Double Standards for Michael and his music?

classic

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
2,135
Points
0
Do you think that fans and the media hold double standards when it comes to Michael and his music?

For example, I do not hear insinuations that Stevie Wonder, Patti LaBelle, Gladys Knight, etc. must have top ten "hits" on the charts today or else they are has beens. When these others make music that doesn't sound like what is on the radio, they are holding true to their roots and "real" music; however, for Michael the same becomes his music sounds dated. When others re-release music it is a celebration of their great work; for Michael it is clinging to the past. When others re-release CD's in a matter of months by adding two new songs or such, they are being aggressive in business; when Michael re-releases a CD after 25 years, he is being greedy and taking advantage of fans. When others record with the current popular acts, they are keeping up to date; with Michael, he is selling out or trying to "ride the backs" of others.

What do you think? Do you yourself hold these double standards (and willing to admit it)? Will such double standards by the media and fans hurt Michael's future projects?
 
i disagree with you a bit.im big into other musical acts,such as bruce springsteen,prince,madonna,u2 (not bono,but the band),bob dylan & lots of the other really big artists & they all release new material than michael.

michaels thriller 25 is weak if you compare it to springsteens anniversary born to run which included a book,a live dvd,a making of album dvd.u2's anniversary joshua tree had truck loads of demos,rarities,unreleased tracks,essays from bono & the edge etc.

prince is on his own level.his move last year of giving away his superb album planet earth for free & selling out 21 nights in the o2 was pure genius.

springsteen,u2 & madonna bring out an album at the start of the year & at the end of the year bring out a live package dvd/cd set.

radiohead (although i find them to be pretentious twats) released in rainbows for a 'pay what you want' scheme on the internet (& you didnt have to pay a penny) then they released on cd for the cd buyer.

this decade sony have released & re-released michael jackson songs & the public see through that very fast.IMO the only 2 mj items worth buying this year were 'invicible' & 'the ultimate collection'.

dangerous special edition contained nothing new? off the wall,thriller & bad special editions were actually quite good,but.....visionary,number ones,the essential,dvd the one (crap),live from bucarest (a waste if you bought ultimate collection)& yet again we have thriller?

thriller 25 contains nothing more then a few remixes (which are pretty bad to be honest,again IMO only)& one unreleased track?

yeah its double standards,but not on the fans or the critics side.on sony (who are robbing us) & michael.

one live dvd? not good enough really! what about victory tour? bad tour88? history tour? the worlds greatest live entertainer has ONE live dvd which i find astounding!
whats next? history 15th anniversary cd? bad 21 anniversary cd? its a total cop-out!

how about this?! A NEW ALBUM,TEN BASSIC SONGS! & A NEW LIVE DVD OF AN OLD CONCERT OF WHICH MICHAEL OWNS & HAS ALL THE FOOTAGE! IT PISSES ME OFF!
 
i disagree with you a bit.im big into other musical acts,such as bruce springsteen,prince,madonna,u2 (not bono,but the band),bob dylan & lots of the other really big artists & they all release new material than michael.

michaels thriller 25 is weak if you compare it to springsteens anniversary born to run which included a book,a live dvd,a making of album dvd.u2's anniversary joshua tree had truck loads of demos,rarities,unreleased tracks,essays from bono & the edge etc.

prince is on his own level.his move last year of giving away his superb album planet earth for free & selling out 21 nights in the o2 was pure genius.

springsteen,u2 & madonna bring out an album at the start of the year & at the end of the year bring out a live package dvd/cd set.

radiohead (although i find them to be pretentious twats) released in rainbows for a 'pay what you want' scheme on the internet (& you didnt have to pay a penny) then they released on cd for the cd buyer.

this decade sony have released & re-released michael jackson songs & the public see through that very fast.IMO the only 2 mj items worth buying this year were 'invicible' & 'the ultimate collection'.

dangerous special edition contained nothing new? off the wall,thriller & bad special editions were actually quite good,but.....visionary,number ones,the essential,dvd the one (crap),live from bucarest (a waste if you bought ultimate collection)& yet again we have thriller?

thriller 25 contains nothing more then a few remixes (which are pretty bad to be honest,again IMO only)& one unreleased track?

yeah its double standards,but not on the fans or the critics side.on sony (who are robbing us) & michael.

one live dvd? not good enough really! what about victory tour? bad tour88? history tour? the worlds greatest live entertainer has ONE live dvd which i find astounding!
whats next? history 15th anniversary cd? bad 21 anniversary cd? its a total cop-out!

how about this?! A NEW ALBUM,TEN BASSIC SONGS! & A NEW LIVE DVD OF AN OLD CONCERT OF WHICH MICHAEL OWNS & HAS ALL THE FOOTAGE! IT PISSES ME OFF!
How about not buying it if you don't want it?:rolleyes:
 
azza, I agree with every single thing that you've said. You may or may not remember my comments when details of T25 were published and I compared them to that of The Joshua Tree that was released around the same week. Initially I thought Sony were taking the piss and I absolutely detested the material that we were given. A few weeks later I got round to the idea and saw it for what it was, it's not a package for the current have who have a least 6 copies it's for the new generation who are fans of the artists featured on the remixes... a ploy to a new generation of fans really.... When you think about it, its not really fair on the fans who have been a fan of the Thriller era for so long, but personally I'm just glad to see Michael out there.

I have a feeling that we'll be getting the DVD for The Making of Thriller at the end of this year, the landmark video deserves it's OWN celebration and celebrating it with it's own release in December 2008 seems highly appropriate, it would be 25 years since it's premier after all! ;)

As for tours... we'll you're package idea sounds awesome azza! If mean, i the Rolling Stones can produce a concert package which spans across 4 DVDs (re The Biggest Bang) can you imagine the reception of a 3-4 DVD concert boxset from Michael! But then again, I think his decision not to produce concert DVDs adds to the mystique of "The Superstar Michael Jackson". the greatest showman on earth wants to leave us with memories and legendery tales, I guess... why give in to our every whim, why not leaves us more determened to see MJ's NEXT performance. I think it's a deliberate move.
 
T25 is partially a re-release. there are also the remixes in it which are brand new plus unreleased tracks from the triller album. i think the title of the album misleads ppl into focusing on the re-released songs and ignore the brand new stuff that this albums includes
 
My question is not whether you like or dislike Thriller 25. That has been discussed and the only real answer to that is buy it if so wanted and don't buy if so wanted. That is just a part of being a consumer.

My question is about expectations placed on Michael Jackson. When U2 and Springsteen released anniversary or greatest hits packages, were they build as "comeback" chances and as if future projects depended upon them? As for Prince, he gets called innovative for giving away his music? Do you honestly think that is what the media and yes even fans would have said about Michael if he had done the same?

As far as others releasing new music more often than Michael, it depends upon who you are talking about. Wasn't Stevie Wonder's last project after about a ten year gap from the previous one? Yet, I didn't hear the "downing" of him going for so long without a new release; it was simply a music legend is back on the scene. I didn't hear talk that this was his last chance to prove he still had talent.
 
of course theres a double standard.

But it could be a bad and good thing. It's a good thing cuz deep down people are THAT HUNGRY for MJ to come back and rule the charts again. If people DIDN'T apply that double standard to MJ then he would be just another one of those artists who are 'respected' for their work in the 80s. But no, MJ needs to be on the charts at all times. People want him back.

Of course, being top dog all the time isn't possible so, yeah it can be bad.
 
i think lot of what the media has to say or think is not een based on how talented and good an aritst is but also on their personal opionio9n of the artist and that is totally wrong i think
 
I get what you are saying and I guess I never really thought of it that way in terms of people just naturally expecting Michael to be on the charts. But, the problem is there are many who are not thought of as an '80s star who has legendary status like Michael; they are treated as timeless legends just like their music. I think that Michael's music has more than proved its timelessness, so why would he ever now be thought of as simply an '80s act?

Also, with this double standard, I wonder if unrealistic expectations go along to the point that Michael can't reach them.
 
Well like i said, MJ is MORE than just an 80's legend though. MJ has transcended the 80s. And deep down people recognize that and EXPECT him to be on top. I think generally people will always recognize him as being the solid king of the 80's, with Madonna and Prince. But MJ is just so good, and he's effectively broken out of being just an 80's artist so well that people feel and want him to continue for ever and ever as being a prominent figure NOW. I mean think about it, all of us GREW UP on michael jackson. He's been going since the 60's. There hasn't really been a time or a decade when MJ hasn't popped his head into the charts and made a solid impact. And although the 80s were his PEAK decade, he still ruled in every other decade as well :lol: So people want that consistency. And that may manifest itself in irrational expectations, but it's still good to know that people expect that out of him and haven't dismissed him as a strictly 80s act.
 
The reason why a comeback for MJ is more crucial than for anyone else is because all of the artists mentioned above in this thread haven't been away for so long, in fact they haven't been away at all, they have all been around with different projects and never disappeared. As for MJ, he hasn't been touring in ages, he hasn't had a proper album release in many years, no real tv or show appearances - in terms of a real performance -, no project whatsoever. To many people it may look like he doesn't care about music or his carreer or his fans any more. I'm not saying it is that way. The world is moving on, so are other artists, there has been a lot happening out there, the music business has changed dramatically ... I think right now it looks to the general public as if MJ is mostly present in the old classic stuff he did 25 years ago. And the re-release of Thriller has added to this perception.
 
^^ well I don't think that's the reason why his comeback is crucial. The only reason it's 'crucial' (but not really THAT crucial) is because of the trial. But MJ always takes long breaks between albums so that he can have that hunger and anticipation ur seeing for him now, its what makes Michaelmania Michael MANIA. It prevents over exposure. ANd it's a smart way to deal. And i don't think the general public feels that MJ doesn't care anymore. They know that Mj has only made FIVE....count them, FIVE (Thriller, Bad, Dangerous, History, invincible) albums in that last TWO DECADES. So the fact that MJ disappears and reappears again is not new. Thats what the whole "Where is he, here he is again" joke MJ made came from. Now we're at the "where is he" stage. I think people realize that. But what's big about this one that different is that its not just "where is he" but "WILL HE do it again?" And we as fans know he will (or we should :lol:) but the public doesn't. I simply don't believe that people think he doesn't care anymore or whatever, but people may think that he's gonna give it a rest because of the trial.
 
My question is not whether you like or dislike Thriller 25. That has been discussed and the only real answer to that is buy it if so wanted and don't buy if so wanted. That is just a part of being a consumer.

My question is about expectations placed on Michael Jackson. When U2 and Springsteen released anniversary or greatest hits packages, were they build as "comeback" chances and as if future projects depended upon them? As for Prince, he gets called innovative for giving away his music? Do you honestly think that is what the media and yes even fans would have said about Michael if he had done the same?

As far as others releasing new music more often than Michael, it depends upon who you are talking about. Wasn't Stevie Wonder's last project after about a ten year gap from the previous one? Yet, I didn't hear the "downing" of him going for so long without a new release; it was simply a music legend is back on the scene. I didn't hear talk that this was his last chance to prove he still had talent.

well your title is 'double standards for michael & music? & im using t25 to highlight the fact this release is some what a double standard(but a double standard from mj/sony).when u2 released 'elevation' in 99 it was built as a comeback as their album 'pop' was huge a flop seen by not only the fans but the band as a failure.the tour was a disaster (bonos words) with the band not getting along & being unrehearsed.

when sprinsteen released 'the rising' it came after a few albums like 'the ghost of tom joad' which alot of fans were devided,plus 'the rising' was his first album with the E-street band since 'born in the usa' which was about 20 years prior so theirs was massive expectation.

u2 almost ended & springsteen/e-street band almost never re-happend.what both spingsteen & u2 didnt do however was live on past glories.they gave us new material & when they couldn't they gave us unreleased material.springsteen released 'tracks' which was a 4-disc box-set of unused songs & demos.

as for prince,it was a masterstroke of genius & a very savvy business move.he got paid a fortune from 'the mail',they printed an editional 600,000 copies of their paper sold out everywhere.prince got his music out to his fans & the public,& sold out 21 nights in o2.
everyone came out of that scenario a winner.if michael did something like that with 'new' material,i would guess that not only would he be called 'innovative' but alot of the music critics would regain respect for him.

ive only got one stevie wonder album,so i don't know about him in that sense as i dont follow his career.as for my option with t25 as in buying it or not buying it,your right.i wont be buying it which is the problem,because i already own 8 times & the only people that will buy it are the hardcore fans.

i find it amazing that the majority of the mj fan base find any type of re-release good enough & exceptable.alot of mj fans are mj fans only & don't follow other artists to the same extent so i guess their not aware much mj's back catalog gets exploited & exploited.im astonished!

so answer me this? where does the double standard lie? ive got 8 thrillers,5 bads,4 dangerous,4 off the walls,2 historys,2 invicibles,& one copy of each re-release.& your telling me about this massive expectation placed on michael jackson? he's clearly unaware of this as he's giving us yet another re-release (marketed as a new album) because of a track & a few remixes.i don't even count remixes as music let alone new music.

i know its for the younger generation,but i feel his loyalty lies with his fans as it is with springsteen,u2,prince & everyother artist who has reached their success.
 
It's not all about the fans azza. MJ has another market. And who are we to say that MJ can't try to reach out to another market to GROW his fanbase? It makes no sense that MJ only caters to his existing fanbase. MJ should expand it . And this lil project is doing just that. We, as fans just gotta be patient for his new stuff...this isn't anything new. We had to be patient for every other MJ album. MJ makes about 2 albums a decade...what are ya'll expecting? :lol:
 
It's not all about the fans azza. MJ has another market. And who are we to say that MJ can't try to reach out to another market to GROW his fanbase? It makes no sense that MJ only caters to his existing fanbase. MJ should expand it . And this lil project is doing just that. We, as fans just gotta be patient for his new stuff...this isn't anything new. We had to be patient for every other MJ album. MJ makes about 2 albums a decade...what are ya'll expecting? :lol:

who are we? we are the ones that support him through all the s##t,buy the records,go to the shows,love him,embrace him,put up with abuse for being mj fans.

i hope the younger generation do reach out to him,but any kid i hear speak about him say really nasty things about him.what is the obsession with reaching a new market?

you make music for your fans.well springsteen,prince,madonna etc...does.
 
you make music to reach to who ever is touched by it. You make music cuz u love it. It makes no sense to me to only cater to one group of people...especially a global and versatile artist like MJ. I probably would have never became a fan myself if MJ thought that way. And all of those people u mentioned above make music cuz they love music. Not because they're thinking "i gotta cater to my fans every desire, i have to please their every wish"...if that's the case Prince wouldn't have sued a fan for using his ish on Youtube :lol: Sure the fans' interests are kept in mind. But it should be a goal to expand that fanbase as well by appealing to more and more people.

And no one put a gun to our heads to support him. We support him because WE find pleasure in his music. Not because we're doing him any favors. Like "hmm I'll by Dangerous because I think MJ needs new clothes" :lol: NO, we buy it cuz WE like that music PERSONALLY and SELFISHLY. We support him and buy his music because WE enjoy that music. Mj owes us nothing for that. Thats what he does for a living and its a give/take thing. Not a "i owe u, u owe me"...so therefore we have NO say in MJ's motives for making music.

And your view of the younger generation is very narrow because MOST people i encounter respect MJ as an artist...they may think he's weird, but almost everyone has some MJ in their playlist even if they don't wanna admit it. they'll dance to his music if it's on. And u act like only the younger generation makes bad comments about him...LOL EVERY DEMOGRAPHIC does...not just youngens.

And u cater to them because the next generation will be able to pass on that legacy. Recognize that MJ is still relevant. he's still an impact in the industry and is a force to be dealt with. Thats why u appeal to today's generation.
 
you make music to reach to who ever is touched by it. You make music cuz u love it. It makes no sense to me to only cater to one group of people...especially a global and versatile artist like MJ. I probably would have never became a fan myself if MJ thought that way. And all of those people u mentioned above make music cuz they love music. Not because they're thinking "i gotta cater to my fans every desire, i have to please their every wish"...if that's the case Prince wouldn't have sued a fan for using his ish on Youtube :lol: Sure the fans' interests are kept in mind. But it should be a goal to expand that fanbase as well by appealing to more and more people.

And no one put a gun to our heads to support him. We support him because WE find pleasure in his music. Not because we're doing him any favors. Like "hmm I'll by Dangerous because I think MJ needs new clothes" :lol: NO, we buy it cuz WE like that music PERSONALLY and SELFISHLY. We support him and buy his music because WE enjoy that music. Mj owes us nothing for that. Thats what he does for a living and its a give/take thing. Not a "i owe u, u owe me"...so therefore we have NO say in MJ's motives for making music.

And your view of the younger generation is very narrow because MOST people i encounter respect MJ as an artist...they may think he's weird, but almost everyone has some MJ in their playlist even if they don't wanna admit it. they'll dance to his music if it's on. And u act like only the younger generation makes bad comments about him...LOL EVERY DEMOGRAPHIC does...not just youngens.

And u cater to them because the next generation will be able to pass on that legacy. Recognize that MJ is still relevant. he's still an impact in the industry and is a force to be dealt with. Thats why u appeal to today's generation.

how can my impression of younger peoples attitude towards michael be narrow when that is what i experienced?
yeah all those people make music because they love it.but they make new music & none of them have rehashed & gotten by on their past alone.
we are not doing him any favours by buying his records? thats so naive its funny.because we the fans buy his records we make him (as anyother artist) money.you do realize every time an mj record is sold mj makes money?
mj owes us nothing? yeah,and what do we owe mj?
 
well it's narrow because thats not true for all people in the 'young' generation. Most FANS here are in that 'young' generation. Just because its something u experienced doesn't mean that its true for all...and that makes ur view narrow. In my experience, most guys are pricks....but my VIEW isn't that way cuz i know all guys aren't pricks :lol:

And MJ hasn't gotten by on his past alone...MJ has made a many successful albums since thriller...soooo... So there's that point. LOL

We're not doing any favors. Thats like going to a restaurant you like and buying that chef's food. Then telling the chef "you owe me cuz i bought ur food'. Thats ridiculous, cuz the only reason u bought it is cuz of ur selfish need to fulfill a pleasure...that pleasure being that u LIKE that person's food. LOL Not because ur thinking "man i'm gonna do that chef a BIG favor and buy his food, I'm just gonna be a nice civilian and do that for him" NO. And it's the same with MJ. We don't buy his music to do him any FAVORS. we buy his music cuz we LIKE HIS MUSIC. lol We buy his music for our own selfish reasons.

In that process sure we make him money. But that's as far as it goes. We're not doing him a debt...we're feeding the economy is what we're doing :lol: We go to a restaurant and by a chef's food...and the chef makes money off of that. But that doesn't give us the right to dictate what he should put on his menu or how he should make his food does it? And i'm certainly not going to my favorite restaurant and telling the chef to pay up what he owes me LOL

MJ owes us nothing. ANd we owe MJ NOTHING. That's the point. LOL
 
Again, the topic has nothing to do with whether you like the idea of Thriller 25 or not. Anyone who has 8 copies of any CD has it out of personal choice and nothing more; neither the record company nor Michael Jackson requested such. So let's move on from that.

So prior to Stevie Wonder's last CD, his performances consisted of his prior music. Was he trying to cling to the past? If Michael decided to never release new music, what would be the big deal about him proudly performing and highlighting the long lasting music that he has already done?

When people put his efforts down, why don't they do the same thing with others? I have the same expectations for other legendary artists as Michael. Why should I have any different for him?
 
cuz hes THE KING so ppl expect more from him B) its the price u have to pay when ur the best at sth
 
Classic like i said, MJ is too good for his own good :lol: . Mj's set a trend that he's always on top, and people have a positive expectation that MJ will ALWAYS be on top and when he's not, there u go.

Generally Springsteen and Prince have fell off of thier 'mania' status since the 80s. MJ hasn't. He's fallen off a lot of the thriller mania, but there's still MANIA. It was evident during the trial. And people LOVE THAT. Thats why they put him down when MJ doesn't live up to the mania...and don't do that for Prince. Cuz every album that prince makes doesn't have any mania to it. LOL It's all about the MANIA! MAAANNIAAA!!! :lol:
 
Like others have said, Michael has set trends and broken down barriers. I mean afterall this is someone who has the biggest selling album of all time and is probably the biggest pop star that ever lived so of course the expectations for him are going to be greater when compared with other artists.
 
Last edited:
Michael is held to a different standard, yes. One reason, sadly, is that some are looking for reasons not to like his current work. Why? Because they are unable to look past all the innuendo, drama and cr*p that has surrounded Michael for the last 15 years, so they make up excuses to belittle his work.

Another reason is simply that for so long, he was on a whole different level than everybody else. For years and years, there was Michael, then a whole lot of nothing, then the rest. He set that standard of excellence and created an expectation that every song and album of his would be a mega hit.

Having said this, I do agree with some earlier posters that there have been to many re-re-re-releases of his back catalogue and too little new music in the last decade or so. He needs to get that album out there and his butt on a stage :yes:
 
Michael is held to a different standard, yes. One reason, sadly, is that some are looking for reasons not to like his current work. Why? Because they are unable to look past all the innuendo, drama and cr*p that has surrounded Michael for the last 15 years, so they make up excuses to belittle his work.

Another reason is simply that for so long, he was on a whole different level than everybody else. For years and years, there was Michael, then a whole lot of nothing, then the rest. He set that standard of excellence and created an expectation that every song and album of his would be a mega hit.

Having said this, I do agree with some earlier posters that there have been to many re-re-re-releases of his back catalogue and too little new music in the last decade or so. He needs to get that album out there and his butt on a stage :yes:

I totally agree.
 
Classic like i said, MJ is too good for his own good :lol: . Mj's set a trend that he's always on top, and people have a positive expectation that MJ will ALWAYS be on top and when he's not, there u go.

Generally Springsteen and Prince have fell off of thier 'mania' status since the 80s. MJ hasn't. He's fallen off a lot of the thriller mania, but there's still MANIA. It was evident during the trial. And people LOVE THAT. Thats why they put him down when MJ doesn't live up to the mania...and don't do that for Prince. Cuz every album that prince makes doesn't have any mania to it. LOL It's all about the MANIA! MAAANNIAAA!!! :lol:

again,your so naive it makes me laugh.i don't give a s##t about any type of mania.i was never a fan of an artist because of mania.

this whole chef in the restarunt thing is a metaphor for what exactly? if you dont like the food, you dont eat there.& the chef changes his menu.eh...thats a fact.its called good business practice.
you say most guys are pricks lol? yeah,ive come across plenty of ladies who are pricks:)
 
Why do u keep calling me naive? Cuz u don't agree with me? Here I am trying to have a civilized debate and i already get called ish. LOL Great arguments :rolleyes:

Anyways...I'm not talking about YOU, I'm talking about the general public. THere are no ripples in the industry when Prince puts out an album now a days. It's not a BIG DEAL. For MJ, it IS. that's what I mean by mania. And people outside the fan community, they keep seeing that over and over again. It's 'out of character' for MJ NOT to have that mania cuz it's been going on for decades. Now how is that naive? Explain that to me.

And the restaurants thing is a metaphor for the give/take relationship of the fans towards the artist. We are consumers. We consume for our own benefit. And that's it. If you like the food, u go there and eat it. Nothing else. You're not trying to tell them how to run things and they don't owe you and you don't owe them a damn thing. That's my point in that. So we take MJ's music, we enjoy it. He owes us nothing for that.

And so far people has bought his music. And so there's no need to change just cuz u say so. LOL And if he DOES change it, it's not cuz he owes us that 'service' to change it. He changes because HE feels it's best to do so. Not because the fans are telling him to do so. The female fans have begged him to wear his hair in curls for YEARS, but MJ ain't bringing the curls back...so there u go (thats a joke btw) LOL

And I didn't say most guys are pricks. U missed my point ENTIRELY. I said in my experience there are a lot of guys i know who are pricks but I don't THINK most guys are pricks. That's like u saying that most people u meet say nasty things about MJ, and I'm saying you shouldn't think that ALL young people say nasty things about MJ just based on your narrow experiences.
 
Last edited:
Why do u keep calling me naive? Cuz u don't agree with me? Here I am trying to have a civilized debate and i already get called ish. LOL Great arguments :rolleyes:

Anyways...I'm not talking about YOU, I'm talking about the general public. THere are no ripples in the industry when Prince puts out an album now a days. It's not a BIG DEAL. For MJ, it IS. that's what I mean by mania. And people outside the fan community, they keep seeing that over and over again. It's 'out of character' for MJ NOT to have that mania cuz it's been going on for decades. Now how is that naive? Explain that to me.

And the restaurants thing is a metaphor for the give/take relationship of the fans towards the artist. We are consumers. We consume for our own benefit. And that's it. If you like the food, u go there and eat it. Nothing else. You're not trying to tell them how to run things and they don't owe you and you don't owe them a damn thing. That's my point in that. So we take MJ's music, we enjoy it. He owes us nothing for that.

And so far people has bought his music. And so there's no need to change just cuz u say so. LOL And if he DOES change it, it's not cuz he owes us that 'service' to change it. He changes because HE feels it's best to do so. Not because the fans are telling him to do so. The female fans have begged him to wear his hair in curls for YEARS, but MJ ain't bringing the curls back...so there u go (thats a joke btw) LOL

And I didn't say most guys are pricks. U missed my point ENTIRELY. I said in my experience there are a lot of guys i know who are pricks but I don't THINK most guys are pricks. That's like u saying that most people u meet say nasty things about MJ, and I'm saying you shouldn't think that ALL young people say nasty things about MJ just based on your narrow experiences.

i havent read this post because we seem to be going down a road of arguing with eachother & i like you too much to argue with you.
i was around in the 80's for the real mania & it was fun.i was a kid and it was magic.other then that im not into hype.i like his 6 solo albums (i dont count botdf)I loved his j5 era & a few jacksons songs.he's the best ive seen live & (in my opinion only) your only as good as your work & you should continue making new work if you want to stay relavent.

as for the double standard issue,it might be irrelevant but i feel sony (with mj more so than anyother artist) have ripped fans off big time.
im just happy ive got artists like springsteen that have a huge body of work & continue to make superb records.
with michael (not entirely his fault) the 00's have been his wilderness years music wise.

can someone explain the double standard thing to me because i cant seem to get it.
 
of course i want something new,but of course he is held to a different standard because he changed the course of music twice. I mean when you reach the ultimate music moutain that MJ has reached and done it as he did it then expecations are always gonna be out of this world. yeah I'm buying the thriller 25 but for a collection.

you had to be there back in the day to truly understand thriller 25 years later.
 
Back
Top