Comments on: An Alarming Wake Up Call?

By: Connie M

Connie M — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 17:11:01 +0000

I am so thankful that my dad and every man and many of the women in my family has been willing to lay down and die for the freedom WE ALL enjoy. Say what you will Chicks, Meryll, and bloggers. Say what you are moved to share with the masses, but at the end, thank my dad and the men and women like him, who secure that right for you.

By: David

David — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 04:39:06 +0000

All right, enough already with the sympathy for the Chicks. There are consequences for what you say and do. That is why there is such a phrase as “an alarming wake up call”.
Meryl, you talk about improving our communication skills. You should not lump hate mail and death threats in with a legitimate shunning of their music by blacklisting their music from radio, CD crushing events, and the media’s refusal to accept ads for their concerts. There is nothing wrong with me taking offense to what they said and there is nothing wrong with me not wanting to buy their records or to hear them on the radio. Unlike the Chicks, I don’t have a microphone. They voiced their opinion and I will voice my opinion with my dollars.
Any threat they received is illegal and stupid. But telling them strongly that you disagree and even telling them they are wrong and backing that up with our dollars is not censorship, it is a consequence of our freedom of speech. Life has consequences and apparently the Chicks are willing to pay the price. At least they didn’t flip flop.
You have said many times there is an appropriate time and place for speaking strong. If anyone, not just the Chicks, expresses their dissent on foreign soil (like Al Gore or Hanoi Jane), they have to expect us to see them a traitors. Yes that is a strong word and there are consequences for that too. We all have rights and responsibilities, but do not forget the consequences.
Americans are a very generous and forgiving people. I do believe the severity of the punishment was equal to the dissent. Most people have forgiven the Germans and the Japanese and most people will forgive the Chicks, Al Gore, and Hanoi Jane. It just takes time.
You asked the question about the death threats being carried out and I was shocked at the absurdity of the hypothetical. What reasonable person would say they got what they deserved if they were killed? Not buying their records or not airing them on the radio is not even close to the same thing. They could always say they are sorry or find another occupation. That is what many people have to do when they get fired from a job. Start over. It is up to them to choose their words and to bear the consequences.
And please don’t assume your readers did not check the details. Most of us heard their comments first hand and individually made the choice to stop listening to them. America was even better when we had a few more woodsheds.
Like all of our freedoms, the freedom of speech is not free. There are costs and consequences.

By: Janet

Janet — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:21:25 +0000

By the way, it is insulting to those of us who don’t lean to the left or the right to insinuate that all of the backlash against the Chicks is political. HELLO!!! They were MEAN in their comments. They didn’t express a point of view that showed any relevance to their political point of view. They said they were ashamed that Bush was from their home state.

And just for the record, my point of view would be the same if Clinton or Kerry had been in office (read a Democrat instead of a Republican). For those of you who want to make the whole thing about politics, well you’re just leaving out a large portion of people who just thought that the Chicks comments were MEAN SPIRITED.

Also consider that not every person who disagreed with what they said and how they said it posed extreme measures. Please consider that the MEDIA has hyped this beyond belief as they do everything that has a political slant. I make decisions everyday to support or not support any given person or product. I’m sure every American does the same everyday. I made the decision to not ever support Tom Cruise again because of his strong opposition to anti-depressants and criticism of Brooke Shields for needing help with post partum depression. When I made this decision, the 5 o’clock news didn’t show up. This is one tiny example of how we all make decisions to give our support (and money).

One other thing for those of you on the left side of this discussion, if the Chicks were from Arkansas and said they were ashamed that Clinton was from their home state, would your lack of disregard for their MEAN spirited comment still resonate with you the same way?

And Meryl, I have loved your articles and think you have incredible things to say and share. I appreciate you and the work you do to help us all be better in how we communicate. I just ask, please take the extreme measures out of the backlash that the Chicks have faced and see a point of view that follows exactly what Speak Strong says. They were MEAN in their comments. Isn’t it a tiny bit possible that they could have communicated their feelings in a different way and maybe would have received a different response? Couldn’t they have used their influence and voice to Speak Strong about why they don’t support the war and President Bush? And Meryl, one last question, aren’t there so many people who do Speak Strong and aren’t MEAN that you could use as examples for our support?

By: Brent Sprunger

Brent Sprunger — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 16:29:39 +0000

Hi Meryl -

Personally I find it sad that people can’t tolerate hearing (or reading) a point of view that disagrees with their own. I also find it heartening that those who are intolerant of opposing views have the right to express that with any anger or superiority they may choose to feel. Their reactions are not your responsibility. I’m sure you know this.

I dream of the day when we as a world society dream to be creators of the world we desire rather than reactors to the world we don’t want. Look at these too words — REACTOR and CREATOR. They are made up of the same letters in slightly different arrangement.

I appreciate you teaching the world how to rearrange their words to step away from the REACTOR life and into the life of a CREATOR. Thanks for continuing to do this!

By: Rose

Rose — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 15:14:58 +0000

If no one responded as you anticipated, perhaps the failure lies with the way you expressed yourself.

By: Diane

Diane — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 15:12:35 +0000

I believe what happened to the Dixie Chicks was wrong and should not have happen. Anyone should have the right to say what they want no matter if they are in the public or not. Everyone has the right to say what they believe and should not be punished in any way for stating that belief.

We have fought wars to give us the right to speak what we want without punishment. Many have died and to take a group of 3 people and punish them because they spoke out against something they believed in is wrong. If you disagree with what they have to say is one thing but to punish them or tell them they don’t have the right to say it would then mean you don’t have the right to disagree with them. It is one thing to disagree and not buy their CD’s or attend their concerts but to blacklist them and persecute them for stating their views is wrong.

By: Nora Hooper

Nora Hooper — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 13:43:00 +0000

Hi Meryl,
I read your article about the response to the Dixie Chicks and their treatment after voicing their opinion about the Iraq War and President Bush. I had the opionion that you would be bombarded with mail condeming the treatment and what it stands for. I was shocked to read that that was not the case.
People do not seem to understand that the treatment of the Dixie Chicks is a treatment that sets out to silence the voice of those who dissent. A society where you are silenced when you dissent is not a society of the free and the brave but a society of the muffled and the scared. The freedom to speak against what we see is one that has shaped this country. Without it we actually begin to lose the power to choose.
Do any of your readers remember the McCarthy era where talented writers, directors and actors were blacklisted for their supposed beliefs during the “Red Scare” of the fifties? Even the slightest hint of an association with Communism lead to the end of talented careers and the destruction of people’s lives. The treatment of the Dixie Chicks is akin to that. I for one now want to listen to and will buy the Dixie Chicks cd’s in order to support them in their talent which is amazing as well as to say I support a world where you can say what you think without fear of being destroyed because of it.
Thank you Meryl for asking the questions you do to stimulate conversations and debate in order to help us grow and learn and hopefully expand.
Love and light,Nora

By: Anthea Curtis

Anthea Curtis — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 00:45:17 +0000

I completely agree with Meryl when she notes that it is possible that the reaction against the Chicks is more damaging to the American image than what the Chicks originally said.

I am Australian. In my regional area, coverage of American activism and political news is underrepresented in our media. The backlash against the Dixie Chicks did make news here. It sparked conversation amongst my friends - the topic was mainly that Americans seem all for “Freedom of Speech” right up until what someone else says contravenes their own beliefs.

The manner in which the Chicks were targetted gives these girls more power. They spoke up about what they believed. The people who tried to stamp them down brought more attention to this issue, ultimately spreading the word and causing more discussion and attention than would otherwise have occurred. It has also given the Chicks underdog status. Whether by accident or design, I think the Chicks have come out the moral victors in this debate, and their attackers are bullies and terrorists.

By: Vicky Baugh

Vicky Baugh — Sun, 12 Nov 2006 21:33:22 +0000

I am not surprised that you received the response that you did. The same group of people that present themselves as victims of the “far left” and “activist judges” are those that are fine as long as you agree with them and out to get you when you don’t. Nothing that the Chicks did warrented the response that they got.

One reason that Democrats won is the realization on the part of many people that unless one can reasonably disagree and work together nothing will get done and democracy itself will disappear. I am in California and a registered Green but voted for Arnold, why? Because he learned from his mistakes and is willing to listen and work with those who don’t agree with him.

By: Rebecca

Rebecca — Sat, 11 Nov 2006 21:28:09 +0000

Meryl, I am with you 100%. How can a democratic political system function if people who disagree with policy decisions are silenced by threats and intimidation, or indeed, if they are silenced by anything?