Something I plan to write about and send to the media...

MeggyKateGutermuth

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
51
Points
0
Hey guys! As you know, and I'm not gonna try to hide this, I'm new here. I've been here maybe a week or two? But you guys are so wonderful and great and honest and I'm proud to be a member of this community, very proud! So thanks to all of you for being my friend. In my daily life I don't have many people I can talk to about Michael or my disgust at everything coming out in the investigation because people in my family and a lot of my friends are the kind of people who buy a lot of media's ramblings and they don't care to see Michael as we do. So I'm very thankful to you guys for letting me vent my frustrations and voice how wonderful Michael was in his life and all the humanitarian efforts he accomplished. He reminds me of Princess Diana in that way and together, they'll always be very special in my heart. Anywhoo, I complete digress from what I wanna say here...

Like most of you, I've grown to be completely disgusted at the media's perspectives and coverage of Michael Jackson and his death investigation. I'm dissapointed at the lack of objectivity from the media, how things the family members have said have been twisted around, how they still view Michael as an alleged child molester with a history of drug abuse, how they have created a "dark side" of Michael that they believe may explain his death, all these things, you guys know the list, it goes on and on endlessly and everyday it's something new or something recycled. Needless to say, like most of you, I'm not surprised. I can't speak as a viewer of other countries' media coverage on his death, but I can speak as a viewer of the American media, and as a former Journalism major, that they have done anything BUT their job as reporters.

As you can probably tell, I have a big mouth and when there is an injustice, I'm not afraid to speak. If I have something to say, I say it. I try to say it right. And as my frustrations have built up, it's led me to realize something I really want to do. I want to write a balanced, argumentative essay, and send it in to the media. You guys have posted yourselves where you can send things you want to say, and I want to do this, and do it right. I don't want to be opinionated or even say that I am myself a fan. Though I am, it's important that there is not a bias. If there were, they could dismiss it completely from the get-go without passing that one early sentence: "I'm a fan of Michael Jackson." That is also doing something that is done everyday in the media that has no place in reporting: it expresses personal opinion. So, just the facts, just the facts.

So here are some ideas I have for this article/editorial/essay whatever...lol

- I want to be balanced. I don't want to report from my personal perspective because that promotes a bias. I want to use factual information (documents, for example, that are in the public domain, recorded interviews, etc) and cite my sources (I've been in college for 2 years, I know about MLA formatting, and I have a book on it)

As far as what I wanna write about...as I said, I'm contemplating making this an arguementative essay, and some things I would like to research/discuss are:

- Fans perspectives of Michael's death and investigation vs. the Media's viewpoints, common things the media seem to say each and every time Michael is discussed;

- The most common Media reports vs. the things that do not make it to television/media airwaves (i.e.: Michael's humanitarian work, all the things he did for children at Neverland that are never discussed, and any other ideas you guys may suggest)

- The Media's use of anonymous "sources" vs. how much factual evidence there actually is (which obviously isn't much); Why or why should we not believe the Media's hype over these "sources"? How/are they/why are they just as trustworthy as the factual evidence that we have documentation of?

- The journalists publishing these reports: How are they credible? What about their reputations? Why or why do they not matter when they report to the media? What is their history in reporting? Have they lied or had false information or have they been truthful in their reporting of other things or other previous Michael Jackson issues? Why or why should we not believe them?

- The questions people (in the media, LAPD/DEA officials, family members, etc) aren't asking:

...Ian Halperin (and I'm sure you can say others, in my research I will find other people) : How did he (or they) know what they did? (i.e. his predicition of Michael passing away within 6 months) Why aren't things like this being investigated?

...Why aren't some of the people that have been involved in the investigation given a gag order (where they cannot discuss the case in the media because of it's importanace to the case)?

...The home movies/private footage/photos: Who is selling them, and why? Whose permission/authority allowed this distribution of these personal items to the Media?

...AEG's responses to all of these questions/claims by family members/attorneys/media: Why is there a pattern of "pleading the fifth" (always claiming innocence)?

...Michael Jackson's own credibility: His own reputation for telling the truth to the media. For what reasons did the media deny his credibility (when he was alive) when they report on his life?

...The whole Jackson family credibility: Why are their responses to the media's accusations questioned? For what reason(s) are they or aren't they credible? What evidence does the Media have against them to put them in a dishonest light?

...Joe Jackson: his credibility. i.e. He claims that Omar Bhatti is Michael's "lovechild". Why should we believe him? What is his credibility history? What/how many other things in the past has he said that Michael himself has verified to be true?


Again, these are just rough ideas and I plan to do a ton of research. It doesn't seem like Michael's place in the media is going anywhere anytime soon, it's a new headline everyday, so I'm not rushing to get this out there. I want to take my time and do this right, even if it means taking a month or two to write it, so be it. I want to have my facts together and write a balanced article asking all the right questions.

If you guys have any suggestions/ideas or questions that should be asked or ideas for things/people I should research, I would be most grateful for all of your input.


Thanks to all my friends here for your support and to anyone who has anything to add. Sorry for such a lengthly post. I talk too much, lol
 
That sounds really very good Meggy. I can't wait to read it. I do think that there are many questions left unanswered as you have mentioned ...Anyway it sounds like it'll be an amazing article. Wish you all the best with it and once again can't wait to read it. Let us all know how its going. keep us updated :)
 
Hey guys! As you know, and I'm not gonna try to hide this, I'm new here. I've been here maybe a week or two? But you guys are so wonderful and great and honest and I'm proud to be a member of this community, very proud! So thanks to all of you for being my friend. In my daily life I don't have many people I can talk to about Michael or my disgust at everything coming out in the investigation because people in my family and a lot of my friends are the kind of people who buy a lot of media's ramblings and they don't care to see Michael as we do. So I'm very thankful to you guys for letting me vent my frustrations and voice how wonderful Michael was in his life and all the humanitarian efforts he accomplished. He reminds me of Princess Diana in that way and together, they'll always be very special in my heart. Anywhoo, I complete digress from what I wanna say here...

Like most of you, I've grown to be completely disgusted at the media's perspectives and coverage of Michael Jackson and his death investigation. I'm dissapointed at the lack of objectivity from the media, how things the family members have said have been twisted around, how they still view Michael as an alleged child molester with a history of drug abuse, how they have created a "dark side" of Michael that they believe may explain his death, all these things, you guys know the list, it goes on and on endlessly and everyday it's something new or something recycled. Needless to say, like most of you, I'm not surprised. I can't speak as a viewer of other countries' media coverage on his death, but I can speak as a viewer of the American media, and as a former Journalism major, that they have done anything BUT their job as reporters.

As you can probably tell, I have a big mouth and when there is an injustice, I'm not afraid to speak. If I have something to say, I say it. I try to say it right. And as my frustrations have built up, it's led me to realize something I really want to do. I want to write a balanced, argumentative essay, and send it in to the media. You guys have posted yourselves where you can send things you want to say, and I want to do this, and do it right. I don't want to be opinionated or even say that I am myself a fan. Though I am, it's important that there is not a bias. If there were, they could dismiss it completely from the get-go without passing that one early sentence: "I'm a fan of Michael Jackson." That is also doing something that is done everyday in the media that has no place in reporting: it expresses personal opinion. So, just the facts, just the facts.

So here are some ideas I have for this article/editorial/essay whatever...lol

- I want to be balanced. I don't want to report from my personal perspective because that promotes a bias. I want to use factual information (documents, for example, that are in the public domain, recorded interviews, etc) and cite my sources (I've been in college for 2 years, I know about MLA formatting, and I have a book on it)

As far as what I wanna write about...as I said, I'm contemplating making this an arguementative essay, and some things I would like to research/discuss are:

- Fans perspectives of Michael's death and investigation vs. the Media's viewpoints, common things the media seem to say each and every time Michael is discussed;

- The most common Media reports vs. the things that do not make it to television/media airwaves (i.e.: Michael's humanitarian work, all the things he did for children at Neverland that are never discussed, and any other ideas you guys may suggest)

- The Media's use of anonymous "sources" vs. how much factual evidence there actually is (which obviously isn't much); Why or why should we not believe the Media's hype over these "sources"? How/are they/why are they just as trustworthy as the factual evidence that we have documentation of?

- The journalists publishing these reports: How are they credible? What about their reputations? Why or why do they not matter when they report to the media? What is their history in reporting? Have they lied or had false information or have they been truthful in their reporting of other things or other previous Michael Jackson issues? Why or why should we not believe them?

- The questions people (in the media, LAPD/DEA officials, family members, etc) aren't asking:

...Ian Halperin (and I'm sure you can say others, in my research I will find other people) : How did he (or they) know what they did? (i.e. his predicition of Michael passing away within 6 months) Why aren't things like this being investigated?

...Why aren't some of the people that have been involved in the investigation given a gag order (where they cannot discuss the case in the media because of it's importanace to the case)?

...The home movies/private footage/photos: Who is selling them, and why? Whose permission/authority allowed this distribution of these personal items to the Media?

...AEG's responses to all of these questions/claims by family members/attorneys/media: Why is there a pattern of "pleading the fifth" (always claiming innocence)?

...Michael Jackson's own credibility: His own reputation for telling the truth to the media. For what reasons did the media deny his credibility (when he was alive) when they report on his life?

...The whole Jackson family credibility: Why are their responses to the media's accusations questioned? For what reason(s) are they or aren't they credible? What evidence does the Media have against them to put them in a dishonest light?

...Joe Jackson: his credibility. i.e. He claims that Omar Bhatti is Michael's "lovechild". Why should we believe him? What is his credibility history? What/how many other things in the past has he said that Michael himself has verified to be true?


Again, these are just rough ideas and I plan to do a ton of research. It doesn't seem like Michael's place in the media is going anywhere anytime soon, it's a new headline everyday, so I'm not rushing to get this out there. I want to take my time and do this right, even if it means taking a month or two to write it, so be it. I want to have my facts together and write a balanced article asking all the right questions.

If you guys have any suggestions/ideas or questions that should be asked or ideas for things/people I should research, I would be most grateful for all of your input.


Thanks to all my friends here for your support and to anyone who has anything to add. Sorry for such a lengthly post. I talk too much, lol

Impressive...

:angel:We Are The World...Keep Helping to Heal The World...Education IS the Key~~~
 
i admire u for your good intention and determination ~i hope this wonderful idea would be given more attention so that more fans would join in together to have a further and broader discussion sharing the knowledge &evidence that might be helpful for u ~`and i just hope everything you did would be paid off,god bless mj and his fans~
 
Hey MeggyKate, welcome to the forum. I really appreciate your idea to do something against the media.

I thought about the media myself, not only recently, of course, but Michaels death made me think about their influence again and I'm sure that the media are in a way responsible for his death. Not only the media, of course, but they often made Michaels life a misery and I think it would be naive to believe that something like this doesn't affect one's mental health, which causes physical diseases again or takes the strength from someone to cure a disease.

What came to my mind was, that it won't make sense to bring up facts to the media or to remind them of their responsibility, because they are not stupid, they know what they are doing. They know how to work with rhetorical tricks to make people believe something without becoming a target for an allegation because they lie. They use rethorical questions, they quote "friends or insiders" they don't name and they use grammar to persuade people in a manipulative manner.

Let's just take the incident with Blanket in Germany, when Michael wanted to show the fans his baby. The story they made up about it was, as we all know, that Michael wanted to throw Blanket from the balcony or that Blanket was on the verge to fall from the balcony.
Most of the people have children. And many people use to throw their children in the air and catch them- it's a game both of them find funny. But nobody would come to the conclusion, that the person would want to kill the child or is completely insane.
In Michaels case, they did. But they didn't only say it like this, but they played the video veeeery slooooow, so that it seemed like Michael let Blanket hang there for a veeeeery looooong time. They knew exactly what they were doing, they wanted to make up a story about "you know the nickname they used for Michael".

But still- people buy the newspapers, they read the magazines and they watch it on TV. Those, who don't find it right to slander people or to be manipulated by lies, they simply don't pay for it and they don't watch or read that stuff.

Now, if someone comes up and says "Hey, it's not right what you're doing" they think "Your problem, we have our consumers and that's all that matters."

The reporters are not stupid, but the consumers are. Or they simply enjoy when they read bad news about other people, because it makes them feel better or at least well entertained.

So I had the idea that we should try to sensibilize those who buy these magazines and watch these TV-programmes to what the media actually do. Ask them to ask themselves if they like to be manipulated and why they support the tabloids.

Another idea I had was to maybe collect information about other artists or famous persons who were slandered, too, and I like the thought of maybe contacting those artists and ask them to take part in a campaign against the lies of the tabloid press by maybe giving a statement to publish on a website about the topic...

Of course, that would take some time and effort, until we maybe see a result, but we have time, don't we? And we know what we're talking about as well.

What do you, MeggyKate, and of course the other users as well, think about something like that?
 
I think you're hitting the nail on the head, precisely...I'm almost sad to admit my defeat before I even started, but you're right. And I think if we did something bigger and better than my idea, I think it's very possible we could make a bigger difference. And like Michael always was and how he always taught us to be, he was a perfectionist, which in turn, turned us into perfectionists. Which isn't bad, it's always good to reach higher than we think we can. My only question is, how exactly would we go about doing this? I truly believe we can..

I used to run an e-mail rock n roll fanzine a couple years ago, I called it Pretty Vacant, and I used to e-mail various rock bands for interviews for it and things like that. A possibility for this, if you'd like to go this way, is I can e-mail some of these people again and see if they'd be open to doing interviews on this subject for this project. I'll PM you a message with my email and contact info so we can talk more about this.

I think we could make a bigger difference if we not even go to the media but go straight to who the media is affecting, which includes both us, as fans, and the artists themselves and the audiences, the citizens of the world. This stuff is thrusted down their throats 24/7. I say lets give it a go. =)

But do you (or anyone else here) still think I should still go the route I was planning by writing that article? Is it worth trying?
 
Hey Meghann,

I didn't want to depreciate your idea, I hope it didn't come across like that. Your ideas for the argumentation are well-thought-out and I think your article is gonna become real good.

You should definately write something, as you planned, I'd just not adress it to the tabloids, because I'm afraid that would be wasted effort, for the reasons I explained hereinabove.

That article should be addressed to those who usually buy these magazines and papers or watch these programmes.
And therefore I think it would be good, not only to write about the lies the media spread about Michael, but also give some other examples, maybe not only from the music-business, there surely is more than one example.

Because if you only write about Michael, the people who don't like him (which must be most of the tabloid-consumers, because they hardly hear any good about him) might think it's something like a fan-campaign and therefore won't take it serious enough or think "okay, it was just in Michael Jacksons case then". They buy these tabloids for years, many of them may even have taken out a subscription, they probably don't wanna believe straight away that 99% of what they read are lies.

I think maybe the best is, to think about how to handle this and maybe think about a website for it, with your article/ information, so that we can refer to something everyone has access to?

I just replied to your PM :)
 
Just thinking out loud as I write this I suppose, but wouldn't it be great if there were a website called, say, "The Real Michael Jackson" where as suggested by "daydreambeliever" articles such as the one our friend is preparing could find a permanent place? There could be interviews with people such as Aphrodite Jones, quotes from other artists saying positive things about MJ and so on.

A special section of the website could be about MJ's humanitarian work. MJ visited as you all know many orphanages and hospitals when he was on tour - donating money, saving lifes, like for example that kid in the home movies that got a new liver thanks to MJ. It would be cool if those people (if they could be located) could be persuaded to write about what Michael did for them.

Best thing about such a website would be the fact that the media can't interfere with it. A whole site of truthfull, positive MJ info without any cynical remarks from haters or the media trying to put a negative spin on whatever is being said. Ideally the website would be "Jackson Family Approved" with maybe even them posting something every now and then.

Unrealistic idea, I know, but as I said: I was thinking out loud. ;)
 
Back
Top