re: Cancel Culture Origin

I will look at your numbers when I get home.

Do you have a link to where you are getting those from?

And to be clear, your stance is that most country music fans still supported them. . .even though their subsequent albums and concerts sold so poorly they went on hiatus. Because only a very small portion of country fans dropped them

Not trying to strawman, just being clear.j

Famous people or celebrities have gotten cancelled or something similar in past (and usually part of redemption and comeback story later), but what’s going on now is different.

Dixie Chicks issue was them being dumb enough to be in another country and belittle their long standing base by saying they were ashamed to be from same state as Bush right before Iraq War in March 2003 and while war in Afghanistan going on. They hit Texas, country fans, and a pretty high level of patriotism still going on across country less than 2 years after 9-11, and they did it during a concert in London right before playing “Travelin' Soldier” without any prompt from audience. Maines tried to apologize a little within days which she later took back years later. They then doubled down with a song or album.

There were celebrities that voiced not supporting Iraq War who weren’t cancelled, but they either did it in a more respectful way than Dixie Chicks did or didn’t give the finger to their base audience that help push them into mainstream while in London trying to kiss up to foreigners right before a song about soldiers.

Today is every day people getting harassed and/or cancelled. It’s 80 year woman getting shouted down by trans activists for stopping a perv checking out girls in a ladies pool dressing room. It’s teenagers having social media searches through to hold against them, and teenagers getting doxed on Twitter by people like Ryan Clark for an issue already handled by school and then having people like Spears write her off for life. It’s also every day people being held accountable to today’s standards for things they did, said, or wore decades ago even if it wasn’t considered offensive at the time by most.

Unlike Dixie Chicks they don’t get interviews with the likes of a Diana Sawyer, covers on entertainment weekly playing victim, support from other large entertainers at the time, and so on. Dixie
chicks were not the same afterwards, but they weren’t truly cancelled. They won Grammys afterwards.

Today it’s much more political and fairly one-sided on what’s forgivable (or time frame for forgiveness). The leftist elites don’t want redemption or people to be forgiven like was more possible in the past. They want to force their will and make anyone they can be permanent examples of the consequences of thinking differently than they think. Big tech was allowed to become big tech by buying up competitors as only way to make profit on internet, and now after people have become dependent on them as part of their lively hood big tech makes them bend the knee and kiss the ring or get banned. It’s not even by consumer choice but by elite decrees on those they have power over using social media outcries and bots as a cover. They not only banned a sitting President, but they banned the only available alternative at the time and for long they could.

quote:

---

And to be clear, your stance is that most country music fans still supported them. . .even though their subsequent albums and concerts sold so poorly they went on hiatus. Because only a very small portion of country fans dropped them

Not trying to strawman, just being clear.

---

No worries. I am making a rebuttal to two of the statements you've made in this thread.

These are:

quote:

---

Boycott= I don't like it, so I won't consume it
Canceling= I don't like it, so NOBODY can consume it.

---

quote:

---

Stations refused to play them because Country fans didn't want to hear them.

---

My stance is that...

#1 - there were more than enough country fans that wanted to hear them to justify playing them on the radio, evidenced by the fact that they sold tremendous numbers of albums and sold out concerts after their comments were made. I believe the data that I posted backs that up pretty well.

#2 - if we hold #1 to be true, then by your definition of boycott vs. cancelling, I believe it would qualify as a cancelling. I believe it wasn't simply a lack of interest in consuming Dixie Chicks content from country fans, but instead it was an attempt by a very vocal minority to silence or punish the Dixie Chicks by preventing others from listening to them.


By the way, the comments were made to Londoners: "Just so you know, we're on the good side with y'all. We do not want this war, this violence, and we're ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas." and another bandmate added "But you know we're behind the troops 100 percent." Coincidentally, the media didn't report that last bit. I wonder why? Surely the mainstream media wouldn't distort words to stir up a backlash in favor of the neocon establishment and the war architected by former Halliburton CEO Dick Cheney, surely not.

quote:

---

A person/band being stupid enough to alienate their fanbase is not the same thing as some rando wacko coming out of left field and trying to make everyone cancel the target over some unrelated act.

---

meanwhile the album was at the top of the country charts for months afterwards...

You're making the 2003 version of the "it's not cancel culture, people just don't like you, and we're showing you the door" argument people use now

Just like every time now someone says something pro-Trump or against the mainstream narrative, they get cancelled in the media but behind the scenes the product flies off the shelves

quote:

---

meanwhile the album was at the top of the country charts for months afterwards...

---

I just think something is wrong with what you are posting

Here was their single at the time

quote:

---

The Dixie Chicks single "Landslide", a Fleetwood Mac cover, fell from number 10 to 43 on the Billboard Hot 100 in one week and left the chart a week later.

---

Their shite plummeted man.

From top 10 to not even on the charts within 2 weeks. I am thinking the way album charts are measured is the reason for the slow fall that you posted, and not because they still had a strong fanbase that you are trying to infer

quote:

---

Their shite plummeted man.

From top 10 to not even on the charts within 2 weeks. I am thinking the way album charts are measured is the reason for the slow fall that you posted, and not because they still had a strong fanbase that you are trying to infer

---

Obviously, yes, the discrepancy is in the way it's measured.

The singles chart is highly dependent on radio airplay impressions.
The albums chart, is not -- it is dependent on sales figures.

So, as I said before, they were banned on the radio (which means little to no radio airplay impressions), but their album continued to sell like crazy. As the radio host quoted earlier said, two months after their comments, they were the hottest country group out there.

I'm sorry to inform you, but young white girls (the Dixie Chicks core demographic) don't give enough of a shite about George W. Bush being called dumb to stop listening to the #1 album overnight, just like that.

There was a bigass meteor that canceled the dinosaurs 80 million years ago

Dixie Chicks werent cancel they first go woke go broke maybe