Michael Jackson Is Dead!!

Rare footage of MJ's Pepsi accident:

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/80695416/

__________________
I have been formatted to fit this screen.

r66-The member who always asks WHY?

R66, that was rather horrifying. Pepsi is rather upset about it and horrified not only because it was released but that people would watch it.

You know, this whole story of his death leading up to the release of the video is fascinating stuff. I'm not sure I've ever seen a better example of sensational journalism at its worst.

One example is Nancy Grace talking about released photos of MJ's leg where he said he had a spider bite. She said he must be lying. Anyone can tell you that spiders would exist on Neverland ranch. Furthermore, she ignores the very real evidence of his vitiligo in the pictures. If you want an example of a media "vulture," she sure has heck is it. She even yells for 10 minutes before her show starts. I know I shouldn't be shocked by this anymore, but it still shocks me how irresponsible TV tabloid shows are.

I teach media and every year I try to communicate to my students the idea of sensationalism in the media. It isn't that hard, but in the Jackson story I have so many components -- the massive and prolonged coverage, the obsession we have with celebrities, and the digging for any bit of information, true or false.

Personally, I'm pretty flabbergasted with how Michael's life was handled when he was alive. We seem to be learning new things about him every day and some of those things are enlightening as to his very real problems. The media made some grave assumptions. I gather if he lied about how many nose jobs he had, then he must of lied about everything.

I find it all rather heartbreaking. But I've said that before...

Oh tramp, I majored in journalism, did my internship here: http://www.ciij.org/ : I know, I know.

The most amazing thing to me was at that time during the 90's news was changing. No longer was a newspaper or tv news program there to report the news to the public, they were there to give opinions, personal views and editorials. In my youth an editorial was put in a package at the end, if there was time. Now it's every anchorman for himself just spewing his views and yelling into the camera. I don't like Nancy Grace for this reason. I think to myself, "Well who are you Nancy? The be all, end all of opinions? We should all just agree because you're Nancy Grace?" Can't stand the woman, even if she does help in the fight for children's rights.

Please don't get me started on this subject. I was in the middle of the change in journalism. First lesson in journalism: don't editorialize, the people don't want to know your opinion, they just want the news. Uhg! tramp! Now you've got my blood moving!!

What was really startling was that Michael didn't even seem to realize that he was on fire. He actually put out the fire with his spin move before anybody else got to him.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

Lol, well, we have A LOT in common. It gets my blood not only moving, but boiling. You should watch a video that appears on the extras to All the President's Men. They interview journalists (I gather it was around 2005 or so) and ask them to talk about what legacy Woodward and Bernstein have left. What is sad is that many of them believe a story like that would never happen today -- the 24 hours news cycle would have destroyed Woodward and Bernstein. The story may never have survived.

Oh yea, the state of journalism today is a crime. I've had arguments about it on this very board, lol.

I will say this: using Jackson as an example of sensationalism and opinion will be easier for my kids to grasp than when I tried it with the election. They got the point, but this combines all of our most basic instincts. And that's not a good thing....

And you're nicer when you talk about Nancy Grace. I think she should be removed from the air, but I think that about a few others as well. I actually hate her no matter how much "good" she may have done somewhere.

I know. And people are theorizing that it was the stuff they put in the hair to curl that is what made it go up in flames. What a horrible sight. There was a guy on Huffington Post who said he was there and Michael didn't realize it until the spin and then he yelled for his brother.

Nancy Grace sure can get your attention when your TV finds itself tuned to her channel. She got my attention, at least.

..... I think I like her..... I know I might be alone here. I originally thought she was crazy, but, she seems to really speak her mind and look at all kinds of evidence. If I was ever in a legal battle, I'd want her on my side!

I always thought he wanted to be Diana Ross. For awhile there, he looked a lot like her.

In mourning or celebration?

ohh, ouch!

In more than 30 years as a reporter and editor, I've yet to see anyone in the media--even television--"dig" for false info.

He did, especially during the Bad years.

See, this is another reason that man had to be gay. He was obsessed with Diana Ross, best friends with Elizabeth Taylor, friends with Liza Minelli (was even best man at her gay wedding to that David guy, wasn't his name David? David Guest?)

Only gay men have such obsessions with divas like all of those women.

Of course, to me, that's only the tip of the iceberg in concluding that Michael Jackson was gay.

Hell, it isn't even the tip, it's just a tiny little water molecule.

You know what, it's not even an iceberg anymore, it's Neptune.

No, scratch that, Uranus.

I always make my own opinions regarding what's being reported just in case. Although I don't feel I should have to. Hopefully you see my point.

I assume you're talking TV. I've seen very few TV news programs do actual editorials expressing views on anything more than hooray for mothers and the 4th of July--mainly because if they actually said something controversial as an editorial, it might 1) tick off viewers and advertisers, so that the station's ratings and income might drop, 2)generate written complaints to the feds that station management will have to explain when they get their air time renewed, 3) force them to give free air time to someone who wants to express an opposing view.

True editorials are generally confined to the editorial pages of newspapers.

But Nancy Grace is not an anchorman--or even an anchorwoman, in the original concept of one who anchors a news team by reading reporter's articles on the air. What the British more logically call "newsreaders."

Grace and Geraldo and many of the other talking heads on Fox and CNN talk shows are lawyers who never covered a real news beat in their lives, couldn't write a news story for love or money, and wouldn't recognize news if it kicked them in the butt. They're just the barking dogs of television hired for their entertainment, not their news, value. They say outrageous things to get rubes mad enough to watch and call in. If Hitler or Stalin were still alive, they'd be hosting one of those call in shows right now.

You wouldn't watch Jerry Springer for the news, would you? Grace and Geraldo and Bill are the same thing, just with pretensions of sophistication. Same thing goes for Larry King, who refuses to read up and prepare in advance for his guests because he wants it all to be "spontaneous." That's why some of his guests make the most outrageous claims without him ever challenging them.

Like it or dislike it as you will. But don't call it journalism or "news." Have you ever seen anyone on television actually break a major story like newspaper reporters do?

Exactly--that's still the rule for real reporters. But don't confuse us news hounds with the people who write columns in the newspaper, in which expressing personal opinion is perfectly acceptable for columnists, or the people who write editorials on the editorial page that express the newspaper's official stand on some issue. Three very different types of writers who often do not share even the same work space at a newspaper.

On TV and radio, any time you find someone on a program that's named for him or her and who is always telling you what they think and what you should feel, that's the TV equivalent of a columnist--but more like a televised "reality" show rather than a newspaper column.

Rather than a station or network announcing its management's stand on any issue or endorsing a candidate, you're more likely to get a written or spoken disclaimer to the effect that "the views expressed are that of the people on this program and do not necessarily reflect this station's opinion or policy."

Just curious, r3port3r66: you say you majored in journalism and interned with some online thingy, while Tramps says he teaches media. Have either of you ever earned a living as a news reporter?

I'm not sure I do. If you're saying you make up your own mind whether what you read in a newspaper or hear on a TV news program is true or false, that's fine. That's your right. But I hope your opposite opinion is based on something more than a gut feeling or what "everyone says" or an unverified statement by some unknown person on the internet who may have an ax to grind.

Most of all, no one should rely on one newspaper or one TV show or even one media outlet--print or TV--for all of one's news. There's an infinite variety of news sources out there to pick and choose.

Would like to respond to the above after I put the baby down. And yes, I was a paid TV journalist for a while. Not hard news though--entertainment, fashion and travel (which may explain a few things ). But before you roll your eyes, I came out of school with an ideal of what journalism should be, and I rarely find that ideal in place on television. More later.

Not if any slips get past the radar. I did a story once on the term "Asian Invasion" which was readily used in the media in the 90's. The word "Black" is still used to represent African Americans sometimes, so is Indian to describe Native Americans. These may be small examples, but if you're the minority and you care, it's not something you want to hear coming from your TV while watching the news. But the fact is the majority rules. And if the majority doesn't complain then why should it matter? I can't see a twenty year old African American coming onto a news set to give his opposition to a term used once in a local news story, although it deeply offends him and maybe millions of others.

Agreed. But the morning edition that I had to run out and get from the driveway before the sun came up is extinct now. Seems nobody reads the newspaper anymore. The appearance of news has changed, and with that change comes a disclaimer that says these aren't necessarily the news networks views? What's next; "This network may not agree with the unidentified sources used for any story appearing on this program. But we'll use them anyway. You decide". Because that's what's happening.

San Francisco State University. My mentor was the late Charles Jackson, editor of the Oakland Tribune. The "online thingy" was actually a journal for the Center for Integration and Improvement of Journalism. After college I worked at Q-TV, the first ever gay/lesbian/bi-sexual/transgender newsmagazine in the country. I became a model, an actor then a recovering alcoholic. I've had personal debates with John Stossel for his ignorant remarks on 20/20, a then popular Laura schlessinger for her stupidity and a couple others I won't mention. Being a reporter was making me a very angry person so i stopped. I loved Features though. And the travel reporter gig helped me buy my first house.

I don't think Michael Jackson was ever happy in his personal life. A pity considering all the money he had. Proves once again that you can't have everything in life. And surely between money and other things, a happy and peaceful life would be most people's choice.

I quite enjoyed his music. I was quite young to remember the Thriller period as i was only 5 when that record came out, and i wasn't into music yet. However i was old enough to remember the Bad period around 1987, 1988. that was the time when i actually started buying music albums and that was one of the truly first ones i bought.

A great artist, singer and dancer and probably one of the most important american artists of the last 35 years.. May he rest in peace.

Hey, 66, check out this and put it at "Actual Size" (100% - if it isn't already) and look at question #9. What say you?

I say WOW! Let's see what happens...I almost think that Black may be a little more acceptable than "Negro"...yikes!

Not sure if this is appropriate here. Thought it was an interesting piece of our culture that you may or may not agree with. It's a copyright infringement none the less. Some epithets here too. Mods, if it's inappropriate...well, you know.