Under Attack for Expressing

Freedom of speech is an amendment that the media uses to its advantage. Implied in this line of thought is the idea that if it is not used in the favor of the audience, then it can be withdrawn. The idea, however, that we can have freedom of speech but only in certain areas seems paradoxical.
In politics, it is a very valuable commodity. But with every limitation that is placed upon it, the value is diminished. If there is but one thing that we cannot publish, put on television, or say freely in our community then it could be said that we do not in fact have freedom of speech at all - or is this a freedom that is being separated from the words of what one has said and the public?


After a concert in London, England on March 10, 2003 controversy aroused after Natalie Manes (lead singer of the Dixie Chicks) told the crowd, “Just so you know we are ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas”. They were critisized and ridiculed for those harsh words. Station managers said their decision to removing their music from the radio, were prompted by calls from irate listeners who thought criticism of the president was unpatriotic...
One station in Kansas City, Missouri held a Dixie "chicken toss" party, where people were encouraged to dump the group's tapes, CDs and concert tickets into trash cans.


Rather... when P!NK spoke out against President George Bush in her song Dear Mr President critics praised her for her honest words.

Why the difference?

P!NK is known for her unique appearance and her rough attitude. When this song hit the radio stations... though it was very anti-Bush... the song wasn't a surprise to the American public because they know her for being very honest about how she feels.
However, in The Dixie Chicks case, the citizens of America saw them as very wholesome young women. When Natalie Manes, "spoke her mind", it was a complete shocker to the country.

But was it really that bad what she said, or could there be worse things to say about your president?

After Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans, Kanye West came on NBC with Micheal Myres dicussing the Hurricane Katrina fundraiser.
During this, West said, "George Bush does not care about black people."
Now, the media convered this for about 2 days. While the Dixie Chicks were critisized for months. Was this because of gender, colour, or simply just because there were more important things going on like, all the homeless people in New Orleans at that time?
I'm going to take a closer look...

If you look at the difference between the statements, Kanye West made a public claim (that wasn’t true) against George Bush’s reputation, while Natalie Maines made a personal opinion about how she feels about George Bush.
What doesn’t make sense is when Pink wrote a song called “Dear Mr. President” that was extremely controversial against the president she got praised from her fans.
Her songs usually do have a meaningful message behind them and that’s what makes her fans and parts of society not care about her choice of songs, which is why I think she got away with her song.

As you can tell all three situations were seen by the public very differently.When Natalie spoke out about Bush the media took it harsh on her and made it a big deal and their whole career almost ended just because of one group member who made this one comment. As for P!NK, the media doesn't real critisize her for speaking her mind, because that is what she is known for. And as for Kanye West, he is always complaining about one thing or another.
For all three cases, all of these artists have different audiences. Even though, Kanye's comment is harsher than Manes', you will never know if the the media will bend or break you. Even if your allowed to say what you want. Because you shouldn't be afraid.. it is a free country.. right.

John and WHO? plus 8

<You might know the show John and Kate Gosselin of TLC's docudrama Jon & Kate Plus 8, about their family life with two sets of multiples.

It seems... well according to the media that they are heading for divorce?
InTouchWeekly.com, claims that John has been spending long amounts of time away from home and partying with collage girls.
February 6 was the first incident John was supposedly caught, when he drove to a nearby hangout, Mimi's Martini Bar, in Huntington, Penn, where he then met with some girls from Juniata Collage who then invited him to a house party.

Is this the real John Gosselin? Or could this be a frame to break the couple from an almost perfect marriage?

As John proceeded to drink and dance he reportedly told one the girls, "We might be getting a divorce."
Star Magazine had earlier reported one witness' account:
"He was dirty dancing with several of them, making out, kissing them on their necks and mouths. I thought it was rather surprising for a father with his wife and so many kids at home to be acting like this. He was all over one girl, a long-haired blonde who's nearly 6 feet tall. He left with several of the girls, including her."



To beleive this or not to believe this that is the question?
Lets take a look a what John's statement was, as said through his rep:
"It is certainly hurtful for people to spread rumors and lies about us. It certainly makes me reluctant to live my life like the average person would. This has made it very clear that the simplest innocent gesture -— such as taking a picture with a fan, can be taken out of context. As you can see on the show, I am not perfect, but I am a part of a loving family and couple."

This story can go either way, and I am not about to come to a conclusion. The media can come to overexaggerate what celebrities do in their personal lives, but can maybe come to show some truth?

In conclusion, John and Kate have often bickered on camera, but that doesn't even come close to the amount of times they have had great times with their children.
An act? Maybe.
You can never tell what is going on behind a camera. Or behind the eyes of the ones infront of it.