This thread isnt about the people that have won or havent won its more about the RULE that the grammy's apply in some cases and not in others, case in point.

The Rule states that no one can be nominated that has recorded before, this would go for a duet or member of a group. Backing Vocalist and things like that are not counted against. That rule would obviously disqualify say..Paul McCartney the year his first SOLO ablum came out or when Wings came out, however it seems the Grammys dont always apply this rule. First would be CYNDI LAUPER, she won, and yet recorded an album as lead vocalist of Blue Angel. Next Would be JODY WATLEY she won and yet was a member of Shalamar. The rule doesnt say anything about popularity or if the group was well known. With that being said, heres where the rule has been used

Whitney Houston a shoe in was disqulified because of a duet with Teddy Pendergrass on his record.

Richard Marx a shoe in was disqualified because of a song he had on the Nothing in Common soundtrack the year earlier.

The reason i bring this up is next week the nominations are announced and insiders have said that Amy Whinehouse and THICKE are probable for best new Artist nods...really? didnt they have albums before their breakthroughs once again the grammy rule is not used.

I believe the rule, actually, is that you can't have been nominated for a Grammy previously, in another incarnation of your career.

Should an artist be disqualified if they previously recorded in another country as is the case with Amy Winehouse? Her first U.S. recording ever was Back To Black. I think she should be eligible--just like Alanis Morissette was.

Lauryn Hill

Aside said:

Yeah thats why the rule is kind of bogus, "public indentity" can be viewed in many ways, to me "public indentity" would be as soon as your are listed as a member of a group (recording) or if you do a soundtrack cut or duet with someone, so i agree that they were OK with disqualifying Richard and Whitney, though they easily would have been the winners in their years, but technically Cyndi Lauper would be out since Blue Angel had an album and the same thing with Jody Watley, despite her maybe not being a group leader thats not what the rule states, her identity was known.

Graycap23 said:

Exactly, so right there the argument in terms of "popularity" is bogus since the Fugees were huge and everyone knew who Lauryn was at the time of this nomination and victory.

nah, the language was changed a few years back...the original rule did state you had to be a new artist but i think it was with your own name and thats how lauper and watley snuck in...then in the 90's it changed to the current rules hence old school people all of a sudden qualifiying.

sosgemini said:

It was loosely changed to bring in more popular breakthroughs it seems back in the 90's the wording was changed to "when an artist achieves Grammy Consciouness" which is the most bogus thing i have ever heard of. This is why the 90's saw No Doubt nominated after their 3rd album and of course Lauryn Hill. By altering that wording the grammys once again left itself to so many people going "what the fuck, they arent new, its their fifth album" this wording makes them look lost and clueless.

lastdecember said:

you can't really argue that Cyndi Lauper with Blue Angel really put her (or the band) in the public eye. hardly anyone, even at the height of her career, even knew that Blue Angel existed. and Jody Watley's work with Shalamar didn't exactly make her a household name, or even a name someone would recognize as being connected with the group.

I agree they're vague distinctions, but it would be different if either of them had had a record out there credited to themselves, even in a duet situation, like Whitney did. Whitney's duet put her on the map. Say Cyndi Lauper or Jody Watley to someone before they'd struck out with a solo career and 99.9% of people are going to say "who?" Blue Angel and Shalamar didn't put either of those women on the map. They might have gotten each of them in the door, but they individually had no name value or impact outside of being in the groups

Aside said:

I agree but its still a questionable call and when you bend wording in a rule to slide some people in and then others get left out well, you leave the door open to accusations thats really all im saying, just scanning through the years of nominations you will find alot of this, No Doubt being nominated after already releasing 2 albums, of course Lauryn Hill with the Fugees, sure she wasnt the Fugees featuring Lauryn Hill but that would be like Nominating Nicole Scherzinger for Best New Artist this year despite the fact that she was a singer for 2 groups. I just think since this award is so loosely worded it should just be nominated by a grammy panel not by academy members (which are nothing but the labels and artists themselves).