Is Big Biz manipulating you on the Web? Meet Digby, figurative sister to LonelyGirl15

Marié Digby came across as a budding musician, naïve in the ways of the music world. Her apparently ‘homespun’ performances have been viewed more than 2.3 million times on YouTube, according to an article in the Wall Street Journal. Imagine all those other budding musicians who, hearts full of goodwill, cheered Digby’s success in signing with a major record label. Imagine all those same budding musicians’ emotional responses when they learned Digby’s innocence was carefully marketed. She actually signed with Hollywood Records in 2005. Echoes of LonelyGirl15 should be sounding in your psyche right about now.

It should come as no surprise that the Web, considered for so long by writers, artists, musicians and others as a frontier where all have an equal playing field, is being utilized as a resource by big business. It was only a matter of time. I listened to a publishing agent at a conference recently as he described the use of MySpace and viral emails to promote a forthcoming title. And there’ve been many articles about writers reviewing their own titles, under a pseudonym of course, on sites like amazon.com.

Most of us like to think the person we read about or admire is exactly who we believe him or her to be. Truth is, in life as on the Web, that may not always be the case. The best tactic is to think for yourself rather than buying into talent just because others have. A certain bias is created in group adulation, and it works in favor of the person seeking your admiration. Sites like YouTube and MySpace are an advertiser’s dream—a low budget path to big budget profit. It should come as no surprise that big commercial outfits, just like those of us in our own small corners on the Web, have come to see the light.

As for Digby, she makes me think of Britney Spears for some reason.

Intellectual property rights: what a tangled Web we’re weaving

The Web is heating up with news of another copyright battle, Viacom’s $1 billion lawsuit against YouTube.

I predict lawsuits will continue to increase in the next few years because technology available on the Web creates gray areas in copyright and other intellectual property rights issues.

I don’t think disputes will be limited to sites owned by media conglomerates, and I think a number of disputes will transcend intellectual property rights, moving into areas like libel and slander.

Traditional media is suffering transition pains right now because there’s so much free content available on the Web. Who watches TV anymore?
For instance users at YouTube upload whatever they want, and if they do infringe on a copyright, it’s up to the owner of the property to flag YouTube to remove the content.

That process sounds like a good plan until you consider the numbers. Last month, according to BusinessWeek.com, Viacom spokesman Jeremy Zweig said Viacom demanded the removal of more than 100,000 “unauthorized clips” from YouTube. That request was followed by Viacom’s discovery of another 50,000 unauthorized clips.

I think this is just the tip of the iceberg. Right now there’s a move among print media as well as online media to take advantage of “citizen journalists”—partly because the content is free and partly because this approach involves the reader/guest in the publication’s development. Circulation declined for many traditional newspapers last year, and investors are running a little scared.

The approach sounds all well and fine until you consider the lack of standards. Who will make certain stories adhere to fact and not fiction? Who will make certain there’s no copyright infringement? Who will deal with libel threats that will surely ensue? And will quality suffer even more, considering the current quagmire engulfing the English language at the moment?

I interviewed best-selling author James Redfield (The Celestine Prophecy) for the St. John’s Sun not long ago, during his residency at Flagler College. He likened the Web to “Chicago in the ‘30s.”

We will certainly face interesting challenges as individuals with no professional background in media transform into content providers.

Here’s hoping the content they provide will be legal. But I wouldn’t always bet on it.