Napalm Death Frontman Responds To Digby Dig
Napalm Death vocalist Mark “Barney” Greenway has responded to Earache Records head honcho Digby Pearson’s recent blog about bands he’s worked with over the years.
In a recent blog, Digby said he had an “unpleasant” working relationship with Greenway, who he claimed was ungrateful for the “eye-wateringly huge sums of money” the label spent promoting his band.
Loudwire‘s Graham “Gruhamed” Hartmann cornered Greenway before Napalm Death’s concert in Connecticut recently, and asked for his response.
“People were telling me, ‘You should respond.’ ‘Cause a lot of people know it’s not true, the stuff that [Digby is] saying,” Greenway began.
“Let me address a couple of points. He makes out in the article that I had a manager — I personally had a manager — who was putting pressure on him. Not true. That was a band manager, who was hired to protect the band. It wasn’t somebody that came in that was trying to get all this money and blah blah blah. The band had been reamed several times over, and he was there to protect the band.
“And all the his stuff that Digby says about Earache pumping money into Napalm — ‘eyewatering’ amounts — not true. All that was him fulfilling his contractual obligations. See, Digby seems to have this fantasy viewpoint that if you sign a contract with somebody and you have monetary conditions that are not excessive, that are needed for the band to operate, he thinks that once you sign that contract, he doesn’t necessarily have to fulfill those obligations. And that’s where his warped kind of thinking comes around.
“I mean, I could go on righting wrongs about the whole thing, but we could be here all day. But let me tell you this. All of this has come about, and it’s directed at me — not Napalm — for three things. One, we refused to do the 25th-anniversary thing that he’s got going on in the U.K. right now, for exactly the reason that we felt that because of our past with Earache, and because of the way we perceive that other bands have been treated, we thought it would be entirely hypocritical to get involved with that. So we said, ‘No.’ So that’s my opinion. I suspect that he knows that he’s out of joint because of that. Two: because I took my trade union to his doorstep. When he was not doing what he needed to do for Napalm, I said, ‘Enough is enough.’ I took my union — it’s like a regular union — to Earache’s doorstep, and he didn’t like that either.
“See, Digby doesn’t like people to stand up to him; he expects everybody to be subservient to however he decides he should treat people, and I wasn’t prepared to happen. That’s why he doesn’t like me — because I stood up to him. And a lot of people that he actually is positive about in that interview, the reason why he is positive about them is most likely because they never stood up to him; they always accepted what he said and whatever he tried to them as perfectly acceptable, and I’m saying that’s not. So that’s’ two things right there. Third thing: he talks about my so-called enmity to Earache. Well, if you research, if you look over however many years it is, and you look for interviews where Earache comes up, I’ve said consistently that it’s not worth me badmouthing Earache anymore; it serves no purpose. What’s done is done and it’s in the past. But he’s the one that keeps digging all this stuff up, not me. So where’s the enmity coming from — me or him? People can work that out for themselves.”