LoveMJackson
Proud Member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2009
- Messages
- 6,299
- Points
- 0
Surely you can see that any book authorised by MJ's estate and made with MJ's blessing would be very heavily biased in MJ's favour?
And what's wrong with that?
Surely you can see that any book authorised by MJ's estate and made with MJ's blessing would be very heavily biased in MJ's favour?
I've heard enough CRAP about Michael to last me a lifetime. IF the stuff the media had been saying about him for years had been true, then sure, I wouldn't mind it being in the Opus. But the media spun everything about Michael and his life that they could, so...it was CRAP.That's not a very sensible way of looking at it.
Surely you can see that any book authorised by MJ's estate and made with MJ's blessing would be very heavily biased in MJ's favour?
The Opus must be a perfect book if Michael approved it..I can't wait to get it![]()
Because Michael never lied, is that it?
That's not a very sensible way of looking at it.
Surely you can see that any book authorised by MJ's estate and made with MJ's blessing would be very heavily biased in MJ's favour?
What if he did? People are entitled to their privacy. He didn't owe anyone details about his personal life, such as what plastic surgeries he did, etc. It isn't anyone's business.Because Michael never lied, is that it?
Why would anyone read that book if the foregoing articles by RS set the tone for the book being negative towards MJ?Have you even read the book that you are accusing of containing lies?
Have you even read the book that you are accusing of containing lies?
not sure how something containing facts on his career can be classed as biased.what would the book say. that mj was the second comming for example cause im not sure how pointing out what he acheived can be viewed as anythingrely you can see that any book authorised by MJ's estate and made with MJ's blessing would be very heavily biased in MJ's favour?
The Rolling Stones is a joke...
I hated the way they downplayed his artistry, his genius.. but when it's Dylan or Elvis even Madonna, it's nothing but praise...
Have you even read the book that you are accusing of containing lies?
wow gee when u put it like that, no one canbuy anything cuz in reality, zumiez, khol's jc penny's and walmart never had mike merch. hot topic did so they get a pass.
no magazine was nice to him
not sure how something containing facts on his career can be classed as biased.what would the book say. that mj was the second comming for example cause im not sure how pointing out what he acheived can be viewed as anything
It should be no surprise to anyone that Rolling Stone or any other magazine has been cruel to Michael Jackson. After all, they are one of a few that did a scathing interview with LMP, to which she also was very unkind to Michael. The only Magazines that have been fair to Michael for the most part are Ebony and Jet. With the exception of the snub for the top 25 most influential black artists of the 80s. Michael was excluded from that list. Everyone right now is making money off of Michael, including his family, good or bad. It's sad that a man who gave so much to the world is still being dragged through the mud after his death. I wish his family would speak up more about this and not focus on his shortcomings.
To all MJ fans, please do not support Rolling Stone's latest attempt at milking the Michael Jackson name. For the past few years, they haven't been kind to MJ, so I don't think they should be profiting from his passing.
Have you even read the book that you are accusing of containing lies?
Especially in the early days, Rolling Stone never really supported coloured singers.
However, if the book is limited edition, it might be a good ides of getting one just to sell it on when it goes out of print!
So true. More like mjhater1988. Who's side is he on?Do you happen to work for Rolling Stone or something? You're just going to ignore all the wrong they did to Michael because of one semi nice yet sarcasm filled quote?..Eh, be my guest.
So true. More like mjhater1988. Who's side is he on?