enhance or take away from the lyrics? What about the liner notes and visual packaging?

*Other- if you want to approach this paper in a different way, please talk to the instructor about it.

This assignment will require you to research your topic by not merely visiting websites but also reading periodicals and books, and possibly conducting interviews. You will create a Works Cited page that will contain at least three print sources (books and periodicals) and at least two other types of sources (internet, interview, television, radio, etc.)

Draft 1

Over four years ago eleven words drastically changed the country music industry. Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks said “…we’re ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas.”

The date was March 15, 2003. A war with Iraq was looming. President George W. Bush had given Iraq an ultimatum—they must relinquish their weapons of mass destruction. The United States military was slowly closing in on Iraq, some bombers taking their stances within distance of Baghdad. The Americans (in addition to some British soldiers) put their boots in the desert sands of nearby Kuwait. Needless to say, the United States was ready to fight.

Europeans found that the war was not going as smoothly. While politicians such as Silvio Berlusconi (Italy), Tony Blair (Britain), and Jose Maria Aznar (Spain) openly supported the American cause to put an end to the creation of weapons of mass destruction, large numbers of the European peoples were openly disagreeing. USA Today reported on March 14, 2003, “At least 7 million Europeans marched through their capitals a month ago to protest war in Iraq.” As the week played out, numerous protests would take place in Britain over the next few days. Perhaps such anti-war sentiment prompted Maines to make such an outlandish statement.

In actuality the Dixie Chicks were touring Europe, and happened to be in London at the time of the statement. Perhaps it is more accurate to say that because they were in London, she made the statement, as British citizens were angry with American sentiments. Reasons aside, the deed was done. Over in London Maines was rewarded with loud cheering. Back home in the United States, Maines’ fellow citizens did not have the same response.

Previous to her statement, the Dixie Chicks had become country music icons. So far they had accomplished six number-one hits in addition to numerous other hits which made substantial gains on the Country Billboard Chart. In addition, they had graced both the Country Music Association (CMA) and American Music Association (AMA) Awards several times. They had won several Grammys, including Best Country Album (three times), Best Country Performance by a Duo or Group (four times), and Best Country Instrumental Performance. In addition, they were nominated twice for Best Album of the Year (homepage good site). As of Maines’ statement, the group had experienced reign as the “only country group in history and the only female group of any genre to earn back-to-back Diamond Awards signifying 10 million in record sales.” (Home website) Needless to say the Dixie Chicks were well-liked and icons of millions of fans everywhere, including pre-teen girls (which comprised a majority of their fan-base).

When the United States caught word of Maines’ statement, the fans that had made the Dixie Chicks idols called into radio stations, requesting that the disc jockeys not play their songs. Some radio stations reportedly had “chicken trash” events. At such events, disgruntled fans could come to the station to stomp on their Dixie Chicks CDs and trash the pieces, in addition to other Dixie Chick memorabilia. While this was an extreme, other, perhaps more emotional, fans found it necessary to write to Maines and the other two members (Emily Robison and Martie Maguire).

At the time, the Dixie Chicks’ concerts were sold out. While promised attendance to these concerts was not at its fullest potential, the Dixie Chicks would experience their biggest let-down in the years to come. In 2004, after the anti-Bush statement, the Dixie Chicks decided not to tour. Instead they accompanied major acts like Bruce Springsteen and R.E.M. on a major tour to gain the liberal vote of “swing states”. (USA TODAY) In the years to come they eventually settled by touring with major rock bands.

Draft 2

Over four years ago eleven words drastically changed the country music industry. Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks said “…we’re ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas.”

It all started when Maines began bashing well-known, very popular country singers.

At the time, the Dixie Chicks’ future concerts had already sold out, and disgruntled fans were stuck with the tickets. While promised attendance to these concerts was not completely fulfilled, the Dixie Chicks would experience their biggest let-down in the years to come. In 2004, after the anti-Bush statement, the Dixie Chicks decided not to tour due to the lack of concert ticket sales. Instead they accompanied major acts like Bruce Springsteen and R.E.M. on a major tour to gain the liberal vote of “swing states”. (Gardner). In the years to come they eventually settled by touring with major rock bands.
Many broadcasting stations felt obligated to report on the incident. While some did so without any bias, others presented the facts with a twist. This twist usually backed Maines’ statement—and rarely mentioned her other bouts. The fact of the matter is that while some of the media turned Maines into a freedom-of-speech martyr, few accurately portrayed Maines for her true actions.

Journal

Over four years ago twelve words drastically changed the country music industry. Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks said “…we’re ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas.”

Previously the Dixie Chicks had broken all kinds of bestselling records and tore down barriers never touched by other country female recording artists. A few weeks after Maines’ statement, a smash hit went lame and one of the most popular country groups of all time found out that they were hated by nearly everyone associated with country music. Today record sales dwindle. In liberal areas, such as California or the Midwest, the Dixie Chicks’ airtime has been lessened, while in more conservative areas such as the Deep South, the once-popular group is no longer played on the radio.

My paper will focus on this very subject. It might be historical fiction or persuasive. I have yet to decide. It will be featured in Country Weekly Magazine, and therefore must be a serious article. It will venture into this “Dixie Chicks” situation which has been almost entirely ignored by Country Weekly, most likely in order to keep the peace between the liberal and conservative readers across the country.

There have been other articles written about them through People Magazine and internet blogs. They have been cast over many news programs and received a lot of publicity for their stunts. Others have even made a movie about their situation, called Shut-Up and Sing.

What most journalists do not go into, however, is their feud with other country stars Toby Keith and Reba McEntire. They do not consider a possible need for attention or the fact they have alienated most of their fan base. The general media has turned the Dixie Chicks into freedom of speech martyrs.

Sources I am considering are the newscasts, blogs, magazine articles, and the movie. I will also be looking at Country Music Television (CMT) and Great American Country (GAC)’s outlooks on the situation and exactly what happened between the Dixie Chicks and Toby Keith and Reba McEntire. Hopefully I will more clearly bring to light the Dixie Chicks situation and reveal the whole truth so that others may decide for themselves if the Dixie Chicks are truly worthy of fame.

Process Memo

It was widely publicized when Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks bashed President Bush just before the war in Iraq. It was also publicized, however, that country fans revolted against the Dixie Chicks. Non-country fans watched as former Dixie Chicks listeners stomped on their CDs, tore up their concert tickets, and requested that disc jockeys not play their music. Why were the fans so upset? After all, Maines was just sharing her opinion, and in this wonderful country, we all have the freedom of speech.
So country fans were portrayed as ignorant. Big deal, they cannot even string together a coherent sentence to defend themselves, so when they try to explain why they acted this way, it all the more proves the theory correct.
The big deal is that I am one of those country fans, although I have no problem with expressing myself (contrary to popular belief, most of us can.) And as an avid country fan, I knew better than to assume that what some of the media reported was the full truth. I researched until I came to my own conclusion.
I wrote this paper because I was told to write about something I cared about. Country fans—and the Dixie Chicks, for that matter—had been misrepresented, and it is time that others hear the whole story. I wrote nearly the entire story without the media’s reports in one sitting and then added to it with two more drafts. I tried to find an equal amount of research, such as stories which focused mainly on the victimization of the Dixie Chicks and other articles which focused on the victimization of their fans. This was nearly impossible, as most of the media took the Dixie Chicks’ side. Yet with time I found exactly what I needed, and my article is the result. Its purpose was not to sway the opinion of the reader, but rather to make the reader stop and think about what really happened throughout the Dixie Chicks controversy.