Carrie Prejean vs. Dixie Chicks

[Fountain79]

As a Democrat who admitatedly is not as liberal as most here,(I see myself as a moderate/quasi-libertarian) I find an interesting parallel to the Carrie Prejean incident vs. the Dixie Chicks incident. What I find interesting is that people seem to not get what freedom of speech/expression means. When the statements made by the Dixie Chicks began hurting them financially and reduced their airtime, I seem to remember people feeling as though that the Dixie Chick's freedom of speech/expression was violated

''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 free speech 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(Entertainment Weekly) http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,445858,00.html

The right of course pointed out that people had the right to not buy and not listen to the Dixie Chicks if people didn't like what they were saying.

Now on to the Carrie Prejean incident...it seemed as though it was deja vu all over again except this time it was the Right crying foul and the left on the other end. As Keith Olbermann pointed out last night there was nothing about the incident that was a violation of Carrie Prejean's freedom of expression. An employee of a company, which he pointed out she was, does not necessarily have the right to complete free expression. I may not necessarily be able to be arrested for what I say...I certainly can be fired for it.

In the end, why is the concept of freedom of expression as a right become so blurred when it is with something you agree/disagree with? Thoughts?

[tularetom]

1. The media jumped all over the Dixie Chicks for their rather mild statement

Insisting they were somehow disloyal by making statements about the idiot that was then our president. While we were at "war";

The same media has jumped backward through their assholes defending Miss CA's right to say what she did.

That's what's different about the two cases.

[Buzz Clik]

2. Great post.

Simply from the point of freedom of expression, this whole thing was much ado about nothing.

HOWEVER!

Here at DU, issues about rights for the GBLT are huge and viewed as very, very important. As a result, the reaction to her intolerant comments was fiery.

She can say what she wants, but she should expect some serious blow-back. And she got it. Ditto the Dixie Chicks. (The Dixie Chicks received multiple death threats. I certainly hope that Miss California has not been forced to suffer similar insanity.)

[blue_onyx]

5. GBLT are very important

Gay issues effect the lives of people. The Dixie Chicks having an opinion about the president didn't affect anyone's ability to live their lives. Miss California holds a bigoted opinion that makes gay people second class citizens. Add in her hypocrisy and the media's defense of her right to speak her mind makes the two situations different.

[Buzz Clik]

7. You are correct: the Dixie Chicks didn't make a bigoted comment, and Miss CA did.

Miss California is an idiot, no question. What I don't get is why we're surprised.

These beauty pageants and their participants are given far too much attention.

[blue_onyx]

12. The pageants do get too much attention

I think people are surprised because pageants are thought to be gay friendly. Miss California didn't have a problem letting the gay guys do her hair and make-up but god forbid they get married. Many of the judges are also gay. She should have known her audience better.

[Fountain79]

10. I agree with you on the gay issues front...

however that is your personal opinion. For many, judging by the drop in record sales, what the Dixie Chicks had said was important to them. I am saying both had the right to express their opinion. Although funny enough it was a good thing the Dixie Chicks expressed an opinion that Great Britain liked, otherwise they might have been banned.

[blue_onyx]

14. So....

Is the idea that black people and white people are equals an opinion? Because you are saying the idea that gay people are equally as important as straight people is an opinion.

[Fountain79]

15. Not an opinion of equality an opinion of importance...

For you, myself, and many on here GLBT equality is important. Others may not see the importance in that, they may view making perceived "treasonous" statements particularly abroad as more important to them. Therefore there are some who would be more offended by what Prejean had said vs. others would were more offended by what the DC had said.

[Raineyb]

3. This is not a free speech issue

Prejean is a twit who was asked a question, answered it and was deemed by the judges as unworthy. And now she's trotting around as though she's being punished for merely expressing an opinion out of the blue. The judges asked the question they have every right to knock points off her score and keep her from winning if they don't like the answer.

The Dixie chicks expressed their embarrassment at being from the same place as Bush and you had radio stations deciding to boycott their albums. The two situations are so dissimilar as to be nonsensical to even compare the two.

BTW, it seems as that the twit is in breach of contract and hasn't been showing up for her assigned appearances yet she gets to keep her job so I'd hardly say she's being punished for her opinion. Apparently, Trump doesn't care how well the bimbo does her job so long as she meets some eurocentric standard of beauty so she's hardly being punished for anything. She's not entitled to be Miss USA or whatever irrelevant bimbo title she was trying for.

Regards

[Mike Daniels]

6. The DC's weren't a free speech issue either

Broadcast companies are commerical entities. They have the right to play or not play artists based on any number of reasons including a disagreement with an artist's opinion.

The government didn't pull their albums from stores and they didn't order all radio stations to immediately pull them off the airwaves. If fact a number of stations continued to play the DCs without any sanctions.

Sorry, but it's the same principle regardless of how you feel the messages being protested are different.

[Raineyb]

19. What part of "this is not a free speech issue" did you not understand?

The situations are dissimilar due to the public airwaves issue with the Dixie Chicks which is why I would not compare the two.

Perhaps you should read a bit more carefully.

[sui generis]

4. My thoughts

1. She is supposed to represent EVERYBODY in her role. Her statements do not.
2. Statements of faith that intrude into the lives and rights of other people are no longer faith. It's fascism.
3. She had the opportunity to say: "As a matter of faith, I personally believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, but I would never try to tell someone else who they can and can't marry."

But she didn't. Her freedom of speech was not violated. She had the speech. There were consequences. She was not punished by the government. She was punished by the people she thoughtlessly and gracelessly made less American.

WE are not required by the constitution to have to put up with STUPID, IGNORANT, INSENSITIVE and UNDERINFORMED children telling us how to conduct our lives.

What the bimbo missed here is that without the covenant of legal marriage, our children can't see us in the hospital, adopted children can be removed from guardianship at a traffic stop in Utah, I have no right to will my property to my life partner that the rights of my blood kin can't override, including distant cousins, and I am somehow less of an American as a result of not having the right to self-determination that every other American has, merely because of the gender of the person I want to spend my life with.

No, there is no excuse for her. She is supposed to be an ambassador, at least in "MY" country. She's fortunate it isn't MY country or I'd send her off to live in SOME OTHER country where people can make decisions for her, like say, Afghanistan, or Iran, or Iraq, or Pakistan.

She can go straight to the christian hell she believes in.

[Jane Eyre]

8. "Opposite Marriage"

She was unable to formulate an understandable phrase as to what kind of marriage she supports. What the heck is "opposite marriage" anyway?

Beauty pageant contestants are supposed to be judged on their poise when answering questions off-the-cuff. Ms. Prejean proved to be incapable of putting words together in an acceptable pattern when under stress. No offense to anyone here though, as Ms. Prejean would say...

[NeedleCast]

9. You're right and the hypocrisy on both sides can sometimes be rather rank

Other than disagreeing with her, I didn't have an issue with Prejean's answer to a rather loaded question. However, what started as a controversy over her answer probably would have blown over in a day or two had she not allowed herself to be used as a figure-head for all these anti-gay marriage organizations. After that, the media started digging deeper and all the dirt followed. Reap what you sow.

The issue here is that some people seem to think the right to free speech also guarantees them an audience. A month or so ago Focus on the Family was whining about cable TV stations refusing to carry some fundy bullshit program they had produced. That's not how free speech works. People have the right to free speech but they don't have the right to make me listen. This is what happened to the Dixie Chicks. They turned off a segment of their audience. They still have a right to free speech but they don't have a right to make those former fans listen to them or buy their products anymore. They don't have a right to force a radio station to play their material.

No one is diminishing Prejean's right to free speech but just like anyone who airs a public opinion, people are free to exercise THEIR right to free speech and call her out for what she is.

[gbate]

11. If you're saying that those who oppose her statements are hypocrites, well, perhaps.

I don't agree whatsoever with Prejean's views. What makes her a hypocrite is not what she said. What makes her a hypocrite is that she is basing her opinions on her religion. She is also fighting for Prop 8, which means her opinions have now turned into action.

Now she is getting on national TV and lying about the nude pictures in an attempt to keep her alleged reputation intact.

[Fountain79]

13. Point of clarification....

I am not just directing this at the left.....I found myself exasperated mostly at the right during this whole thing. When you had talking heads like O'Reilly and Hannity bitch and moan about Prejean's rights being violated I couldn't help but laugh. These were the same men who were spearheading the Dixie Chicks lynch mob when they had expressed their opinions. When I tried to point out to rw friends and family of mine that this is similar to the Dixie Chicks situation I was met with hostility.

[gbate]

16. Oh, I definitely agree.

[sinkingfeeling]

17. The difference, in my opinion, is that the Dixie Chicks were attacked for a simple statement. They

were boycotted for their opinions, which is just as 'allowable' as their freedom to say they were ashamed of Bush. Those who wanted to 'shut up' the Dixie Chicks also looked for dirt, but couldn't find anything other than the statement.

Miss California was free to make her statement and people were just as free to dig for dirt. Here they found it and exposed it. But she keeps crying 'foul' and lying her ass off to keep the dirt off herself.

I went out and bought my first-ever DVD, "Home" by the Dixie Chicks to show my support of them.
I will never watch nor in any way support the Miss California or Miss USA pageants. Apparently, Trump is just like the past administration, able to ignore the rules and laws governing the pageants.

[ShortnFiery]

18. Neither, Donald Trump has never been so VILE ... it shows this rich jerk for the shallow excuse

for a human being that ALL should see. I didn't know I could dislike a complete stranger as much as him, but he's IMO, SCUM OF THE EARTH. :nuke:

[RaleighNCDUer]

20. Hey, i've got a great idea -

just ignore the loser. She came in 2nd place and is trying to squeeze every bit of juice from her 15 minutes.

She deserves to be ignored and forgotten.

[southpaw]

21. Agreed

She's a bigot who came in second in a fucking 'beauty contest.'

I wish everybody would just let her sink into the obscurity she deserves.