5 People Are Speaking Their Mind

1. Kayee Says:

   September 11th, 2007 at 5:31 pm

   Do u guys even know about Marie? What I know is that she’s been working so hard with her music, and she had a lot of songs written by herself and also the melodies. Then this record company wanted her songs, and because she didn’t want to sell them, they just made her sign a contract pretending to make her famous, then when they finished the recording, they didn’t released the album and just took the songs and gave it to several artists.
   Peoople is just too busy reading all this rubbish and not even paying attention to the songs she wrote. You can tell by reading the lyrics, she used the same words just in different ways, like for instance “Umbrella” (Rihanna), “What I’ve Done” (Linkin Park) and “Makes me Wonder” (Maroon 5)… it is her doing!!!
   Jonathan Coulton, if you are really an “authentic Internet superstar” please do some more research instead of reading just what WSJ post, like for instance, asking Marie herself? or the Hollywood Record? they are just playing dirty. And you just talk like u have the ultimate evidence and everything, read the facts! the songs!!

2. frank Says:

   May 3rd, 2008 at 9:46 am

   I keep hearing people go on about deception, fakery and misrepresentation. It is mass-consumed music. What is real? and what is about Pop music and Pop Culture anyway? Do we seriously figure this girl has no talent because she has a company or corporation representing her? or that she hasn’t worked tremendously hard to get where she is? I think we sort of want people to suffer for our pleasure. We seem to get a strange kind of happiness from the toil of others, and if we find out they weren’t crawling through misery to succeed we try to shame them into believing they were liars and minor talents. I have heard her music and I can see why people would like it. I’ve heard her interviewed on NPR and she seems more informed and thoughtful than most people I hear from slinging mud in her direction.

3. Bill Hallahan Says:

   July 14th, 2008 at 3:42 pm

   The Wall Street Journal got this story wrong.

   Marie Digby herself says the idea of using youtube was entirely her own, and the timing of her videos coincides with her story.

   Note also, the Wall Street Journal article contained factual errors. The post they cited as typical was not representative of what the vast majority of people in the topic. Most were thrilled for Marie.

   Marie Digby never lied. There is no comparison to the lonelygirl case, and by the way, she didn’t lie either, at least not as far as I have seen.

   It always struck me that there is a special term in journalists, i.e. “Investigative journalism.”

   Here’s the other, more accurate side of the story in Marie Digby’s own words.

   http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=4165438&blogID=307265009

4. Bill Hallahan Says:

   July 25th, 2008 at 12:15 pm

   I now have more information.

   The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) article was wrong about Marié Digby, and there is evidence to show that Marié Digby never lied. To anyone who followed her videos, it’s obvious that Marié Digby has always been herself.

   The article stated:
   —–
   “Ms. Digby’s MySpace and YouTube pages don’t mention Hollywood Records. Until last week, a box marked “Type of Label” on her MySpace Music page said, “None.”
   —–
   However, she had joined MySpace in 2004, roughly 2 years before she was signed, and she merely didn’t bother to update a setting, and she’d probably forgotten that setting even existed. I signed up for a MySpace music page, and it could even be missed when first signing up. And, since months after she recorded her CD, there was no indication it was ever going to be released, I wouldn’t expect that it would even cross her mind to change her status to signed, even if she was still aware of that setting. Note, her CD didn’t come out until approximately 2 years after she was signed, and approximately 4 years after she joined MySpace.
   The article went on to state:
   —–
   “After inquiries from The Wall Street Journal, the entry was changed to “Major,” though the label still is not named.”
   —–
   Makes sense to me. There is no point in naming a record label when there is no indication they are going to release your CD. And, given that, who she was signed with has just as little relevance as that she was signed. (Note, the CD, titled “Unfold” finally came out on April 8, 2008. Buy it, it’s wonderful).

   The Wall Street Journal article also contained:
   —–
   ‘Most of Ms. Digby’s new fans seem pleased to believe that they discovered an underground sensation.
   —–
   In fact, the vast majority of the posts were about her music, and not about “discovering” her. For most of us viewers, a huge number of people had already seen her videos when we found her, which were posted long before the WSJ article, so we could hardly claim to have ‘discovered her.’

   The term “feigning amateur status”, used in the WSJ article is completely ridiculous. Marié Digby posted music videos, and expressed enthusiasm, and hope. She was largely unknown outside of Los Angeles.

   Marié Digby has posted that a Wall Street reporter talked to Marié Digby for about an hour, but they never asked the questions that would have cleared this up. Instead, they took one response, which merely meant that her signed status wasn’t relevant to her goals (and frankly, would have seemed ridiculous in the videos), as meaning she was hiding it.

   There were radio station interviews, before the WSJ article, where she mentioned being signed. If she were hiding it, she would have hid it there too.

   I gather Marié Digby’s family is rather well off. She never mentioned that in her videos either. I wouldn’t say she was, “feigning middle class status,” but I’m sure some people would! Sad!

5. Bill Hallahan Says:

   July 25th, 2008 at 12:39 pm

   Well, if the record company contacted Carson Daly, then he lied, but that hasn’t been proven. It’s easy to make accusations.

   It is clear the Wall Street Journal is wrong on many things, which puts the entire article in a bad light.

   The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) article was wrong about Marié Digby, and there is evidence to show that Marié Digby never lied. To anyone who followed her videos, it’s obvious that Marié Digby has always been herself.

   The article stated:
   —–
   “Ms. Digby’s MySpace and YouTube pages don’t mention Hollywood Records. Until last week, a box marked “Type of Label” on her MySpace Music page said, “None.”
   —–
   However, she had joined MySpace in 2004, roughly 2 years before she was signed, and she merely didn’t bother to update a setting, and she’d probably forgotten that setting even existed. I signed up for a MySpace music page, and it could even be missed when first signing up. And, since months after she recorded her CD, there was no indication it was ever going to be released, I wouldn’t expect that it would even cross her mind to change her status to signed, even if she was still aware of that setting. Note, her CD didn’t come out until approximately 2 years after she was signed, and approximately 4 years after she joined MySpace.
   The article went on to state:
   —–
   “After inquiries from The Wall Street Journal, the entry was changed to “Major,” though the label still is not named.”
   —–
   Makes sense to me. There is no point in naming a record label when there is no indication they are going to release your CD. And, given that, who she was signed with has just as little relevance as that she was signed. (Note, the CD, titled “Unfold” finally came out on April 8, 2008. Buy it, it’s wonderful).

   The Wall Street Journal article also contained:
   —–
   ‘Most of Ms. Digby’s new fans seem pleased to believe that they discovered an underground sensation.
   —–
   In fact, the vast majority of the posts were about her music, and not about “discovering” her. For most of us viewers, a huge number of people had already seen her videos when we found her, which were posted long before the WSJ article, so we could hardly claim to have ‘discovered her.’

   The term “feigning amateur status”, used in the WSJ article is completely ridiculous. Marié Digby posted music videos, and expressed enthusiasm, and hope. She was largely unknown outside of Los Angeles.

   Marié Digby has posted that a Wall Street reporter talked to Marié Digby for about an hour, but they never asked the questions that would have cleared this up. Instead, they took one response, which merely meant that her signed status wasn’t relevant to her goals (and frankly, would have seemed ridiculous in the videos), as meaning she was hiding it.

   There were radio station interviews, before the WSJ article, where she mentioned being signed. If she were hiding it, she would have hid it there too.

   I gather Marié Digby’s family is rather well off. She never mentioned that in her videos either. I wouldn’t say she was, “feigning middle class status,” but I’m sure some people would! Sad!

Have Your Say

Ask a Question Or Offer Your 2 Cents: