BRAVO and their support for Michael

[HIStory]

I just came accross this website which has covers of the German teen bopper magazine, BRAVO all through the decades: http://www.whosdatedwho.com/tpx_2747904/bravo-magazine-germany/1983

I'm not German but from the beginning of the 90s we started to have BRAVO in my country as well. So it brings back memories and I guess that magazine was part of many European teenagers' life growing up.

It's quite interesting that Michael only started to have covers in 1988, but from then on quite frequently. Anyway, I remember they were always very supportive of Michael, even when other papers and magazines turned against him because of the allegations. Here is their 1993 December cover:

Yeah, I know Michael had a huge German and European fan base, so it's maybe not so surprising that they were supportive, but it's still nice, because many magazines and papers chose the other way. So I pretty much like BRAVO for that. As far as I remember they always stood by Michael.

 

[lt_v92]

It's quite interesting that Michael only started to have covers in 1988, but from then on quite frequently.

That's the bit I find unsettling. The magazine has been published since 1956; two years before Michael was born. Yet, they never had him on the cover when he was HUGE in The Jackson 5, or when he released "Off the Wall", or "Thriller". They only put him on the cover when his skin had lost its pigmentation. They have never had a picture of him on the cover with dark skin. In fact, looking back, NO other ethnic person has been featured on their cover, unless they have light skin. Very worrying.

 

[HIStory]

That's the bit I find unsettling. The magazine has been published since 1956; two years before Michael was born. Yet, they never had him on the cover when he was HUGE in The Jackson 5, or when he released "Off the Wall", or "Thriller". They only put him on the cover when his skin had lost its pigmentation. They have never had a picture of him on the cover with dark skin. In fact, looking back, NO other ethnic person has been featured on their cover, unless they have light skin. Very worrying.

Well, they had a Prince cover once.

Also, it's Europe, not the US, so I don't necessarily see a racist undertone in not featuring black people on the cover. Ie. I don't see it as deliberate. Maybe in a more subconscious way. Like it was a teen bopper magazine with a white (German/European) audience, so the target audience might have been generally more attracted to white performers.

We can call it racist, but then are US magazines targeted at black teens racist too? I mean magazines, such as Black Beat, which featured mainly black artists because its target audience were black teens:

I think Michael's popularity really boomed during the Bad era in Europe. Of course, Thriller was Thriller everywhere, but Bad sold more in the UK. And I think in Germany Dangerous was his biggest selling album.

Maybe on a subconscious level that had something to do with his lightening skin as well, but I think it mainly had to do with the Bad and Dangerous World Tours. Remember, the Victory Tour was only on American soil.

 

[PaceMioDolceCuore]

Actually, I wrote Michael a letter of support in 1993- through BRAVO.

When the news of those allegations broke, this magazine figured to do something POSITIVE for Michael. How many news outlets do you personally know of that publicly not only supported Michael in that year= but also RALLIED for the fans to express support??? Not that many, trust me on that.

The cover there you see posted is the "We love Michael" campaign.

Fans who wanted to show Michael support could send their letter to the editors with the promise that the journal would forward the mail to Michael. Boy, did they get mail!
In fact, I bought my very first English dictionary just for that purpose. I still have it.

(I'm actually a part time translator and interpreter today...I never forgot the incredible difficulty I had as a 13 year old to write a letter in English; "to become" was tricky verb for me, I literally remember that as if it was yesterday. Bravo and this campaign was actually a major motivation for me to be a part of the translator teams here on MJJC to cover the trial testimony that has been translated into many languages)


This is the cover depicting some of the mail that had arrived. (there was a bigger article depicting the mountains of mail- I actually saw my letter, grey envelope from recycled paper, I somehow remember that)

And yes, Michael did receive the mountains of letters of support. Of course he could have read only a few of them- but all that matters to me is that he saw, knew and FELT some support. Support that didn't come from the fans alone- but that an actual media outlet wanted to HELP, not destroy. Perhaps you can see his willingness now to perform on a German TV show. I know, I know, it didn't take his pain away etc- but at least some of us can live knowing that some people did show Michael support, not everyone hated his guts.

Ahem, here's a 1974 cover from someone else. Before accusing a publication of undertones of racism, it helps to check that claim out a little. (and believe me, I am all in support of Joe Vogel's last article...)
Bravo usually (I'm sure there are exceptions) featured those whose music was the Nr. 1 at the time- and that could be literally anyone from MJ, to the acts mentioned, to Nirvana etc.
Actually, coming to think of it, black musicians were highly represented in the Bravo that I remember.

And yes, here's that 1984 Prince Cover. Do I have to subject these artists now to an microscope to see if they only landed on that cover because they were 'light enough'??? Seriously, that alone sounds like a nasty projection of someone else's issue.

I would recommend checking out the following acts of the 90ies, google will help.

-Dr. Alban
-Culture Beat
-No Limit
-Janet Jackson (she was HUGE in the early 90ies in Germany...)

All these acts featured lead singers that were black etc.

Are these pictures 'dark' enough? (btw, I think it's problematic to go either way, as I have noticed that especially in the US aforementioned editors loved to pick Thriller time pics as if MJ didn't exist anymore post Bad- either way you can't please MJ fans) Some of these are not just covers- they are the virtual centerfolds!
Every issue came with posters to take out.

And I think Michael started to have plenty of covers with the rise of being a solo artist- and especially in German "Bad" hit the musical nerves of the time.
An international audience is not the same as the US. Michael had a HUGE following in Germany from the late 80ies on. (of course, earlier too- but I very much remember the absolute hype and craziness and his popularity around "Dangerous"- which is another reason why I usually look at US editors and critics like a deer in headlights because of this "he was past his prime after OTW and Thriller" BS.
Europe was going absolutely bananas over MJ for decades (so did Asia if I'm not mistaken) and around the time of Bad, Dangerous and HIStory he was at the absolute height of popularity in Europe- despite what the media did to him)

I think that the CD and technology such as home VCRs, walkmen that were half the size of a US model etc played a huge role in this popularity. The political landscape had changed vastly and people were finally able to purchase all his music. I've been there in those years, I read Bravo in the early 90ies.

And yes, as Respect mentioned before- Bravo is the ultimate mainstream music teeny bopper magazine. It is literally dealing with top 40 stuff of the moment and nothing else. (aside from the painfully descriptive sex advice, :hysterical::hysterical:, which is the reason why all these covers are cut off- something you'd never find in any youth magazine in the US)

To be honest, I don't recall the fondness for either OTW or Thriller in Germany. Nor the Jackson 5. I'm sure I can't speak in general terms for all- but I didn't even know he was part of the Jackson 5, I was just a teenager and to me Michael Jackson had always been a solo artist. I also lived under the total rock, so to speak. Thriller actually happened to be the first LP that I bought in 1992- because CDs were still unaffordable (20 Dollar price range per album back then. There was one store in a 15 mile radius that was selling CDs- and there was only one of each for a while) to me as a 12 and 13 year old. So I purchased tapes and LPs.

Until the Oprah interview I barely had heard any Jackson 5 song, to be honest. Honestly, the typical child stars such as Shirley Temple etc might be popular with an older crowd, but they are not as revered in other non- English speaking countries. I think the last true child star in Germany was "Heintje", a Dutch kid born in 1955. And I think kids were not exactly working strip clubs in Germany post WWII, either. Michael is the last generation of kids born in the West that were unprotected child laborers.
Some countries are simply not very fond of child performers- especially not in the wake of several wars when people were just happy to live in a heated apartment with indoor toilet and when they finally had a 5 day work week to even spent with their families. The late 60ies and early 70ies were spent with singer/songwriters for many people. Protest songs and political engagement. Both Germanies had their own musical movements in addition to stuff from overseas, especially from the mid 70ies on.

I remember Germany had one TV show called "Kindquatsch mit Michael" ("Children's nonsense with Michael"- "Michael" was the host, conincidentally). It ran for a while, but a lot of people felt that it ridiculed children and took advantage of them. (plus, there were copyright issues)- so it was taken off the air.
Shows that contain children in a certain context are very controversial- stuff like the American "Toddlers and Tiaras" etc. Germans were okay with stuff like "Lassie" and only in the 90ies did "Kevin Home Alone" have success- as it did everywhere.

You also have to take into consideration that the approach to children had undergone DRASTIC changes, pedagogically, in schools, kindergartens etc- partially as a counter result of the sick, sick views on childhood under Hitler etc. Where in the US corporal punishment in schools was not out of the world- it sure was in Germany. Stuff like that reflects in the number of 'trained' child superstars. Sports were the exception.
Music education to a degree as well, but no child would be doing 3 hours of home schooling and the rest of the time spent in a recording studio.

I even noticed that the vast number of child stars/young folks all seem to come from the North American side of things. Asia being another interesting example.

On top of that you have to understand that Germany had literally been divided until the wall came down. It's a relatively small country, but very densely populated. You couldn't officially buy anything 'Western' in most stores. That applied to the white Beatles as well. Granted, East Germans were only 16 million... but that's still 16 million customers- and trust me, those customers bought anything in sight for a long time, as soon as they didn't have to buy that stuff underhanded somewhere.

Btw, I am from East Germany and only half German. Do you know what my first exposure was anything to American?
Angela Davis, Michael Jackson, Janet Jackson and literature such as Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn and Uncle Tom's Cabin.
Right after that came Charlie Chaplin and the first Hollywood production that I ever saw was E.T.

I know the Jackson 5 had worldwide success- but aside from Michael only Janet had a lasting memory. Take into consideration that especially from the 50ies on Europe had their very own mainstream acts as well. You will find more American acts in Europe, than European Acts in the US.
So, before accusing anyone of pronounced racism it helps to check out the realities of the day. You can encounter racism anytime- but especially in Germany interracial marriage became quite normal. Those GIs and the Fraeuleins could not resist one another, no matter how 'forbidden' that was at first. There were some very dark chapters in those times as well- but they were overcome and the presence of the American armed forces became a constant feature, especially in Southern Germany.
There are also countless forums that deal with binational and interracial marriage- practically all expats that I know of are in such relationship.

I think Michael's popularity really boomed during the Bad era in Europe. Of course, Thriller was Thriller everywhere, but Bad sold more in the UK. And I think in Germany Dangerous was his biggest selling album.

Maybe on a subconscious level that had something to do with his lightening skin as well, but I think it mainly had to do with the Bad and Dangerous World Tours. Remember, the Victory Tour was only on American soil.

Correct, Michael's extreme success (and I mean EXTREME, seriously, he was on every channel etc) started with Bad. Dangerous was absolute madness in stores.

See, the thing is that Michael fans are faced with issues. If he sees success from Bad on somebody is going to say that has to do with his skin becoming lighter. And in the US people are being accused of unkosher motives if they focus on pictures that depict him with a darker complection. What do you make of either one?

I was 12 and didn't even NOTICE his skin changes- I seriously had the mentality of a child who just didn't care- yes, that exists. I remember that because the only reason I even started thinking about that was because 2 people people started making stupid comments to me how I don't think it's weird that he 'was black' and isn't anymore?
I didn't even think about it, to me he was just "Michael"- I didn't define him as "black artist", the same way I didn't define Chopin as "white artist".
I actually do not recall anyone else having these armchair diagnosis that seems to be so popular in the US: Does MJ 'hate his blackness'. That was largely a US obsession. I don't recall as much hubbubb the way Pearl Jr. for example stood out. This seems to be something rooted in US history with some disturbing effects.

http://pearljr.livejournal.com/330.html

And Janet Jackson actually was hugely popular, so I'm not sure that argument applies. Think of Tina Turner- hugely popular at some point as well. They were female and black- and hugely popular. Turner drew an older crowd though, no so much teenagers. The teeny markets are very different in different countries.

And I actually hate that I lost my 'innocent' approach to Michael. He was just Michael to me and I loved him to pieces. Always. End of story. When he pulled his cosmic star traveler/astronaut number at the end of 'Man In The Mirror' in Dangerous, I felt like I came 'home', which is funny- since that dream was a competition between political systems- and yet shared by all of mankind.

Now I am consistently asking myself if it's okay that I love certain pictures- which seriously, is stupid. Nowhere else do people have to justify themselves for loving Michael. Did they 'always' love him, or only when he became whiter? It's absurd, really. Some of us simply had no access to Off The Wall and Thriller- not to mention anything before that.
My library also featured Seal and Terence Trent D'Arby, so I'm fairly certain that Michael's success from Bad on had to do largely with changes in the way music could be distributed.
In the past you had to have a huge piece of equipment- record players. The one my family had was so heavy- you could barely lift that thing.
Even tapes where still expensive- and a lot people didn't have two tape players at home at first. That changed and now people were able to record straight from the radio, copy tapes etc.

MJ tapes were hugely popular in East Germany- and illegal, btw. We had walkmen, too- but you couldn't just walk into a store and buy an MJ tape. It didn't work that way. Michael literally took off in certain countries as soon as people were able to purchase the necessary technology at a price they could afford. I remember the prices for a simple VCR in 1992- you wouldn't believe what stuff like that once cost.
Germany was also not the US when you compare TV channels etc- East Germany had 2 (!!!) channels and West Germany didn't look a whole lot better. "Private" TV US style with it's different networks was in it's infancy in the 80ies.
People need to see things as a whole, the world was a different place back then.
When my family was able to purchase a CD player and a VCR- believe me, THAT was when even my parents were suddenly buying music they simply couldn't listen to before. And my dad loved the Beatles for example- but unless you knew the right people, you couldn't just buy them, either.


I'm remembering one cover of Michael with a picture around 1988/1989 and in the lower right hand corner it featured a lengthy article with the headline of "Xenophobia/Hatred toward foreigners".
I can't speak for any editor of the past, where humans are- you will encounter stupidity. But: This publication even tackled the issue of hatred. Because yes, it was an issue. Racism and xenophobia exist anywhere.
Ask some if he wants to be stationed in Alabama or the South of Germany, lol, most service members know pretty well why they extend and extend their contracts. (thing of the past largely at this point)



Sorry that this became a "too long, didn't read", but there's no way to shorten down decades of cultural realities in 2 (!!) countries into a 5 sentence paragraph.

 

[PaceMioDolceCuore]

Btw, coincidentally I found this today.

'One of Michael's favorite forms of amusement is to get two people into a heated discussion about politics, race or whatever then sit back and let them give each other headaches'

 

[HIStory]

My God, such wonderful posts, Pace,MioDolceCuore!

And so much to discuss too. Where should I start?

My perspective is that of a kid who was born in Hungary in the late 70s, so I spent the first ten years of my life behind the "iron curtain". When it came down that coincided with me becoming a teenager. And this was the time when we first got to see Western magazines and TV channels - including MTV.

My first encounter with Michael Jackson was when the son of a friend of my father's left a "Bad" casette tape in my father's car. And my father put it into the player and I loved it immediately. It was the first album ever I liked from start to finish. I listened to music on the radio before, rock and all, but this was finally MY type of music! Something of MY choice, not my parents'! And I wanted to have it, so my father made a copy for me. That's how it started. And then we already started to have "teen bopper" magazines dealing with Western music (a couple of years later came the Hungarian version of BRAVO as well). And there came MTV of course. And music videos! They amazed me and most of all of course it were Michael's videos which amazed me. A video like "Bad" was like a miracle to me. The music, the dance, everything. Not to mention "Smooth Criminal" and all the rest.

I can confirm what you said: for most people in Europe Michael's race and skin color simply wasn't an issue. Certainly not to the extent it was (and still is) in the US. It certainly wasn't an issue for me and when I first learnt that he had darker skin earlier, I just shrugged: so what? And frankly, I think that was the reaction of many European teenagers. We simply didn't get what was the big deal about his changing color. We truly were unconditioned in this matter. Unlike the US audience, I think.

That's why I said in my earlier post that while in the US it does have a racist undertone if a magazine doesn't put black artists on its cover, it's certainly a lot different in Europe and I don't believe for a moment, that anybody at BRAVO was a racist or that the fact Michael started to frequent on BRAVO's covers at the end of the 80s has anything to do with skin color. It has to do with the fact, that Michael's popularity boomed at that time in Europe and IMO that in turn has to do with the Bad World Tour, which was HUGE in Europe! And it also has to do with the European market booming with the coming down of the "iron curtain". And with what you said about how music was distributed. So lots of other factors, rather than skin color.

I agree that I don't remember Thriller being that huge here and certainly not Off The Wall. Though, like I said, I became a teenager at the end of the 80s and before that there was the iron curtain, so I cannot tell what was the Thriller era like in Western European countries. Though I can see the record sales telling that in the UK Michael's best selling album was "Bad" and in Germany "Dangerous", so yeah, it seems to me unlike in the US, in Europe it wasn't necessarily Thriller that was the peak of his popularity. I'm too angered by the fact that US critics and media often seem to forget that there's a whole world outside of the US and when they say that Michael's career started with Off The Wall and finished with Thriller that's quite simply just ignoring the rest of the World!

I also think besides the factors discussed above there is a difference in taste between the US and Europe. When I became a fan of Michael's during the Bad era, of course I found out about his previous albums and I bought them (you could only do that on the black market at the time!) but I never listened to Off The Wall that much. It took me a long time to finally get it. (And probably if that had been the first album I heard from him that would not have made me a fan.) Thriller was easier to get, but Bad was by far my favourite. And then Dangerous when it came out and until this day I think Dangerous is his best album, not Thriller. European taste is less rooted in R&B, more in pop and rock and I think that's why Bad and Dangerous are perceived so much differently here. In the US, it seemed to me, people wanted Michael to remain more R&B, while in Europe his experiments in diverse styles were more appreciated.

And while we are talking about race issues: I think Michael's lightening color was much more of a factor in the US than anywhere else. Like I said, in Europe people mostly just didn't care. But I really think it scared many people in the US to see that a black man can "turn white" and thus questioning our "clear"(??) categorization of races and what it means to be black or white. I read Willa Stillwater's book, "M Poetica" and I agree with her that Michael blurred certain boundaries regarding race and gender. People (especially in the rather religiously conservative US) like to think in "clear" categories: black, white, male, female - and what each person in either category is supposed to be like. Michael, of course, never identified himself anything else than a black male, but he kind of re-defined the meaning of these "clear" categories. On the cover of a "Bad" album he appeared as a white skinned black man with feminine features. Yet, sexy as hell for women! I remember the first time I saw that cover (the same day I first listened to the Bad album), I found it very cool that he's so mysterious and different. I found it attractive too. So much that as a teenage girl he was my first (and ever-lasting) crush. But I can imagine that people in the USA were pretty much confused and scared about it, because the USA has a history in black slavery and racism against black people (and don't get me wrong, there is racism everywhere in the world, only when we talk about racism against black people, it's more of an issue in the US. Here in Europe racism takes form more in anti-semitism, or in racism against gypsies or immigrants). And I think that he was so bold to challange these social constructs contributed to the drop of his popularity in the US after Thriller. The US was still not quite ready (and probably sill isn't) to take any challange for such boundaries lightly. In Europe and the rest of the World people simply weren't bothered by that, so Michael remained massively popular.

Back to the teen bopper market in Europe: I actually remember European boy bands in the 90s consisting of both black and white guys. Such as this German band, called "Bed and Breakfast":

According to Wikipedia: "Bed & Breakfast was a German boy band from Hamburg. They were founded in 1995 and became one of Germany's first and, at the time, most successful boy bands."

Don't look them up on YouTube, their music wasn't very good. LOL. But the point is that while in the US we only had all-white boybands, such as NKOTB, Backstreet Boys and N'Sync or or all-black R&B bands targeted at a different market, in Germany there were actually mixed boybands marketed to mainly white teenage girls to drool over. (And I remember on the Glenda tapes, Michael and Glenda once talk about how much German women like black guys. LOL.) So no, I don't think racism was as much of an issue in the European market as in the US market.

 

[HIStory]

(aside from the painfully descriptive sex advice, :hysterical::hysterical:, which is the reason why all these covers are cut off- something you'd never find in any youth magazine in the US)

Funny that you mentioned this, because last night after I started this thread I went to check what Wikipedia writes about BRAVO ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bravo_(magazine) ). And in the "Talk" section there is some upset American complaining about how BRAVO contains "child pornography" because it apparently had some nude or semi-nude pics of 16-18 year old individuals.

Then someone went on to explain to this person that it's just a cultural difference. In Germany (and in Europe in general) people aren't so touchy and phobiac about nudity in the media as in the US. I especially liked this part of the reply:

I know this argument has been made over and over again, but it seems odd to read complaints like this from fellow Americans who live in a country that allows mainstream distribution of ultra-violent genres of video entertainment, dubbed by enthusiasts as "splatter films" and "torture porn" but considers photos like Bravo runs to be pornographic or somehow contributing to the delinquency of minors.

When I was a kid and someone brought a BRAVO to class, the first page we turned to was always the "sex advice" page. And someone read it out loud and the whole class had a good laugh. It was really innocent fun and I don't feel we have been morally corrupted by BRAVO or that we were looking at "porn", let alone "child porn". That's simply ridiculous.

 

[HIStory]

And one more thing. BRAVO didn't only support Michael when it was cool to support him. They supported him in 1993. And they also supported him after the trial and before he died. Here is an issue from 2008. All the while US magazines were calling him a "freak" and a washed-up "has been" and worse...

 

[soulmum]

Kudos to Bravo.

 

[CherubimII]

Thanks for sharing these wonderful cover pictures of Michael Jackson.

 

[Sunwalker7]

Thanks for making this thread, it's wonderful to see at least someone supported Michael when many others abandoned him. It's easy to support and love someone when everyone else does too, but much harder when it's cool to ridicule and disrespect them. I'm glad Bravo did the right thing and didn't join in ridiculing Michael.

 

[maviefly]

Alex Gernandt, BRAVO deputy chief editor, is still a big fan of Michael


Michael and Alex Gernandt

 

[Nadia1981]

I live in Belgium and I used to get the German version of Bravo and something called Popart, something like that lol. I loved it, even though I didn't understand one word written in it lol. I got it for the posters, stickers and pics.

To add to the posts above, I can relate to them. Living in Belgium, I never heard of the Jackson(s)(5), they weren't that huge over here. In the 50's, 60's and 70's we had our own big artists and with the exception of a few (Rolling Stones, Mud, Tina Turner) we didn't care that much about music coming from another country nor did we really have the means to hear about them.

I do remember seeing the short movie Thriller on tv when I was a kid, but it must have been a few years after it came out already. Over here, Dangerous was HUGE. The hype around that was out of this world. I mean, that was our Thriller. Bad did great too, but Thriller and Off the Wall? I didn't even know about those until I was older. So to me, Michael had always been a solo artist so I have a hard time when people make a big deal out of his Jackson 5 career lol.
It probably goes hand in hand with the launching of MTV Europe in 1987. I remember using my VCR to tape the songs I liked haha. MTV was at his peek in the early 90's in Belgium, and that's when Dangerous came out.

It probably is partly cultural and partly a linguistic issue too. We didn't have that many channels. Let alone any foreign channels, and the ones we did have were certainly not from the US (still aren't by the way), but rather from a neighbouring country. And in some ways, things haven't changed. For instance, my country doesn't have paparazzi. So we never heard about gossip that much, we still don't. And I really can't remember there to be that much bad press about Michael,his appearance or the charges.

When the world opened his doors to me through the internet mainly, that's when I read most of the negative press out there. Now I have friends all over the world and sometimes it surprises me how big an artist is in the States, while I never heard of them lol. That goes for the older stars as for the newer ones.
And don't get me wrong, I love my friends who live in the States, but it keeps amazing me how they just assume things are the same way over here lol. But I think that has to do with geography too. It's like, when I drive for 4 hours, I have crossed 5 countries, 5 different languages and before the Euro, also 5 different currency lol. We brought up with the knowledge that another country meant another culture and another approach on things. I think the US is more isolated that way.

 

[HIStory]

Thanks, Nadia. I really love the posts in this thread, because it showcases how US-centric the music media can be when they claim MJ was not that successful after Thriller. I often see that when they talk about record sales (of any artist) they only cite US sales and ignore the rest. Dangerous was absolutely massive in Europe!

Europe is a very different world than the US. Like Nadia said, there are artists who were HUGE in the US but didn't really make it in Europe. For example, I remember the band "Hootie and the Blowfish" who were HUGE in the US, but no one really cared about them here in Europe. Or Garth Brooks is one of the biggest selling acts in the US, but no one is interested in him in Europe. And the same can be said of many other country artists. There were artists like Tevin Campbell who were also big in the US for a while, but when we had the New York marathon broadcast here a couple of years ago and Tevin sang the anthem the commentator was like: "I have no idea who this guy is."

I know only because I was a music fanatic and I was interested in everything and I always watched the American charts too on MTV, but I was a rare exception. Most people here didn't care about those artists. Of course, the same is true vica versa. Europe had artists who were huge here, but never really could make it in the US. For example, I remember Take That tried real hard. They achieved some moderate success, but nothing big. But here in Europe they were HUGE back in the 90s. And I don't think they were worse than any American boyband. (Actually I think they were a LOT better than NKOTB and arguably better than BSB.)

Nadia, I also agree about the press. Discounting the British press, which is as bad or worse as the American, I think the continental press tends to be more respectful. Not always, and you can name exceptions, of course and especially because nowadays they too tend to get their "information" from the English speaking press when it comes to celebrities. But I think people in general have less ill-will. I mean when I go to an English or American website and read about a celebrity I will see dozens of really hateful comments. Just check out Yahoo News or CNN, the comment sections... It's not necessarily so in my country. Again, there are examples of that, of course, but, for example, it's very rare that people will call Michael a pedophile under an article about him in my country. It sometimes happens but not nearly as often as in the US or England. Actually I think most people here don't believe the allegations. Those who do, out of ignorance only and when they are shown the facts they are willing to change their minds. There is no such a deep rooted hatred against Michael as I often experience on English speaking websites.

 

[Nadia1981]

I know exactly what you mean Respect77. I know of most US artists because ... well basically i'm a musicfreak lol. I love everything there is about music. And just like you, I kept an eye on the US charts. I really was into R&B back then, way before it became a popular genre, so I had to look for the latest music myself because those songs were not a part of our charts lol. But the people around me, they really didn't care that much. I'm also a big fan of US sitcoms and talkshows, so that's how I get a lot of my information about (new) artists, books, movies, ... too. Which always results in me being really really impatient, wondering why a certain sitcom, album or movie hasn't been released over here yet haha.

I'm watching the Grammy's now and I keep hearing LL Cool J saying "all the people looking from ALL around the world". It made me laugh because I had to go through every single channel to see if maybe 1 of them was showing it. And I found one at last, a German channel lol.

Oh my, Take That. Those boys were something else haha. They were not only huge, they were MASSIVE!!! It was like the Beatles all over again. However the difference between the European attitude and that of the US is that Europeans don't assume that an artist who is huge over here, is also huge over in the States. But that's not always the other way around though.

I rarely read negative comments, if any at all, underneath an article over here. And you know, I think maybe that's why most Europeans didn't believe the allegations. Because we didn't go through the 'brainwashing' by the media. We don't have that kind of media, that kind of reporting doesn't make the evening news for example. Mostly, the news sticks to facts and the do's and don'ts of a celebrity are not part of that.
Over here, celebrities don't need bodyguards, no one is gonna bother them when they go out. Maybe one or two will ask for a pic or autograph but they are not being hassled, followed or stalked.
Remembering the whole drama about the final scene of the Black and White video, no one over here was offended or cared about that. It didn't make the news and the only way I knew there was drama about it, is because it was mentioned on MTV.

I really think, being so close to other nationalities, has kept (continental) Europe more open minded. We've learned to adapt to different cultures because we had too. You are only an hour away from the next country, you can't hold on to your every belief/opinion/religion/language. That would make travelling unbearable lol.

 

[HIStory]

I rarely read negative comments, if any at all, underneath an article over here. And you know, I think maybe that's why most Europeans didn't believe the allegations. Because we didn't go through the 'brainwashing' by the media. We don't have that kind of media, that kind of reporting doesn't make the evening news for example. Mostly, the news sticks to facts and the do's and don'ts of a celebrity are not part of that.

Exactly. In the US trials are made out to be entertainment with the likes of Court TV and the media hype around them. That's not healthy, IMO. You don't have that in Europe. It can sawy justice. For example, when an overzealous DA brings charges against someone for publicity, no matter how ridiculous his case is. (*ehm*Tom Sneddon*ehm*) Or when the media convicts someone in the "court of public opinion" by not presenting all the facts of a case. That's what happened to Michael. For ratings. For sensationalism.

Over here, celebrities don't need bodyguards, no one is gonna bother them when they go out. Maybe one or two will ask for a pic or autograph but they are not being hassled, followed or stalked.
Remembering the whole drama about the final scene of the Black and White video, no one over here was offended or cared about that. It didn't make the news and the only way I knew there was drama about it, is because it was mentioned on MTV.

European laws are better at protecting people's privacy too. The so called "freedom of press" is not valued over ANYTHING else (even over people's right to a privacy) like in the US. For example, Michael had to make his kids wear masks in the US. But in Europe, I remember once Formula One star Michael Schumacher's kids were photographed by a paparazzi and the photos ended up in a paper. He sued the hell out of them because in Europe there are actually laws which protect the privacy of people and "freedom of press" is not considered a holy cow above everything else! No one ever tried to publish pics of his kids again! I realize that MJ is a lot bigger star globally than Schumi, but still I think these laws in Europe are just healthier.

 

[Nadia1981]

Exactly Respect77, happened here a few times too. Like I said before, we don't have a tabloid press like the US and the UK but we do have this 1 magazine that publishes some gossip. It's not too bad though and they rarely cross a line because as you said, they get sued. It's just not worth it to cross the line because there isn't a multi-billion industry behind paparazzi pics and gossip stories.

I have to admit, my grandfather used to have that magazine because of it's tv guide that was printed in really big letters lol, and I've read the magazine too. But whenever I read some tabloid trash, I have this 'whatever' feeling. I'm not really interested in it and I don't believe it either. And I think most Europeans have that 'whatever' attitude when it comes to gossip.

It's unimaginable to read a Belgian article that is filled with nasty trash talk like for instance the NY Post article about MJ by Andrea Peyzer a few years back. I wrote a letter to the NY Post to express my feelings about it and I mentioned the Freedom of Speech too. In fact, my exact words were: "I am fully aware that Ms. Peyser will get behind that precious ‘Freedom of Speech’ act the US holds so dearly. Honestly, you all can have that if it means one can blatantly ridicule a person, his children, his family and his fans."

I've always read such articles with so much disbelief and disgust because that kind of 'reporting' is just not done over here. Reporters and editors always make sure to keep their dignity and try to stay respectful to the celebrity and their closed ones.

People online sometimes ask me how I could be a Michael Jackson fan, knowing about the allegations (because obviously where there is smoke, there is fire) and all the mystery around MJ's life. I always answer that I'm not 'a fan despite the allegations and mystery'. The reason I'm a fan is exactly because I do my research and when you do that you find that Michael Jackson is an amazing human being and that there wasn't that much 'mystery' to begin with.

 

[HIStory]

In the US there are laws actually fueling unethical behaviour by the media, in my opinion. For example the so called "shield law" which says that journalists don't have to reveal their sources, not even in court! This in practice means that a journalist can write any lie or slander about anybody, cite "unnamed sources" (an old trick) and if someone would sue him he can just invoke the shield law and he cannot be forced to name his sources (which might as well as be non-existent). This is why it's so hard to win a lawsuit against a journalist in the US and they know it. This is why Michael, more often than not, was helpless against the lies. In fact, Martin Bashir invoked the shield law at the trial in 2005!

Freedom of press is generally a good thing, though it probably only exists in principle. When whole media empires work in favour of only some interests it's questionable whether that can be called a free press. And freedom of press is also something that is easily abused. I think the US took freedom of press to the extreme where it's already not necessarily positive, it hurts people, it even ruins lives. I know, for example, that neo-nazi publications from my country hosted their websites on US servers, because they were allowed to do that there in the name of freedom of press, but they weren't allowed here.

 

[Dr.Feelgood]

In fact, looking back, NO other ethnic person has been featured on their cover, unless they have light skin. Very worrying.

= can't deny - but when you look at todays magazines (Bravo or whatever) you will find out that that has not changed really.

As I remember in Germany Michael was not too popular during Thriller and Bad (don't get me wrong he was popular but you seldomly saw him on tv or anywhere) and at first Bravo had problems to reach him. After Alex Gernandt had connected him it was easy for them to report about Michael and they had every reason to be proud.

MJ had his first NO 1 with the Earth Song after that huge tv-appearance in "Wetten dass..?".

What I will never ever understand is that they never had stories about Janet in the Bravo, also never was she Bravo-Cover-Girl

 

[PaceMioDolceCuore]

...

As I remember in Germany Michael was not too popular during Thriller and Bad.

"Thriller" was not what it was in the US.
Quote on the contrary Michael was quite the name. In fact so much that an EAST GERMAN figure skater went to the Winter Games in Calgary (1988...) and performed an encore to "Bad".
A tiny country of 16 million- and this girl puts on her jacket...



And Michael started to have countless covers on Bravo (West German publication) from Bad on- 5 in 1988 alone. And those are just those that I found.

That makes 5 (!!!!!) Michael cover stories in 1988 alone.

Btw, Michael was so huge from Bad on that government officials in East Germany feared that his concert in Berlin might lead to uproar among the youth- remember how Michael had considered pointing speakers toward East Germany... dude even received 'coverage' by the 'secret service' of East Germany known as "STASI". That is how gigantic a symbol he already was from Bad on.

1989 cover:

Here's an interesting cover that deals with hatred toward foreigners and xenophobia- with Michael on the cover btw. Reason being a beating that was motivated by such hatred- and this publication dealt with this issue.

Janet Jackson had PLENTY of centerfold posters in Bravo actually, I remember them because I hung of a few of them in my room... There was Janet Jackson coverage, I remember it- down to song translations. (they had one section dedication to translating 2 songs into German each week to help people understand song lyrics)

And again, the claim that only blonde and blue eyed Central Europeans or US Americans have been featured as cover story is simply untrue as I have already posted even other covers from the 70(ies!)

Harry Belafonte cover story in 1957:

Mike Todd, born Avrom Hirsch Goldbogen in Minneapolis, Minnesota, to Chaim Goldbogen (an Orthodox rabbi) and Sophia Hellerman, both Polish Jewish immigrants. (3rd husband of Elizabeth Taylor)
Perhaps some can see the significance of this cover in 1957.

Omar Sharif cover in the 60ies. (Egypt born)

Bruce Lee covers in the 70ies.

Tina Turner cover.

Btw, remember this guy?

Yes, as you can see, the editors are raging racists. *sarcasm*

They referred to Lopez as "Goddess". And wait, on the same cover you see Janet Jackson and ... the Wu Tang Clan. Lopez had 4 or 5 cover stories.

Acts such as Usher, Beyonce and Rihanna all had their own covers.

I am sure there are COUNTLESS publications that are guilty of racism, but seriously, stop accusing the one magazine that had COUNTLESS covers on Michael alone and that supported him through decades when others where slinging mud. Seriously, it's ridiculous.

I understand that Michael's fans have a reason to suspect a ton of racism in the way the majority of media has treated Michael- but that doesn't make it okay to label others as racist when that is not true. To keep insisting this particular publication has tendencies of racism is simply very far from the true as I have read it for years back in the day when plenty of black artists have received coverage in this magazine.

Overall I am not willing to forget or ignore the awful coverage that Michael received as well- German media for example is extremely guilty of referring to Michael as "Ja**o* and I believe that is simply rooted in something you could describe as "lost in translation" and because the younger generation has had absolutely no reason at to internalize a number of things. A lot of fans actually were not able to understand every interview of his in the original language- especially in the 90ies- and depended on a translation. For example, the Barbara Walters interview barely aired the way the Oprah interview aired for example- Oprah was aired with immediate overdubbed translation to help the audience. A lot of people outside of the anglo-American linguistic reach have absolutely no idea what hides behind that moniker- you'll even find it in fan forums because sometimes 'lost in translation' people have absolutely no idea about the history of certain terminology.

People need to take into account that 5th graders in other countries taking English lessons are not exactly being told that the term "boy" for example comes LOADED with differing meaning in US history. People need to know the how and when of dark chapters in human history- but they are not obligated to internalize linguistic racism of others as their own and walk on egg shells.

 

[HIStory]

= can't deny - but when you look at todays magazines (Bravo or whatever) you will find out that that has not changed really.

As I remember in Germany Michael was not too popular during Thriller and Bad (don't get me wrong he was popular but you seldomly saw him on tv or anywhere) and at first Bravo had problems to reach him. After Alex Gernandt had connected him it was easy for them to report about Michael and they had every reason to be proud.

MJ had his first NO 1 with the Earth Song after that huge tv-appearance in "Wetten dass..?".

What I will never ever understand is that they never had stories about Janet in the Bravo, also never was she Bravo-Cover-Girl

Yes, Janet was covered in BRAVO too, but she was not nearly as huge in Europe as in the US. That has nothing to do with racism, it's just that her music didn't appeal to European taste as much as to US taste. Here she was mainly just "Michael Jackson's little sister".

I think during the Bad era Michael was already VERY popular in Europe and Germany, as Pace,MioDolceCuore showed with the BRAVO covers. Both Bad and Dangerous sold more in Germany than Thriller and HIStory sold as many as Thriller. And Thriller and HIStory (which weren't Michael's best selling albums in Germany) sold as many as the Bodyguard album by Whtiney (which is the fourth best selling album of all times in the world) or Madonna's Ray of Light, which is Madonna's best selling album ever in Germany. This shows that Michael was massively popular in Germany post-Thriller - and his peak was Bad-Dangerous, not Thriller (and even HIStory sold as many as Thriller or The Bodyguard or Ray of Light).

As for singles: Michael was never really a singles artist in any country, to be honest. He was always an albums artist. I myself rarely bought singles from him, even as a massive fan, because frankly I usually don't care for remixes and I already have the original on the album. But having said that, Earth Song was HUGE in Europe. It was Christmas Nr 1 in the UK as well and I think it fended off the Beatles from the Nr 1 spot. I don't have exact data about it but I think it's probably his most successful single ever in Europe. And that's just another blow to the American myth that Michael was finished after Thriller and didn't do anything significant after that.