Message from The Estate on the Tabloids

sophiemj

Guests
We know many fans have been upset by recent tabloid stories in the UK about Michael. In his song “Tabloid Junkie” Michael Jackson sings: Just because you read it in a magazine or see it on a TV screen doesn’t make it factual.

Sadly, we were recently reminded of just how prophetic Michael’s lyrics were when these disgraceful, stale and discredited stories more than two decades old were published making unfounded allegations about Michael and so-called FBI “files.” It should be no surprise that one of the authors of this rehash has a long history of writing tabloid articles about Michael. It also should be noted that he formerly was a top editor at a scandal-ridden British tabloid that folded following revelations that the phones of celebrities, public figures and even a child murder victim were illegally hacked. Even more unseemly was one press account in which the tabloid’s source was identified as a former investigator whose license was revoked and who also has filed for bankruptcy. He isn’t denying that he was paid to tell these falsehoods, but he is boasting about his pornography career. It goes without saying that this callous and brazen disregard shown Michael’s children, family and fans is beyond reprehensible.


Responsible journalists who don&#8217;t practice checkbook journalism have thoroughly debunked this disgusting story and its unreliable sources. Showbiz411 titled its story: &#8220; &#8216;FBI Files&#8217; Are From People Discredited Long Time Ago&#8221; (http://www.showbiz411.com/201<wbr>3/06/30/michael-jackson-fbi-<wbr>files-are-from-people-discredi<wbr>ted-long-time-ago). CNN called the London tabloid reports a &#8220;questionable&#8221; rehash while noting that, &#8220;A website can enjoy a sharp spike in traffic -- which can translate into advertising revenue -- with a sensational headline&#8221; (http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/03<wbr>/showbiz/michael-jackson-files<wbr>) in describing how media can play fast and loose with the truth to drive viewers or readers to their site.


We believe unethical tabloid journalists and publications spreading falsehoods about Michael for their own selfish reasons are best ignored. Sadly, they hide shamelessly behind a legal shield allowing them to smear those who are no longer with us. As readers abandon them and their businesses collapse, they desperately seek attention and publicity. We don&#8217;t believe they deserve it, and are confident that discredited articles such as these vanish quickly and are easily forgotten.



Rest assured that Michael&#8217;s legacy is his artistic genius. It&#8217;s his humanitarian work that touched millions, and his global messages of peace. Most important, Michael&#8217;s legacy is his enduring love for his children, his family and his fans.


- John Branca and John McClain, Co-Executors, The Estate Of Michael Jackson


ETA - Team MJJC
UK Press Complaints Commission states MJ Estate filed a complaint against Daily Mirror and Sunday People tabloid stories.


The email is below



Thank you for your email.


The Commission has today been contacted by a representative of the Estate of Michael Jackson. The Estate has informed us that it wishes to make a complaint through the PCC in relation to the coverage in the Daily Mirror and Sunday People which forms the subject of your complaint.

As I am sure you can appreciate, in circumstances where articles have made specific allegation against a named individual, it is more appropriate for the Commission to consider a complaint from that individual or their representatives.

As such, we will be taking this complaint forward with the Estate of Michael Jackson. We will endeavour to let you know the outcome of the PCC&#8217;s investigation into the matter, subject to the requirements of confidentiality.

Whilst the Estate has not as yet made a complaint in relation to the coverage in the Daily Mail, we will be putting that complaint on hold pending the outcome of our investigation with them of the coverage published by the Daily Mirror and Sunday people, as this raises substantively the same concerns. Should it become appropriate for us to revert to you on this complaint at a later stage we will do so.


Thank you for raising these concerns with us.


Best wishes

Ben



Ben Gallop
Complaints Officer

Press Complaints Commission
Halton House
20/23 Holborn
London EC1N 2JD

Tel: 020 7831 0022
Website: www.pcc.org.uk


source : http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/th...=1#post3866751
 
Roger Friedman a responsible journalist? Great way to kill the credibility of your statement.
 
^^^ I think they were using the term broadly just to show those in the media who defended Michael against these despicable stories. In this instance RF was more responsible. I don't think it will hurt the credibility of what they are trying to say in standing up for Michael. I appreciate them making a statement against the stories and the people who are behind them.
 
Mentioning Roger Friedman in their statement, who fabricated so many fake stories about Michael is bad. I don't like this at all. Who is next Diane Diamond, Martin Bashir? Responsible journalist.. yeah right!
 
Already read the estate message in various posts on MJJC. Estate needs to wise up, and have a PR wing.
 
Last edited:
Already read the estate message in various posts on MJJC. Estate needs to wise up, and have a PR wing.

The message is decent. The problem is that fans have unrealistic expectations of what the estate can and cannot do.
 
Last edited:
Finally a decent response, it was about time. I don't think there is much else the Estate can say about this.
 
Roger Friedman a responsible journalist? Great way to kill the credibility of your statement.

This shows your complete lack of understanding of the spirit of the message.

RF despite his notorious past was one of the very first people to debunk the story hard and even wrote three articles on the subject. For the better or worse the estate can't ignore that fact.
 
The fans didn't seem to mind Alan Duke's CNN article when he quotes Diane Dimond, so what's the big deal with Friedman. He did debunk that fake FBI files and that's why they are mentioning him. IMO the fact that even these MJ detractors don't buy this story is very telling.
 
I think most of us were glad that someone like Freidman said this was all crap when a lot of people were not saying anything. We don't have to like the guy but I am not going to ignore what he did to help Michael this time. We should take the help where we can.
 
It is very disheartening to know that nothing can be done legally against these vultures ...
crying.gif
I think the reputation of a dead person who collaborated actively for society should be defended effectively.
 
I think you need to calm down and quit with the insults. My 'opnion' is not rubbish and nor am I a 'typical example of what is wrong with fans'. Those are hurtful and unnceccesary coments. I believe they hurt their credibility by name checking Friedman. End of. You can disagree but make it personal and I have no time for you. It is, ironically those who constantly belittle the opinions of others on here who are the problem.

I characterized your views as rubbish because they were cynical and unrealistic. they represented an unnecessary assault on the estate, and almost a deliberate attempt to undermine the work they do. there is only so much the estate can do and you need to acknowledge that.
 
I characterized your views as rubbish because they were cynical and unrealistic. they represented an unnecessary assault on the estate, and almost a deliberate attempt to undermine the work they do. there is only so much the estate can do and you need to acknowledge that.

I applaud the statement itself, despite being two weeks late and almost certainly only done in response to the negative reaction by others to the first statement. It is a good and neccesary statement but I believe it harms their credibility when referencing Friedman. It certainly isn't an attempt to undermine what they do, which is a rather odd thing to say. There is indeed only so much they can do but in my opinion they could have done better on this issue. I will applaud rhem when do they do right and criticise when they do wrong. I think they miscalculated on this. I am not a critic or apologist for anyone. The only person who matters to me is Michael.
 
Roger Friedman a responsible journalist? Great way to kill the credibility of your statement.

I mean, at least they finally spoke up about it. Like I said yesterday in the thread in the Tabloid section, the authorities weren't going to make this move, it was up to The Estate to do so. They did just that.
 
ANYWAYS!...I'm glad there is FINALLY a strong to the point Statement from the MJ Estate! I'm sure they felt it was a good time to do so now cause they have some media people that are actually telling the truth and calling that tabloid out on their B.S! So I guess it makes their statement more stronger for them and the general public!? Which I think it does! But, I wish they could have themselves debunk it at least a lil in the same fashion from the start. But, non the less I'm glad they released a stronger statement one I didn't expect cause I thought the first one was all we were gonna get... thank god it wasn't! Cause that was some what embarrassing telling fans to go see ONE SMDH Hopefully they never do that again with something so serious!
 
I agree, the previous statement didn't answer the seriousness of the situation, and saying "go see MJ ONE, that's where the true Michael is" is cheap marketing. True Michael is in his music. And MJ ONE is just someone else's tribute.

This statement is good. However all these statements are just for fans, they are not even press releases, so general public does not see them. It's unfortunate.

The slander in tabloids hurts Michael's image and hurts profits of the estate as a result. Can't they sue on that ground?
 
No matter what the estate put out, the estate haters will hate - PERIOD.
 
Look as far as Friedman goes you need to accept the fact that he always maintained Michael was innocent - even during the 2005 trial. He wrote extensively about it then, he addressed it in multiple articles and interviews this time too. I understand the dislike towards some things he wrote but you need to give credit when it is due.

As for Alan Duke article yes it's good but it also has quotes from Diane Dimond and plug for her book. Just for that reason it wouldn't be my personal choice to include in any statement but again it's not realistic to expect Estate to ignore the media sources who is debunking the claims - regardless of how imperfect they might be.

The slander in tabloids hurts Michael's image and hurts profits of the estate as a result. Can't they sue on that ground?

Only if they can show an actual damage to the income. In the cases of loss income ( or emotional distress ) you can't just say "this hurts my income" but you need to be able to show "here's what I lost and why".

so legal options are limited to non existent.

Dead cannot be defamed so no defamation / slander lawsuit.

Any financial damages / emotional distress has to be actual and need to be shown and proven. Just making a claim of "this hurts me" is not enough.
 
Funny some people here blame the estate this and that but never complain about the Jacksons (his own blood). At least, the estate made two statements on this. Where is the Jacksons statement? You can only hear them when they throw Michael under the bus for the sake of money.
 
Yes, beautiful words in defense of Michael. But it can not be just that. Have to go beyond words/message. I want to see action against these people/press and stop them once and for all. BUT I know it will not be possible and that nothing will be done. The name Michael will continue to be played in the mud by vultures. *big sigh*
 
Can The Estate file a formal complaint to the PCC like Taj did? Charles Thomson said to him as a family member, he could do it and they are forced to investigate but I don't know of it'd proceed in the case of Branca & McClain. IMO they should do it too.
 
There was something about Branca in that recent interview with that weird woman who got shown round the hanger of memorabilia. When she idiotically began questioning him on MJs bed-shares with children, he didn't do or say much to refute it. He looked almost apologetically back at her in silence and then issued some meek response of 'the MJ I knew...'.

And here, they are telling us to focus on MJs artistic greatness all the while his character as a great human being is being assassinated.

My instincts tell me something isn't quite right there. Something just isn't sitting well with me.

However at least they said SOMETHING.
 
Thanks Ivy.
Tabloids (and media in general) have a huge fore in this situation, and they are using it to the fullest. I know that in the end, in 10, 20 years, the true story will prevail. There is just no way for it not to. And the estate execs are absolutely right in saying that this tabloid garbage will be quickly forgotten. But it's just so frustrating and sad to see this happening time and again. For how long can you keep kicking the dead person?
 
Imo they took too long to make this statement i mean the tabloids have been goin on for ages with those disgustings stuff and they make the statement now....too much damage has been done. I dont hate the estate at all but i think they really need to up their game
 
There was something about Branca in that recent interview with that weird woman who got shown round the hanger of memorabilia. When she idiotically began questioning him on MJs bed-shares with children, he didn't do or say much to refute it. He looked almost apologetically back at her in silence and then issued some meek response of 'the MJ I knew...'.

And here, they are telling us to focus on MJs artistic greatness all the while his character as a great human being is being assassinated.

My instincts tell me something isn't quite right there. Something just isn't sitting well with me.

However at least they said SOMETHING.

I don't think for a second that Branca believes Michael was guilty. He probably did not want to make that TV special about the allegations yet again, he wanted the focus to be on MJ as an artist and that's why he decided not to argue with that woman. It was the right thing to do, imo.
 
Better statement this time. I don't agree that ignoring these things is always the best policy though. I would encourage Branca and Co to sign the CADEFLAW petition.
 
Back
Top