Kenny Chesney’s Comments About Fan Voting Are On The Money
Much ado has been made about Kenny Chesney’s comments after winning the award for ACM Entertainer of the Year. It’s the first time that fan voting has played a role in determining the recipient of the award. A few things appear to be in question, though, including what exactly the Entertainer award is supposed to represent, and what role fan voting actually plays. Let’s pull the description of the award directly from the voting criteria on the ACM website:
This award is presented to the individual, duo or group who showed the most overall success in the country music industry during the preceding calendar year. The factors to be considered in arriving at this award include, but are not limited to, success at radio, sales of prerecorded music, success of music videos, live concert ticket sales, artistic merit, appearances on television, appearances in films, songwriting, writing and contributions to the country music industry. The nominees shall be determined by a nomination ballot(s) and are subject to the approval of the board. The winner shall be determined by a combination of votes from the membership of the ACM and viewer voting.
This description itself raises a few flags. First, it appears that popularity simply isn’t enough to qualify for the award. It can be argued that popularity guarantees that a few of the qualifications are met (success at radio, sales, etc), but artistic merit and songwriting are independent of popularity.
Fan voting is tantamount to a popularity contest and while the Entertainer of the Year award, in it’s previous form, could be likened to popularity contest, fan voting removes any existing barriers. Fans don’t take artistic merit into consideration, nor do they consider each artists’ contributions to the country music industry. All other factors being equal, the artist with the larger fan base has a decided advantage, artistic merit be damned. On the other hand, voting or selection by the ACM Board attempts to equalize the field while determining the winner. There simply isn’t any prestige in winning a popularity contest, which is a shame, considering the award’s billing as the biggest of the night.
Secondly, the award was promoted as being based entirely on fan voting, but the last sentence of the ACM’s criteria calls into question how large of a role the fans actually played. And without any sort of oversight, that question can’t be answered. Even if the results were released, there would be no way to determine their accuracy due the online polling procedure. I commented previously about how susceptible the procedure was to fraud and a look at artist’s messageboards only confirms those misgivings. I wouldn’t expect the media to understand the inherit flaws in online polling, but without requiring the voters to register, there simply isn’t an accurate way to determine the results.
What you wind up with is a marketing ploy by the Academy to garner exposure for the show. By making the award fan voted, they get huge acts to promote the show and drive their fans to a web page to vote and to eventually watch the show, both of which increase advertising revenue. From a business perspective, it’s free marketing. The voting procedure, however, is subject to fraud, the results neither verifiable nor accurate, and the ACM can ultimately choose whoever they want (again, without any oversight). In essence, fan voting is simply a marketing ploy that cheapens the integrity of the award.
And this is all what Kenny Chesney was alluding to when he said, “but I don’t think it’s right that they picked the one award that means the most, that all the artists sacrifice the most for.” They changed the category “into a sweepstakes to see who can push people’s buttons the hardest on the Internet. I don’t think that’s right, really.” He continued, saying:
“I think it’s a complete disrespect of the artist — what they’ve lowered us to, to get entertainer of the year. … Because of that, it really diminishes the integrity of the music that we’re making and how much work goes into it. That’s what really matters. That’s what entertainer of the year really is. It’s not about flying somebody to some shows and giving free songs away — and giving this and that — and seeing how hard you can push people’s buttons on the Internet. As much as I love the ACMs and what they’ve done for my life, that’s how I really feel about it.. And I can say that because I won tonight.”
It’s a sweepstakes that had Rascal Flatts offering a free MP3 to anyone who would vote for them–which, by the way, didn’t break any rules–and had the ACM changing the rules in the middle of the game and rescinding those votes. I’m not completely sure how the Academy was able to determine which votes were a result of the promotion, but even that procedure should be questioned.
Chesney didn’t criticize fans, and from his comments he believes they should be included in some form. But making the Entertainer of the Year award fan voted is not the answer. Chesney is completely justified in making the comments he did, and winning the award allowed him to air his complaints without sounding bitter. The fans would be bitter to hold his comments against him. Like Chesney, I think the Academy should reconsider the way it handles this award.
Popular Stuff
Sponsor
While the voice of country’s future took home this year’s big honor, a legendary voice from country music’s past scored a win for Album Of The Year. Check out the winners in The 9513's 2nd Annual Country Music Awards now!
Josh Turner's fourth album, Haywire, furthers his reputation as one of the leading men in contemporary country, a true, traditional voice in an ever-changing Nashville scene.
Having played on more than 500 albums and toured with artists that range from Hank III to Dolly Parton, Randy Kohrs has become one of the go-to musicians when there’s a need for a resophonic guitar
Sammy Kershaw – “Better Than I Used To Be”
As the title track off his upcoming album, “Better Than I Used to Be” is a straight-up look back on the career of a country music staple.
Emily West Featuring Keith Urban – “Blue Sky” Emily West turns in a gorgeous performance on “Blue Sky,” hitting notes few of her contemporaries can reach.
What does Alan Jackson like on his eggs?
Cheese and corn; he still likes bologna; a load of salsa; hens? Answers to the questions you'd never dream of asking. (
In each and every instance, the best country albums of the past ten years were built on the backs of songs -- stories about you and me from birth to death and stories that paint landscapes rooted in every region of America and beyond. These are the top country albums of the decade.Tagged In This Article
ACM Awards // awards // Kenny Chesney // Rascal Flatts
Current Discussion
- Steve Harvey: I do wish however, that he would choose some of his singles differently. According to some interviews I've read, he doesn't ...
- Alena: K, you've said it. I agree with you 100%. A wise person once told me something that I've always believed ...
- Paul W Dennis: Also I am not sure that comparisons between Taylor Swift and Carrie Underwood are terribly germane. Other than both being ...
- Phil: Aren't most people who write these reviews just frustrated songwriters who couldn't make it in the music business?? Yea, ...
- JCH: It's not exactly an irregularity to hold Underwood in esteem while thinking very little of the material she is delivering. ...
- K: "I would not take a review that uses that type of language seriously at all. You did a great job ...
- Steve M.: Perhaps the reviewers are simply stating that Carrie Underwood is wasting her talent on material beneath her talents.
- K: "Lady A had a bad review of their live performance at the Houston Livestock Show recently. Can’t believe they won ...
- Jon: Well, Steven M., sometimes criticism of artists is framed in such a way as to constitute a attack on the ...
- Steve M.: That would be personally.
1 Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URI for this postMay 20, 2008
[...] out Brady’s discussion of Kenny Chesney’s complaints about the fan-voted entertainer of the year award for analysis of the night’s biggest honor. [...]
63 Comments
RSS for comments on this post | Trackback URI for this post
May 20, 2008 at 7:34 am Permalink
I completely agree. As I said at country universe, this reminds me of the situation of the Democratic election. The fan votes equal the popular vote (though one at least has to register in order to vote in an election) and the industry votes equal the super delegates who reserve the right to override the popular vote if they feel it’s necessary. So, it’s possible that the industry voting took the fan votes into account, but it’s just as possible that they voted as they wished, which seems to discount the whole process all together. So, as Brady concludes, it seems that the “fan vote” opportunity was ultimately a marketing ploy rather than an actual chance for fans to fairly vote for the Entertainer of the Year.
I applaud Chesney for speaking out against this process. As he said, he could do it because he’s the one who won the award. I don’t believe he’s ungrateful; I think he’s just being practical about the matter. He probably realizes that the cmt awards is the place for fan recognition, though that process is equally flawed.
May 20, 2008 at 7:35 am Permalink
Fan voting is a funny thing. There is a rabid discussion every year on Galleywinter surrounding the Gruene With Envy Awards. I personally hate the way a fan can “revote” as many times as they want becuase they will skew the voting and it becomes a popularity thing. Last year we worked with GWE to build a solid voting system that relied on a registration method and I personally kept constant watch on the results. People STILL found loopholes in the system that I had to recode and fix quickly to keep the voting pure. The end result was that I had artists after artist tell me at the show that for the first year they truly believe that they had won something of value.
I don’t think we can fault the fans. They just want the artist the love to win and I appreciate the fact that they go to great lengths for them. The person to blame here is the Academy for not having the foresight to know how to run a fan voting system properly. I love the idea of fan voting but we have to improve the process.
May 20, 2008 at 7:55 am Permalink
Ryan, you at least understand the pitfalls of online polling, but even if the kinks are worked out, does it not wind up being a popularity contest with the artist who has the largest fan base winning? It just doesn’t seem that the playing field is equal. With artists with bases as large as these, sales seem to be a better indicator of popularity than a vote. It’s just a matter of who can mobilize their base.
I think GWE is a little different in that the scene isn’t as well organized, so sales numbers and whatnot aren’t readily accessible. Also, considering the audiences are smaller for artists in the Red Dirt scene, a fan voted awards show helps mobilize those bases and raise awareness.
May 20, 2008 at 7:56 am Permalink
Kenny Chesney is the most overrated artist on the scene today. But he showed some brains, class and courage by making those statements; especially since he had just won the award. If fans are too involved in the process, it WILL “cheapen” the value of the awards.
May 20, 2008 at 8:21 am Permalink
I’m not a fan of Kenny Chesney, but after his speech my respect for him went up a lot. When they first announced that the award would be fan voted i thought that it was a cool idea. Then I thought about it and realized, like many others did, that it just cheapened the award. I hope if they keep it fan voted next year that they improve the voting method.
May 20, 2008 at 8:48 am Permalink
Look what happened when NA$CAR let fans vote a driver into the All Star Race Saturday night….
On the other hand, the fans pay the bills for Mr. Chesney and his fellow artistes. I don’t mind having a say…(and mine wasn’t for KC)
May 20, 2008 at 9:06 am Permalink
It’s also double voting. If the criteria for the award is partially based on aspects that are market driven (sales and radio demand), direct voting gives consumers a duplicate voice.
May 20, 2008 at 9:08 am Permalink
I think he would have won anyway. I am a moderate fan of his and even though he has morphed into this country Jimmy Buffet, I do think he brings a lot to industry. I have seen him several times and he puts on a great show where you can tell he cares about his audience. I think my thing is that the award is already totally subjective and it already has that taint of politicking attached to it. Adding an element that is rife with ways to circumvent the voting system adds more to that taint.
It comes down to money as Brady said. All those people logging onto vote bumps up advertising rates.
May 20, 2008 at 9:23 am Permalink
Kenny Chesney’s comments were smart, well-thought out,and honest. But I wish the music that he puts out were equal to the statement. I also think that the ACM awards have always been a cheaper version of the CMA awards. The fact that they allowed fans a way to have a say in the awards only proves that music has changed in ways that the industry cannot saddle. The internet, music videos, the 24 hour news cycle, the money that pop fans bring country( we can thank Garth and Shania for that),and the need for bigger concerts all diminish the power of the industry to control how music is heard and/or seen. So it is only natural that a show like the ACM would bring in fan’s voice. It may be the only way to stay alive. But Chesney is right. Sadly his kind of popularity may have been what provoked the use of the fan vote.
May 20, 2008 at 9:29 am Permalink
I’m amazed at the controversy Kenny’s comments have stirred up, sort of a tempest in a teapot within a mountain made out of a molehill! We’re talking about the “ACM Entertainer of the Year Award” for goodness sakes! What real significance does this award mean in the oberall scheme of things in the country music realm? The country artist that stages the biggest, most entertaining, and most successful tour during say the previous 12 months should win! Fans vote with their money to buy tickets to attend those concerts, and by this measure Kenny Chesney is the reigning champ.
I think including fan voting is a great marketing ploy as described by Brady in the article, and the primary purpose of the ACM, the individual awards, and the awards show itself is marketing country music artists so I don’t see how that can be condemned….
My proposed solution: Create a new “ACM’s Fan’s Favorite Country Artist of the Year” award that is purely based on fan’s votes with no ACM judging involvement. This would take advantage of all the marketing angles without corrupting any of the other ACM awards with fan vote shenanigans. If the fans want to vote in a popularity contest for an award on the ACM show, let them!
May 20, 2008 at 10:40 am Permalink
Brady, your comments were spot on. This is a by-product of the success of shows like American Idol. It’s a tough call because I’m sure the promoters of the ACM have the best of intentions. They’ve probably worked for years to increase viewership and fan support. This is another attempt on their part and you can’t blame them.
Compare shows like American Idol to the Academy Awards. I care a lot more about the Academy Award winners than the Idol process but everyone at the water cooler has an opinion about Idol and nobody watches the Awards any more. If people like you want to stop this from happening all over, you better suggest some ways how to grow fan support.
It’s funny that Chesney is standing up for an independent and thoughtful awards process. Even better, I’m sure he gets the joke. He probably started out loving country music.
May 20, 2008 at 11:08 am Permalink
Do true fans change who they are supporting because someone other than their favorite wins the ACM Entertainer of the Year award? I don’t think so. I agree with those that have said the
fans “place their vote” throughout the year by buying the music, buying and wearing the t-shirts and attending the concerts. This is the way I feel the fans should, and do, have a vote in who achieves entertainer of the year. To crown an entertainer of the year in a completely fair and unbiased situation, actually no one would be voting. The bean counters would just be tallying statistics from the prior year, with perhaps a point system to include number of appearances on television or in films, how many songs were written by the artist themselves, and outside contributions to the country music industry as a whole by the nominee. This system would make only artist who have been involved in the industry for the entire voting year eligible, all others could only be nominated in the newcomer categories. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to design a fair and impartial voting system, but the harder thing to achieve it seems, is a system that chooses to be fair and impartial over profits. That is not likely. Award shows were not originated for the promotion of the artist, but rather for the promotion of the academy. As a musician myself, I appreciate talent and dedication in any style of music. But my favorites are all subjective, as are anyone else’s. Let the hard-earned dollars spent speak for the masses, not just your vote or mine.
May 20, 2008 at 1:05 pm Permalink
Kenny Chesney’s comments were dead on! His honesty is very refreshing. He knows there was another nominated artist that was more deserving of that award. Someone more talented who played smaller – but many more – concerts and poured his heart and soul into every concert this year.
May 20, 2008 at 5:14 pm Permalink
Now it’s been revealed that Chesney’s web site encouraged fans to “click” votes for him. So, whether he likes it or not, he’s now embroiled in a “scandal” of sorts. Anyway, the fact remains that he still is hugely overrated as an artist, but he deserves “props” for questioning the value of the “Entertainer of the Year” award process.
May 20, 2008 at 5:35 pm Permalink
Guy, he was just doing what he had to do to have a chance to win the award and that’s what he was speaking out against. It’s no longer about the music when you have to beg your fans to vote for you in order to compete.
May 20, 2008 at 7:53 pm Permalink
Kenny has a letter to all his fans on his web site everyone should go read it.
He said that when he was in the media room after he said what he did, everyone applaud him. And said that alot of other people in the business agreed with him.
I think some of the media has blown this way out there.
Kenny is a stand up guy.
May 21, 2008 at 7:47 am Permalink
Brady,
I think you are right. but to me that is what the GWE awards are about.. fan based voting. Right or wrong. And I also agree that when you have Randy Rogers going against Hayes Carll… Randy is always going to win. It’s the law of pop culture.
I’ve had several discussion with a few people around the scene in trying to determine how a good awards show would work out and be fair and also include the fans. But nothing has come of it yet.
May 21, 2008 at 8:31 am Permalink
Rick, it is pretty amazing that his comments were able to stir up such controversy. I think some media people are taking the story, running with it, and turning it into something it’s not. Controversy sells.
The award being limited to touring and ticket sales is a misconception that I alluded to in the article, though. The Entertainer award extends beyond just touring and ticket sales and is more of an overall (commercial) impact on the genre.
I have no problem creating a “Fan Favorite” award for the ACMs and I don’t think most people would, either.
——
Ryan, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with fan voted awards or shows like GWE, but when an awards show with 42 years of history suddenly switches to fan voting, it tarnishes the award since the criteria is no longer the same.
Have y’all thought about mixing in some industry/peer voted awards to GWE? It’d be interesting to see which award the artists would covet the most and also whether the new awards would garner more press if they’re viewed as being more prestigious. Or possibly allow the fans to vote and make the top 5 nominees and have a board of industry professionals vote for the winners.
May 21, 2008 at 2:43 pm Permalink
If a jury of your peers can decide your fate in the U.S. Court System, I think fans should decide on an award. Why didn’t Mr. Chesney give those thoughts on stage? People might find out he’s really not as easy going as he portrays. I think he’s a control freak anyway.
May 21, 2008 at 2:53 pm Permalink
Fran,
I’m not aware of any court in the US that allows jury members to use a cell phone to text in their decisions. Maybe in New Jersey?
Besides, you would never get the Bucky Covington fans to participate. They all have their phones out waving overhead at Bucky’s command.
May 21, 2008 at 2:56 pm Permalink
HUH?? Thats a bit of a stretch there, Fran (the part about fan voting, I have no clue or do not care if Kenny is a control freak)….
May 21, 2008 at 2:58 pm Permalink
OMG…totally guilty, IMO! 3-10 for shoplifting, LOL!!!!!
May 22, 2008 at 12:16 am Permalink
A jury of your peers decides your fate in a criminal courtroom EVERYWHERE. There 12 jurors and they all get to VOTE, that’s what Fran meant. I agree with that idea. If a jury of 12 can determine someone’s guilt or innocence based on a vote, then fans who buy albums and attend concerts should be allowed to vote.
You don’t really believe the so-called rules that the ACMs conveniently changed, are actually how they would pick the winner themselves do you? If you do, then you know about as much about these award shows as Kenny does.
May 22, 2008 at 2:05 am Permalink
If anything, the jury analogy suggests the industry should vote.
Rutarded writes, “A jury of your peers decides your fate in a criminal courtroom…then fans…should be allowed to vote.”
But who is a “jury of Kenny Chesney’s peers”? Not fans, but the industry.
May 22, 2008 at 5:33 am Permalink
To the appropriately named commenter above (joke, haha :), Should there only be 12 entertainers that vote for the award then? Would people plesae stop making this extrememly misguided analogy? Wouldnt your argument be stronger if you were comparing citizens voting for the presidency, or hell, even fans voting for American Idol? I still dont agree, but at least there is some modicum of logic to your argument…..
May 22, 2008 at 12:33 pm Permalink
Brady: His comments are off base considering he was actively courting and supporting the votes BEFORE he won, not to mention he often resorts to populism to defend his own music or slight other artists accomplishments.
May 22, 2008 at 12:39 pm Permalink
Stormy, like I said before, he was doing what he had to do to win, and like I said in the article, winning gave him a platform to air his comments. If he hadn’t won and said the same thing, then everyone would be calling him bitter. He was simply saying that artist’s shouldn’t have to beg for votes to be in the running.
May 22, 2008 at 12:43 pm Permalink
Brady, I think he could have had a lot more impact had he refused to participate in the whole process and ask that his name not be considered for the award since he didn’t approve of the way the winner was being determined. That would have allowed him to make his point while keeping to the high road. As it is, his very valid comments about the voting are tainted and he looks like a hypocrite.
May 22, 2008 at 12:50 pm Permalink
Razor, it’s an interesting point that I’ve considered before, but doing so wouldn’t be a wise career move. It could potentially hurt his sales with upset fans and cause him to be blackballed from winning future awards. You can choose to view it as hypocritical if you wish, but I don’t think it taints the point behind his comments.
May 22, 2008 at 12:56 pm Permalink
Brady: So winning awards is more important than maintaining his integrity? I would think his fans would be less upset if he asked them not to vote for him, then to do what he did — allow them to vote for him and then denounce those votes as meaningless and disrespectful to the artist.
I keep thinking of this situation and contrasting Chesney with Bill Cosby who back when his sitcom was in its heyday would ask that his name not be considered for an Emmy because he didn’t believe that actors should be competing against each other. Everyone respected his wishes and no one was ever offended by them.
May 22, 2008 at 1:14 pm Permalink
I think you are intentionally misinterpreting Chesney’s comments in order to make an argument. He DID NOT denounce the votes as meaningless and disrespectful. He DID denounce the process whereby an artist has to beg for votes, taking the focus off the music and accomplishments and turning it into a marketing award. The ACM is essentially using the artists to market their award program. It’s not an issue of integrity and sometimes you need to go through an experience before you can fully develop thoughts on it. It would be like denouncing an album as trash before ever giving it a listen; some of us like to listen to it before developing an opinion.
Kenny isn’t making the argument that artists shouldn’t compete against each other and therefore, he didn’t participate in something he disagreed with from the beginning. Besides, Cosby did win awards for acting. Where’s his integrity?
May 22, 2008 at 1:41 pm Permalink
If I read him correctly, Kenny’s reckoning is that the selection of the award has always been in part based on industry professionals’ firsthand knowledge about the amount of skill, work and organization that goes into the artist’s presentation. Those are things fans by nature wouldn’t be privy to, and therefore the award doesn’t mean the same thing it used to mean.
That said, it’s true that if he didn’t approve of the process he could have suggested that his name be taken out of contention. On the other hand, his argument may have more impact coming from the guy who won the thing.
May 22, 2008 at 1:54 pm Permalink
Let us all read from the Book of Waylon:
“They put us in competition with each other. This should be a happy business. We shouldn’t have to compete, toot our own horn. I never could get into that. I didn’t get many awards.”
Amen.
May 22, 2008 at 2:08 pm Permalink
Brady: If the artist does the work the award suggest and entertains, why would they have to beg to get their fans to vote for them?
May 22, 2008 at 2:17 pm Permalink
If we’re gonna be idealistic and naive, they wouldn’t have to. In reality, though, reaching out to more people garners more votes.
May 22, 2008 at 7:43 pm Permalink
Brady said, “I think you are intentionally misinterpreting Chesney’s comments in order to make an argument. He DID NOT denounce the votes as meaningless and disrespectful. ”
I’m not misinterpreting anything, intentionally or otherwise. Re-read what Chesney said, paying particular attention to the phrases “complete disrespect of the artist” and “diminishes the integrity of he music”. So why particpate in the process if that’s the way he feels? To participate and win, and then complain about it is trying to have it both ways.
Your explanation/defense of Chesney’s actions suggest that it’s more important to not harm CD sales and to continue to get award nominations than it is to stand on principle. I can’t imagine that his fans would stop buying his CDs and concert tickets simply because he didn’t want to participate in this fiasco.
May 22, 2008 at 8:53 pm Permalink
It’s called context, look it up. You’re taking Chesney’s comments out of context and you’re doing the same with mine. I didn’t say he didn’t denounce anything as meaningless and disrespectful, I’m saying he didn’t denounce the votes, rather, he denounced the process. It’s an important distinction. If you feel he denounced the votes, feel free to pull the particular comment where he makes that distinction and evaluate it for us.
If you think less of him for participating in the process, that’s your prerogative, I’m not going to debate that with you as it’s beside the point of whether or nor his comments were valid.
May 22, 2008 at 10:12 pm Permalink
Brady, why nit-pick over whether it was the process or the votes that were denounced? It’s irrelevant. I’m not disputing the validity of his statements. I’m just saying that they would have carried more weight had he refused to participate in a process that he felt was disrespectful to the artists. I’m not sure what you’re so upset about.
May 23, 2008 at 6:21 am Permalink
I’m not being nit-picky; it’s an important distinction, and when you (and the media looking to stir up controversy) misconstrue his comments, it makes it relevant. You made a claim, I asked you to back it up, and you haven’t done it, rather you try to sidestep the issue by waving it off as me being nit-picky. It’s that simple.
May 23, 2008 at 7:02 am Permalink
But, would Kenny Chensey even have a career, much less be considered country without this kind of teen friendly populism?
May 23, 2008 at 7:31 am Permalink
Brady, this whole debate is a tempest in a teapot. I simply made a post saying that I thought Chesney should not have participated in the process if he felt so strongly about the issue. I wasn’t trying to stir up a controversy, yet you seem determined to parse every word I wrote and are all hung up on whether he said “the votes” or “the process” was disrespectful.
I am truly puzzled by your hostility and the way in which you seem to have taken my comments as a personal affront. I’m not sure what I said that has upset you so much, but whatever it was, I apologize, because that truly was not my intent.
May 23, 2008 at 7:51 am Permalink
Razor, I’m not upset, but the apology is duly noted. I realize what your original comment was about and after I responded, you supported your comment with this:
You may not have been trying to stir up controversy, but the media is with the same faulty reasoning and when you bring it up, it makes it relevant. I said it a couple of times that it’s your prerogative if you want to think less of him–that’s fine by me–but I think the facts need to be correct.
May 23, 2008 at 8:06 am Permalink
Brady, I don’t see the distinction between whether he said the votes or the process were disrespectful as a significant one. To clarify, I understand that his criticisms were directed toward the ACM for changing the process, and not the fans. But if I were one of his fans and had just voted for the guy and helped him to win this award, I’d be pretty upset by his comments.
The bottom line is that he feels that the award no longer has the meaning it once did, because the process was changed to allow the fans to have a say. I happen to think he is correct in that assessment, but I think he is far more likely to have upset his fans than if he’d just explained his feelings at the very beginning and asked to be removed from consideration.
‘Nuff said on this topic.
May 23, 2008 at 8:30 am Permalink
“To clarify, I understand that his criticisms were directed toward the ACM for changing the process, and not the fans.”
That is the point. You and I both agree that the process is worthy of criticism and any fan that understands that distinction has no reason to be bitter, whereas if the criticism had been lobbied at the votes or the fans themselves, then they’d have reason to be bitter. That’s the significance and the argument in it’s simplest terms.
If Kenny participates in the same process next year, I’ll agree with you about the lack of integrity and the hypocrisy. I’m willing to give him a year to figure it out, though.
‘Nuff said.
May 24, 2008 at 11:15 am Permalink
I think folks should re-read his comment!! I think the media has done an excellent job at blowing this out of proportion as they do with everything negative!! I think Kenny made a comment on something he felt needed to be said because he feels that the fans may not totally be aware of the guidelines for this award!! He has a right to his opinion as we all do….however to continue to harp on this issue and make this a battle between fans is ridiculous. We are all fans of country music and with all this controversy we demoralize the unity of it and the family we represent.
Should Kenny have said what he did??? Maybe not….I think if he felt this would have caused this much controversy, he may not have. I don’t think Kenny would have intentionally started an uproar between country music fans. I am a huge fan of Kenny and yes I voted…ONCE for him!! At first I was upset with the comment, but when I did my research (as all should before commenting) I realized what he was trying to say held merit and made sense. It is not that he was not thankful or happy his fans made the efforts to vote. He was commenting on the voting process!! Why must we always allow the negative media reporting to be turned into a battle?? This is exactly what they want and I’m sure the ACM is thrilled with all the coverage. It’s a shame we can not take something positive that Kenny and the rest of the country music artists do and spread it like wildfire as we do the negative!! They are ALL awesome and caring folks that make sacrifices to try to make our lives a little more meaningful and happy through the words of their songs….let’s give credit where credit is due!!
May 24, 2008 at 11:30 am Permalink
If Carrie or Taylor were up to win this award they would have
June 5, 2008 at 8:41 am Permalink
I had to laugh when I read “Stormy”s comment about “teen friendly populism”. I am fifty years old and I voted online for Mr. Chesney. I firmly believe that if the award had been voted on by only the members of the ACM as in the past, he still would have won. I also believe that he was playing the game by the rules he was given. It had nothing to do with integrity. He may not have liked the rules but he still wanted to play. What’s wrong with that? I don’t like some of the rules I have to play by everyday but I still want to play the game so I accept them and play. Am I not allowed to speak out about my opinion of the rules just because I continue to play by them? Gosh, I don’t want to live any place where that is the case. I would also like to ask country purists if having a steel guitar in the band is the most important prerequisite to being considered “real” country. If not, what does it take to be considered “real” country? I would like the list.
June 5, 2008 at 8:44 am Permalink
P.S. Brady, I’m putting you on my favorites list. I may not always agree with you but I like the way you make a point.
June 5, 2008 at 9:30 am Permalink
Beck: Where is Kenny’s complaints about this exact same thing the other 364 days of the year?
June 5, 2008 at 10:05 am Permalink
Thanks Beck.
Stormy, it was announced two and a half months before the show that the Entertainer award would be fan voted. I don’t know how Kenny would have complained about it the 290 or so days before that.
June 5, 2008 at 10:39 am Permalink
Brady: But the way that the ACMs conduct their awards and this award in particular are completely indicative of how mainstream country runs its business. Kenny doesn’t have a problem with it on a day to day basis, why this one day in partcular?
June 5, 2008 at 11:11 am Permalink
That’s an open ended question that leads to a completely subjective answer depending on how you perceive the country music industry.
The fact is that Kenny’s comments were about the process for the Entertainer award and we can’t pretend to know his entire view of the industry based on them. I’m sure there are plenty of artists that don’t agree with the way the business works sometimes, but they’re not always complaining, so why expect Kenny to complain every chance he gets?
You’re basically asking why he doesn’t bite the hand that feeds him.
June 5, 2008 at 11:51 am Permalink
Brady: Actually, I’m asking why he chose on this specific occassion TO bite the hand that feeds him when he doesn’t have an issue with eating the meal.
June 5, 2008 at 11:52 am Permalink
Its not like there hasn’t been precedence for giving an award either back or to someone else.
June 5, 2008 at 11:59 am Permalink
I think such questions in this instance are either irrelevant or an attempt to smear his character; unless there’s a deeper issue that pushed him over the edge, which I don’t believe to be the case, so what’s the the point?
June 5, 2008 at 12:03 pm Permalink
The point is his credibility: Why believe him when he says that he has a problem with the award when he apparently doesn’t have any problems with the award?
June 5, 2008 at 12:48 pm Permalink
Stormy – I don’t think Chesney’s credibility is important here. He could be sincere or insincere, but what matters is whether his arguments are convincing.
Sometimes sincerity matters – I’d care about his sincerity if I needed to depend on his actions in the future, if I for some reason needed to know how he truly felt about something.
But this is a case, I think, where his credibility as a sincere person seems irrelevant. He could be totally disingenuous, but if his arguments are plausible they deserve consideration. This is a case where the source of the arguments seems somewhat irrelevant in evaluating their merits.
June 5, 2008 at 1:30 pm Permalink
I’m not talking about his credibity as a sincere person, I’m talking about his credibility as a person who does not agree with the way the EOY award was awarded.
June 5, 2008 at 1:41 pm Permalink
I understand that, Stormy. I guess I just don’t see why it matters.
In other words, I think that if Chesney didn’t believe a word he said, it would be irrelevant from the perspective of what should be done about the awards. If Chesney believed certain things only when they help him, it would be irrelevant from that perspective too.
I’m no Kenny defender. But it seems to me his speech is an argument about the merits of different criteria for the awards. And in evaluating whether his ideas for the awards are good ones, I guess I just don’t see how his sincerity matters much.
I guess for me, it doesn’t much matter what Kenny really thinks, or what’s in his heart, at least on this issue.
June 5, 2008 at 1:59 pm Permalink
I have to agree with Stormy on this one. I was arguing the same points right after the award was presented. I don’t understand why his credibility would not matter.
June 5, 2008 at 2:16 pm Permalink
The point hairandtoenails and I are trying to make are that the validity of his comments are independent of his credibility. Someone with no credibility at all could say the sky is blue, but their lack of credibility doesn’t make the comment any less valid if the sky is indeed blue. Credibility may indeed factor into certain arguments, but I don’t think it pertains to this discussion. His statements are worth examining on their own and anything about his credibility is just a question of character.
June 5, 2008 at 3:19 pm Permalink
The validity of his arguements aside, one does have to question if even he believes them when he has done nothing either before or after the awards to back up his opinon with actions and he does nothing on a daily basis that reflects a disagreement with the overall way that business as usual is done.
July 11, 2009 at 4:40 pm Permalink
Rascal Flatts rocks! I voted for them!
Leave a Comment