Michael - The Great Album Debate

They did not have any songs intended for the album. That;s another myth created to try and make out out they had darker intentions than simply caring about their uncle's music.

And Rodney Jerkins stated publicly that the songs do not sound like Michael, so don't try and twist his words.

That's Cory Rooney's words,not a myth.
What Rodney Jerkins said is "It doesn't sound like him to me".This is his opnion on Twitter.Considering he wasn't involved in this project,I don't think it carried more weight.
As for Latoya, Jermaine, Randy and most Jacksons who commented on this issue,they didn't know more about the background than MJ fans.
 
If people think Malachi sounds "amazingly close" to MJ, then I'm not surprised people think MJ is singing on the Cascio songs. Malachi isn't anywhere near close let alone "amazingly close". Some fans have been fooled by this joker since 2007, so it's really no surprise.
 
all i remember is the first night it streamed, sitting in my room. listened to the track 3 times in a row and TRIED to love it. i didn't understand what i was listening to. it's not the same feeling i got when i listened to don't be messin . . . which is because it's not the same person singing. i didn't hear michael on day 1 and i don't hear him now. i'll never hear him on any of these 3 tracks (except of course in the copy/pastes)
 
That's Cory Rooney's words,not a myth.
What Rodney Jerkins said is "It doesn't sound like him to me".This is his opnion on Twitter.Considering he wasn't involved in this project,I don't think it carried more weight.
As for Latoya, Jermaine, Randy and most Jacksons who commented on this issue,they didn't know more about the background than MJ fans.

Exactly. And nor does anyone else. Remember, the only people involved were Eddie Cascio, Porte and the vocalist. Anything anyone else said is just an opinion. The most important opinions are those of the fans who made their point loud and clear that we don't want fake tracks.
 
If people think Malachi sounds "amazingly close" to MJ, then I'm not surprised people think MJ is singing on the Cascio songs. Malachi isn't anywhere near close let alone "amazingly close". Some fans have been fooled by this joker since 2007, so it's really no surprise.
When people think it's Michael on the Cascio songs, they've always enjoyed Michael's voice for different reasons than I have. And that's all ok. Who would have ever thought that there would come a time we had to disect his voice and singing manners instead of simply just enjoying it...:(

all i remember is the first night it streamed, sitting in my room. listened to the track 3 times in a row and TRIED to love it. i didn't understand what i was listening to. it's not the same feeling i got when i listened to don't be messin . . . which is because it's not the same person singing. i didn't hear michael on day 1 and i don't hear him now. i'll never hear him on any of these 3 tracks (except of course in the copy/pastes)
THIS...especially the "I didn't understand what I was listening to". I wanted to be enthousiastic, and believe me..I tried. I still remember very clearly that all I could say was that the music sounded good. Especially the trumpets.
 
Last edited:
he most important opinions are those of the fans who made their point loud and clear that we don't want fake tracks.

How about the fans that doesn't think the songs to be fakes? What about their opinion? Is it less valuable than any other opinion, like a second rate citizen?
 
How about the fans that doesn't think the songs to be fakes? What about their opinion? Is it less valuable than any other opinion, like a second rate citizen?

They are wrong.
 
Last edited:
I’d like to tell you guys a little story that I think illustrates part of what’s happened.

I’ve been trying to lose a few ponds this summer. So starting about two weeks ago, I cut off the snacks and desserts. What prompted me to do that was the realization, looking at myself in the mirror two weeks ago, that I had gotten a bit chubby.

So this morning, looking at myself in the mirror, I could see that my dieting had already produced results. My face was leaner, my cheekbones more prominent, my jaw line more defined. Also, I could feel my clothes were looser. I figured I must have lost 5 to 7 pounds already – not bad for a few weeks!

But then I weighed myself. I’m still at the exact same weight I was two weeks ago, minus maybe 1 or 2 pounds, which is within the “margin of error” and couldn’t possibly be reflected yet in the mirror.

Basically, the face I looked at two weeks ago and the face I looked at this morning was exactly the same, but one looked chubby to me, while the other looked skinnier. So what happened?

What happened was that this morning, I was EXPECTING differences. And so I imagined differences, and used little details that, two weeks ago, I had not even noticed, to satisfy my expectation of difference. But my eyes deceived me, and I had to face up to disappointment.

I hope that the doubters, who still hold on two years later that they can trust their ears, and that their initial impression must have been the right one, and that they would have had the same reaction to the same songs had they been released in other circumstances or on other albums, will take a second to at least think about this little story above, and acknowledge that if I can make this mistake, then anybody can – it’s human nature.

And I know you’ll say it is not a perfect comparison, because you didn’t expect Breaking News to be fake when it was first released. But it just so happened, by coincidence, that that particular song was a weird one for MJ, for a number of reasons, ranging from its use of the third person and its obviously incomplete character, to the lower-than-usual, not-from-the-classic-era MJ vocals (similar in a way to those on Hollywood Tonight). And it just so happened that we had all read a few days before that the Jacksons were claiming the vocals were fake – sure, we didn’t believe them, but that idea of impersonation had been planted in our minds nonetheless.

So that’s what happened. A little bit of happenstance mixed with a lot of psychology. And I still got those 10 pounds to lose!
 
kreen;3666521 said:
What happened was that this morning, I was EXPECTING differences. And so I imagined differences, and used little details that, two weeks ago, I had not even noticed, to satisfy my expectation of difference. But my eyes deceived me, and I had to face up to disappointment.

I hope that the doubters, who still hold on two years later that they can trust their ears, and that their initial impression must have been the right one, and that they would have had the same reaction to the same songs had they been released in other circumstances or on other albums, will take a second to at least think about this little story above, and acknowledge that if I can make this mistake, then anybody can – it’s human nature.

And I know you’ll say it is not a perfect comparison, because you didn’t expect Breaking News to be fake when it was first released. But it just so happened, by coincidence, that that particular song was a weird one for MJ, for a number of reasons, ranging from its use of the third person and its obviously incomplete character, to the lower-than-usual, not-from-the-classic-era MJ vocals (similar in a way to those on Hollywood Tonight). And it just so happened that we had all read a few days before that the Jacksons were claiming the vocals were fake – sure, we didn’t believe them, but that idea of impersonation had been planted in our minds nonetheless.

So that’s what happened. A little bit of happenstance mixed with a lot of psychology. And I still got those 10 pounds to lose!
"So that's what happened." :lol: Well that clears everything up then! I'll PM a mod to let them know that they can close this thread now.

Kidding aside, you keep telling us that we were expecting diferences when several of us have said that we were not. But let's disregard that for a second. This is an idea that has actually been brought up by believers several times and it has never made sense to me. The reason for that is that this point about expectations can just as easily be made for the believers: you were expecting these songs to be authentic, because they are on an official release, and therefore were more inclined to ignore signs to the contrary.

I actually think you can make a stronger case for the idea that these kinds of expectations could have influenced believers than for the idea that they could have influenced doubters, because of the strong motivation to believe that these songs are real. None of us, believers or doubters, wanted to see fake songs on an album. We were all looking forward to this release tremendously. Believers have it easy: they have an album full of new songs, just as they wanted. Doubters on the other hand have to go against the wish we all shared - the wish to enjoy a great new album from Michael, finally something positive after the terrible year we had all been through as fans. Motivation-wise, I think it is much easier to believe that the songs are authentic than to believe that they are not.
 
Last edited:
kreen;3666521 said:
I’d like to tell you guys a little story that I think illustrates part of what’s happened.

I’ve been trying to lose a few ponds this summer. So starting about two weeks ago, I cut off the snacks and desserts. What prompted me to do that was the realization, looking at myself in the mirror two weeks ago, that I had gotten a bit chubby.

So this morning, looking at myself in the mirror, I could see that my dieting had already produced results. My face was leaner, my cheekbones more prominent, my jaw line more defined. Also, I could feel my clothes were looser. I figured I must have lost 5 to 7 pounds already – not bad for a few weeks!

But then I weighed myself. I’m still at the exact same weight I was two weeks ago, minus maybe 1 or 2 pounds, which is within the “margin of error” and couldn’t possibly be reflected yet in the mirror.

Basically, the face I looked at two weeks ago and the face I looked at this morning was exactly the same, but one looked chubby to me, while the other looked skinnier. So what happened?

What happened was that this morning, I was EXPECTING differences. And so I imagined differences, and used little details that, two weeks ago, I had not even noticed, to satisfy my expectation of difference. But my eyes deceived me, and I had to face up to disappointment.

I hope that the doubters, who still hold on two years later that they can trust their ears, and that their initial impression must have been the right one, and that they would have had the same reaction to the same songs had they been released in other circumstances or on other albums, will take a second to at least think about this little story above, and acknowledge that if I can make this mistake, then anybody can – it’s human nature.

And I know you’ll say it is not a perfect comparison, because you didn’t expect Breaking News to be fake when it was first released. But it just so happened, by coincidence, that that particular song was a weird one for MJ, for a number of reasons, ranging from its use of the third person and its obviously incomplete character, to the lower-than-usual, not-from-the-classic-era MJ vocals (similar in a way to those on Hollywood Tonight). And it just so happened that we had all read a few days before that the Jacksons were claiming the vocals were fake – sure, we didn’t believe them, but that idea of impersonation had been planted in our minds nonetheless.

So that’s what happened. A little bit of happenstance mixed with a lot of psychology. And I still got those 10 pounds to lose!

Ok, but this could apply to what happened to the believers also :)
The problem here is that you have factual proof (like the bathroom scale) to prove yourself wrong.
And we're still waiting after 2 years for that kind of proof, with no luck.
 
Happy birthday Billyjeanplxiv!! Have a very nice day.


Party%2BBalloons.jpg


@Kreen

Good luck to you trying to lose some weight..:cheeky:
 
Last edited:
When you are truly convinced of something, it's impossible to change your mind, unless you are PROVEN wrong.

I need to be proven wrong and then I can accept it's Michael singing the songs. It won't change how I feel about the vocals and the songs though.
 
Thank you, lol I spent a fraction of my Birthday on this fourm, watching starwars, and it has been Cascio Song free as i havent heard even a snippet of one :)
 
sorry king of the world and all things Michael Jackson and the ruler of the fans who determine who is right and wrong and whose opinion should be given more weight.

I'm going to print this and frame it.
 
I recognised Jason Cupeta straight away on Breaking News yet I knew nothing of any controversy surrounding the vocals. So I certainly didn't have any idea seeded in my mind before the fact. It's actually a little insulting to say that in all fairness. Like people can't think for themselves. As others have said, the argument is actually more applicable to believers as it should be expected that an MJ record would contain MJ songs.
 
Kidding aside, you keep telling us that we were expecting diferences when several of us have said that we were not. But let's disregard that for a second. This is an idea that has actually been brought up by believers several times and it has never made sense to me. The reason for that is that this point about expectations can just as easily be made for the believers: you were expecting these songs to be authentic, because they are on an official release, and therefore were more inclined to ignore signs to the contrary.

yes the same argument can be made for believers as well and guess what it has already been done. Many doubters stated believers are basing their opinion and their belief on the MJ Estate's statement. It's the exact same argument that believers say the doubters are hearing such differences to Michael (or similarities to Jason) because the idea of songs possibly being fake was mentioned before.

I actually think you can make a stronger case for the idea that these kinds of expectations could have influenced believers than for the idea that they could have influenced doubters, because of the strong motivation to believe that these songs are real. None of us, believers or doubters, wanted to see fake songs on an album. We were all looking forward to this release tremendously. Believers have it easy: they have an album full of new songs, just as they wanted. Doubters on the other hand have to go against the wish we all shared - the wish to enjoy a great new album from Michael, finally something positive after the terrible year we had all been through as fans. Motivation-wise, I think it is much easier to believe that the songs are authentic than to believe that they are not.

Actually the biggest motivation is being right or wrong or not wanting to be wrong. For example kreen wrote "if I can make a mistake anyone can, it's human nature". I had multiple times wrote "I can be right, I can be wrong". However just look to a few posts above while I was questioning Stella about other people's opinions and he replied with "They are wrong" not even accounting for the possibility that he can be the one that's wrong. Stella isn't the only one feeling this way, For example samhabib used to write he can't be wrong and if he is he'll hang his glove and retire from the fan community.

chamife is absolutely right when he wrote "When you are truly convinced of something, it's impossible to change your mind, unless you are PROVEN wrong." That's the exact reason why Stella, Samhabib and many other totally ignore the possibility of themselves being the mistaken ones. That's why this argument goes in circles. Have you ever read a post from an opposing side that made you think "hmm that makes sense" but still you choose to not allow that logical argument to alter your position?

(that's also the reason in one of my posts about voice identification experts have said being convinced and absolutely sure doesn't demonstrate being correct. They had mentioned a trial that a guy was convicted because his next door neighbor was absolutely sure of himself and had convincingly identified and testified against his neighbor saying he had spoken to him every day for the 23 years and knew his voice. Later DNA evidence had proven that the guy wasn't the perpetrator of the crime. Although the next door neighbor was absolutely sure in his identification, he was absolutely wrong as well)

The truth is although Stella and Bumper claims they lived under a rock and knew nothing about the Friedman & TMZ stories that was written for weeks before the streaming of Breaking News, a good portion of people were aware of it. Even when the 30 second of Breaking News had streamed and only thing you had was a scream from Michael there were people who was writing if it's Michael or not. The minute after the Breaking News streamed there were people instantly giving opinions without waiting for any information and without even listening to the song in full. Rushing to form opinions seems to be a trend in MJ Fan community. For example when Perez Hilton wrote that Monster would be included in Glee, people rushed to write angry messages and threaten MJ Estate with boycotts. They didn't even stop to think that Perez Hilton was a tabloid journalist who wasn't credible at all. This also shows that people are easily believing to what anyone says - including not credible tabloid journalists. If we truly weren't affected by what anyone said, people would have waited to watch Glee with their own eyes & ears before going on a anger fest.


I recognised Jason Cupeta straight away on Breaking News yet I knew nothing of any controversy surrounding the vocals. So I certainly didn't have any idea seeded in my mind before the fact. It's actually a little insulting to say that in all fairness. Like people can't think for themselves. As others have said, the argument is actually more applicable to believers as it should be expected that an MJ record would contain MJ songs.

actually you are exaggerating. no one is saying that anyone is a brainwashed robot. It's just an idea introduced and not an argument you come to on your own.

For example assume that your friend was talking to you and said " I had this chocolate cake in this restaurant and it was the best cake ever". Weeks later you go to the restaurant and remember what your friend said and order the cake thinking that it'll be good. You aren't brainwashed to think it's the best cake ever, you are just introduced to the idea that the cake is good so it's warranted for you to order it. An independent opinion would be if you looked to the menu and made a choice on your own and/or tried every cake and determine which one is the best according to you.

As I wrote this years ago a very interesting test would have been to introduce one Cascio song as a well known legit song and to introduce a legit song as a Cascio song to see the right / wrong determination percentages and how much the presentation was a factor. Unfortunately it's impossible as all of the Cascio songs are known.
 
Have you ever read a post from an opposing side that made you think "hmm that makes sense" but still you choose to not allow that logical argument not to alter your position?

I've absolutely done this, 'hmm that makes sense'.....HOWEVER, I don't CHOOSE to not allow that argument to alter my position....I can't help what I hear, that is the point....

I'm sure you've done the same thing, Ivy, yet you can't help what you hear right?

I don't want to sound arrogant when I say, 'I could be wrong, but I doubt it'....Not when it comes to Michael's voice....It's simply what I feel...
 
I've absolutely done this, 'hmm that makes sense'.....HOWEVER, I don't CHOOSE to not allow that argument to alter my position....I can't help what I hear, that is the point....

and that's human nature as well. Like Chamife said it's really really hard to change an opinion when you are convinced of it. Have you ever dated a guy that you deep down knew that was wrong for you but still continued to date him and in the end he hurt you and years later you finally admitted to yourself that you knew he was wrong for you from the very start?

I'm sure you've done the same thing, Ivy, yet you can't help what you hear right?

Probably but I'm trying my best. I had wrote that I can believe an imposer but not Malachi right? I'm also open to the possibility of being wrong. That's having an open mind in my opinion. However I can't say the same for everyone in this thread. Furthermore in some instances I can't help to think some people reject everything even though they are presented with factually correct information.

I don't want to sound arrogant when I say, 'I could be wrong, but I doubt it'....Not when it comes to Michael's voice....It's simply what I feel...

what I added to the above post:

that's also the reason in one of my posts about voice identification experts have said being convinced and absolutely sure doesn't equal to being correct. They had mentioned a trial that a guy was convicted because his next door neighbor was absolutely sure of himself and had convincingly identified and testified against his neighbor saying he had spoken to him every day for the 23 years and knew his voice. Later DNA evidence had proven that the guy wasn't the perpetrator of the crime. Although the next door neighbor was absolutely sure in his identification and was a believable and convincing witness, he was absolutely wrong as well
 
Speaking for myself as a doubter... there is no doubt. Everyone will see eventually. I'd bet my life without a seconds hesitation. The only thing I can say to a believer is, you just aren't able to hear what we can. It's kind of a shitty thing to say, but hey, that's life. Not everyone is given the same abilities. Luckily for me I've always had a strong ear and knack for music. I do it as a hobbyist today. Which I guess means nothing on the internet. But you'll all see.
 
Last edited:
Have you ever dated a guy that you deep down knew that was wrong for you but still continued to date him and in the end he hurt you and years later you finally admitted to yourself that you knew he was wrong for you from the very start?

hmm...well, this doesn't really apply though because that would mean that deep down for the last 2 years I believe these songs are real, but tell myself they are fake...Which isn't the case here...

I think a lot of people don't have an open mind about these songs because, well, they lack all Michael Jackson vocal traits (aside from the copy/pastes) hence, they don't sound anything like Michael Jackson lol ...It's like looking at green grass and someone insisting that it's red...'It's like, 'oh yeah, I see what you're saying, yeah, it could be red'....:mello:

It's either Michael Jackson or it isn't. There's no grey area, really.
 
Last edited:
Speaking for myself as a doubter... there is no doubt. Everyone will see eventually. I'd bet my life without a seconds hesitation. The only thing I can say to a believer is, you just aren't able to hear what we can. It's kind of a shitty thing to say, but hey, that's life. Not everyone is given the same abilities. Luckily for me I've always had a strong ear and knack for music. I do it as a hobbyist today. Which I guess means nothing on the internet. But you'll all see.
I have also been producing music for over 8 years now. Basically, my life is music and I am very sure that it is not Michael on the songs.

I was at Wal-mart and saw the I Just Can't Stop Loving You single. I look at the tracklist and it has a "previously unreleased" song. It's like two bucks so I must buy it, I take it home, throw it on, and wow. Heaven! Michael's voice almost always instantly makes me smile. The Cascio tracks cannot do this for me!

Listening to Blues Away just a little bit ago... Michael's abilities with his voice, the runs he does, his tricks are orgasmic. Jason is incapable of these things. I think Michael would be very upset with this. :(
 
yes the same argument can be made for believers as well and guess what it has already been done. Many doubters stated believers are basing their opinion and their belief on the MJ Estate's statement. It's the exact same argument that believers say the doubters are hearing such differences to Michael (or similarities to Jason) because the idea of songs possibly being fake was mentioned before.
I think there are three key differences between the Estate statement and the Jackson family messages as a source of influence on our positions in this debate.

a. The awareness of the messages: many doubters have indicated that they were not aware of any controversy before they listened to Breaking News, whereas we were of course all aware of the Estate statement.
b. The source of the messages: a(n at the time) well-respected authority, the official source for all things Michael - the Estate, vs the Jackson family, whose statements are taken with a grain of salt by many fans. Remember that just a few days before Breaking News streamed we got that really weird, supposedly new song from Howard Mann and that Joe Jackson was claiming that body doubles were used in This Is It around that time. The Jackson family's credibility was not exactly at an all time high in the eyes of the fans. Also, the Estate's message was an official statement, whether the comments by the Jackson family were just Twitter messages.
c. The content of the messages: as I said in my previous post, we were all expecting an album full of authentic songs. The Estate statement confirms exactly what we wanted, whereas the claim that there are fake songs on the album does the opposite. It therefore might have been easier to accept the former. Also, the claim that some songs on an official MJ album are fake is much more far-fetched than that they are not. Before this happened, I could have never imagined that it could - another reason why the Estate's statement might be easier to digest than the claim that the songs are fake.

Yeah, the argument can be applied to both doubters and believers and it might have influenced people in both camps, but given all of the above it makes more sense to me that 'expectations/motivations' were a source of influence for believers than for doubters.

Actually the biggest motivation is being right or wrong or not wanting to be wrong. For example kreen wrote "if I can make a mistake anyone can, it's human nature". I had multiple times wrote "I can be right, I can be wrong". However just look to a few posts above while I was questioning Stella about other people's opinions and he replied with "They are wrong" not even accounting for the possibility that he can be the one that's wrong. Stella isn't the only one feeling this way, For example samhabib used to write he can't be wrong and if he is he'll hang his glove and retire from the fan community.
I do not really agree with you. Some people are confident in their opinion - that does not mean that their motivation is to be right. I think most of us in this topic are motivated to find out the truth above all else.

With regards to your point about listening to the other side, sure, some things have given me pause, particularly the bigger questions (why would they do it? why would they release it if they also have other tracks in the vault?). But when I weigh all the arguments and the evidence, I still come to the same conclusion: that Michael is not singing these songs. In my opinion, many of the questions doubters ask are ignored. The inaccuracies we point out are just brushed aside and seldom confronted head on. There does not seem to be a reasonable explanation for any of them. I think this is also why many doubters are quite confident about their position in this debate (at least it is the reason I do). Of course I allow for the possibility that I might be wrong. I just think, in all honesty, that it is very unlikely.

Furthermore, I do not really see how the motivation to be right could have influenced us when we took our initial positions in this debate. When I was about to listen to Breaking News I was not thinking 'oh, I want to be right about this one!', I was thinking 'yes! finally a new MJ song, I can't wait!'

(By the way, you took that quote by kreen out of context. He was not saying that to make the point that he might be right or might be wrong, on the contrary, he was using it to claim that he knew without a shred of doubt (no pun intended) why doubters believe what they do (he even concludes his post with 'so that's what happened').)

The minute after the Breaking News streamed there were people instantly giving opinions without waiting for any information and without even listening to the song in full. Rushing to form opinions seems to be a trend in MJ Fan community.
But why would people wait for information to give their opinion on the song? If it does not sound like Michael to you, it does not sound like Michael to you. I do not see why people should have waited for more information to post that. I also think this relates to the deeper issue of trusting our own ears. Yes, I absolutely think we should take everything into account (and, purely going by memory, I actually seem to remember that many people were waiting for what the Estate had to say before taking a side) and yes, our ears can be wrong. But I also think we should have some confidence in our ability to recognize Michael's voice and not simply disregard that.
 
hmm...well, this doesn't really apply though because that would mean that deep down for the last 2 years I believe these songs are real, but tell myself they are fake...Which isn't the case here...

nah I didn't mean that. Let me explain it better.

I wrote "Have you ever read a post from an opposing side that made you think "hmm that makes sense" but still you choose to not allow that logical argument not to alter your position?"

Normally humans make decisions or come to conclusions based on multiple factors which include rational thinking, common sense, intuition and emotions. However when our emotions run high we also tend to ignore the logical / rational thinking - the dating the guy knowing deep down he's wrong for you is an example of this. The girl is so highly emotionally invested in love that she chooses to ignore the warning signs even though her conscious mind tells her so, she doesn't allow rational and logical thinking to alter her position.

Now let me try with our example. Some days back kreen wrote a post talking about if the claim is that there's been a deliberate attempt to fake the songs, it means that there are quite some people that are knowledgeable about the fraud and the doubters position is based on the assumption that these group of people can and will keep silent no matter what - for a measly sale of 2.5 Million albums.

Assume that you logically agree with this statement (or any similar ones). Assume that you think there's no perfect crime (and furthermore prisoner's dilemma theory concludes that someone ratting the other one out) and it's highly unlikely for a group of people to keep this a secret, logically you should alter your position (I'm not saying change your opinion, it's just alter) to include that it's hard to pull this fraud through. You see what I mean? Even though you continue to believe the songs aren't Michael , you also have "could they have pulled this fraud through?" question mark in your brain. However again by human nature people do not like conflicting thoughts and if your response is " I don't care if they could have done it, I don't care how they did it, all I care is what my ears hear" than although you are deep down aware of a logical conflict but emotionally choosing to ignore it.

Years ago when talking with Dangerous_Inc about Michael's will and conspiracy theories (and I'm not using this word in a bad way, it's a conspiracy to fake the songs - if true) around it, I wrote I'm open to conspiracy theories but everything - and I mean everything- should fit in my mind to believe it. I also wrote I see myself as a highly rational person (which wasn't a jab at people either) so I'm not really the person to go with emotional responses but everyone is different.
 
I think there are three key differences between the Estate statement and the Jackson family messages as a source of influence on our positions in this debate.

I think you are missing some points.

a. The awareness of the messages: many doubters have indicated that they were not aware of any controversy before they listened to Breaking News, whereas we were of course all aware of the Estate statement.

and honestly I don't believe it. I'm not saying that they read every article and memorized every word but Friedman's and later TMZ's stories was very widely discussed. Even the insiders in our forum wrote about the delays without knowing the reasons. If people looking forward to the album and was looking for information/ reading the thread - like I did- they should be aware of there was some issues, some delays and issues raised. Again I'm not saying they believed it but I think 99% was aware of the very basics at least.

b. The source of the messages: a(n at the time) well-respected authority, the official source for all things Michael - the Estate, vs the Jackson family, whose statements are taken with a grain of salt by many fans. Remember that just a few days before Breaking News streamed we got that really weird, supposedly new song from Howard Mann and that Joe Jackson was claiming that body doubles were used in This Is It around that time. The Jackson family's credibility was not exactly at an all time high in the eyes of the fans. Also, the Estate's message was an official statement, whether the comments by the Jackson family were just Twitter messages.

Let's not lump sum Jacksons. Yes while Joe is highly unbelievable, the same could not be said for 3T. At the time the were liked. everyone knew Michael was close to them, knew they were included in the will, they wrote they wanted 3T to be involved in the Estate, involved in Michael's kids life and so on. It's all on these forum. So when those statements came 3T was a highly liked and credible sources. If any negativity against them happened after the Cascio song debate and their participation in Cardiff tribute.

and IMO the medium of the message makes no difference. Teddy Riley didn't give any "official statements" and just tweeted away, all of his statements are repeated over and over. It doesn't seem like people give them any less importance just because the source is twitter.

c. The content of the messages: as I said in my previous post, we were all expecting an album full of authentic songs. The Estate statement confirms exactly what we wanted, whereas the claim that there are fake songs on the album does the opposite. It therefore might have been easier to accept the former. Also, the claim that some songs on an official MJ album are fake is much more far-fetched than that they are not. Before this happened, I could have never imagined that it could - another reason why the Estate's statement might be easier to digest than the claim that the songs are fake.

Correction: time of the statements. Friedman stories started 2-3 weeks before the release, TMZ stories 1 week before. Taj Jackson denied Friedman's story that they came to an agreement weeks before the stream. Estate statement came weeks after all of these, and days after the song stream. By that time most people have formed opinions (and even you said "why people should have waited?"). It's hundred times harder to change a person's mind when they already made it up. So I think Estate didn't stand a chance.

Yeah, the argument can be applied to both doubters and believers and it might have influenced people in both camps, but given all of the above it makes more sense to me that 'expectations/motivations' were a source of influence for believers than for doubters.

I would have agreed only if the information from both sides came at the same time. Unfortunately it didn't and I believe time is a huge factor.

With regards to your point about listening to the other side,

for this part please read my reply to Arklove above. I think it explains what I meant a lot better.


But why would people wait for information to give their opinion on the song? If it does not sound like Michael to you, it does not sound like Michael to you. I do not see why people should have waited for more information to post that. I also think this relates to the deeper issue of trusting our own ears.

Well the more information you have the more informed opinion (and correct) you form, that's one thing. But my main point was that there had been people that were commenting on the song 1 minute into the song, not even listening to the song fully. For example in this thread we call Pentum Malachi expert and let's say that perhaps due to his knowledge he's one of the people that was able to come to a quick conclusion but what about the rest of the people? Do you really think that everyone here is not only knowledgeable in Michael's voice but also highly knowledgeable in regards to Malachi's voice to be able to do that quick determination?

For example I wrote before I knew Malachi and his songs before and I had an opinion about his ability long before but he wasn't a person that I listened to every day. so before I formed any opinion I went back and I listened to his songs again to refresh my memory.

so to me personally if a person 1 minute into a 4 minute song declares it's Malachi, I have every right to be skeptical about the merits of his conclusion. I'm more likely to believe someone who at least showed some effort before they came to a opinion.

Yes, I absolutely think we should take everything into account (and, purely going by memory, I actually seem to remember that many people were waiting for what the Estate had to say before taking a side) and yes, our ears can be wrong.

MJ fans waiting? Sorry that's not our strong suit. Remember the DVD discussion recently? No one waited for any information even though I told that an announcement was coming. People ran a million mile with theories before they even got a bit of information. I mentioned Perez Hilton's Glee news story as well, people got carried away with it as well and no one considering he's a tabloid journalist and/or waiting for confirmation or denial or a more credible source. So sorry but I think MJ fans aren't the ones to wait, they rush into conclusions, they judge and even cut the heads of the people involved and later when proven wrong go around saying "sorry, my bad".

But I also think we should have some confidence in our ability to recognize Michael's voice and not simply disregard that.

sure but the science show that humans aren't as good as voice identification as they think especially when it includes similar sounding people.
 
and honestly I don't believe it. I'm not saying that they read every article and memorized every word but Friedman's and later TMZ's stories was very widely discussed. Even the insiders in our forum wrote about the delays without knowing the reasons. If people looking forward to the album and was looking for information/ reading the thread - like I did- they should be aware of there was some issues, some delays and issues raised. Again I'm not saying they believed it but I think 99% was aware of the very basics at least.
Ok, well here we simply disagree then.

Let's not lump sum Jacksons. Yes while Joe is highly unbelievable, the same could not be said for 3T. At the time the were liked. everyone knew Michael was close to them, knew they were included in the will, they wrote they wanted 3T to be involved in the Estate, involved in Michael's kids life and so on. It's all on these forum. So when those statements came 3T was a highly liked and credible sources. If any negativity against them happened after the Cascio song debate and their participation in Cardiff tribute.
I agree with you that Joe should perhaps be in a category of his own, but I still think that in general, people had more faith in the Estate than in the family (as I said, this was also the time when Katherine Jackson, another highly respected and well-liked family member, was working with Howard Mann, who everybody perceived as shady). The Estate was and is the official authority when it comes to all things Michael - they were the ones appointed by Michael, they were the ones in control of the release, therefore, they were the most authoritative source when it came to this album.

and IMO the medium of the message makes no difference. Teddy Riley didn't give any "official statements" and just tweeted away, all of his statements are repeated over and over. It doesn't seem like people give them any less importance just because the source is twitter.
I agree with you, but many believers do seem to think the medium makes a difference. Just the other day kreen commented that Teddy Riley's tweets should not be taken seriously because they were written in the 'heat of the moment'. This is not the first time I have read that. Similarly, several believers have said that the comments by the Jackson family should not be taken seriously because they 'only posted something on Twitter'.

Correction: time of the statements. Friedman stories started 2-3 weeks before the release, TMZ stories 1 week before. Taj Jackson denied Friedman's story that they came to an agreement weeks before the stream. Estate statement came weeks after all of these, and days after the song stream. By that time most people have formed opinions (and even you said "why people should have waited?"). It's hundred times harder to change a person's mind when they already made it up. So I think Estate didn't stand a chance.
Yes, this is something I thought about as well. However, given the fact that I believe many people were not aware of those rumours (I know you disagree about that) or that they did not take them seriously because the idea sounded so ridiculous, I think they only became relevant after BN was streamed and that timing therefore is not a crucial issue. And I still think all the other issues I raised apply as well.

With the 'why should they have waited' I was referring to people sharing their impressions of the songs: what do they sound like to them? What do they hear? What feelings do they evoke? Your comment seemed to communicate surprise at people immediately posting how they felt about the song, which to me is a totally normal and valid thing to do. That does not mean that people should no longer have listened to what the Estate had to say. On the contrary, if they had provided evidence that the songs were authentic, people should have adjusted their initial opinions. And I think many people did wait for what the Estate had to say, expecting an explanation for what happened. I remember being utterly disappointed with the Estate's explanation because of the total lack of evidence, and then being flabbergasted because there was nevertheless a tremendous shift in opinions: suddenly people heard Michael or were convinced by the Estate's explanation. To say that their statement did not 'stand a chance' is therefore bizarre to me, because it clearly did influence opinions to a great extent.

I think the incidents you mention about the Bad Tour DVD quality and the use of Monster in that Glee episode are not comparable because they all came after the 'Michael' debacle. In other words, after many fans lost faith in the Estate. If what you say is true (fans always immediately jump to conclusions without awaiting further info), shouldn't fans have been massively protesting the Michael album as soon as the rumours about the fake tracks emerged? But this did not happen of course.

Now let me try with our example. Some days back kreen wrote a post talking about if the claim is that there's been a deliberate attempt to fake the songs, it means that there are quite some people that are knowledgeable about the fraud and the doubters position is based on the assumption that these group of people can and will keep silent no matter what - for a measly sale of 2.5 Million albums.

Assume that you logically agree with this statement (or any similar ones). Assume that you think there's no perfect crime (and furthermore prisoner's dilemma theory concludes that someone ratting the other one out) and it's highly unlikely for a group of people to keep this a secret, logically you should alter your position (I'm not saying change your opinion, it's just alter) to include that it's hard to pull this fraud through. You see what I mean? Even though you continue to believe the songs aren't Michael , you also have "could they have pulled this fraud through?" question mark in your brain. However again by human nature people do not like conflicting thoughts and if your response is " I don't care if they could have done it, I don't care how they did it, all I care is what my ears hear" than although you are deep down aware of a logical conflict but emotionally choosing to ignore it.

The difference between the prisoner's dilemma and this situation is that in the prisoners dilemma, choosing the option to rat the other out is always more beneficial to the individual than cooperating. In your description of this situation that is not the case: remaining silent is less dangerous than ratting out the other(s), which would make your own involvement evident and might pit you against a multi-million dollar company.

As I said in my previous post though, these kinds of questions are the things that have given me pause. However, when I take everything into account, the total lack of evidence for MJ's involvement, the contradictory explanations we have been given, the fact that the vocals sound nothing like MJ and everything like JM, etc., then I still can only come to the conclusion that this did somehow, some way happen.

Well the more information you have the more informed opinion (and correct) you form, that's one thing.
I once had an exhausting debate about this on Max Jax. This is not always necessarily the case.

But to get the point: my general argument was that there is a tendency among some believers to completely disregard or shift the focus away from the fact that the vocals do not sound like MJ at all (and instead for instance focus on how hard it would be to pull of such a conspiracy), and that I do not think we should ignore what we hear. Yeah, the opinion of one single fan might not mean much (as you said, we can be wrong). But if so many of us feel the vocals sound off, that does mean something. And that's also why those initial reactions are so interesting: people made them relatively indepent of one another, before seeing how others reacted to the song.
 
Well the more information you have the more informed opinion (and correct) you form, that's one thing. But my main point was that there had been people that were commenting on the song 1 minute into the song, not even listening to the song fully. For example in this thread we call Pentum Malachi expert and let's say that perhaps due to his knowledge he's one of the people that was able to come to a quick conclusion but what about the rest of the people? Do you really think that everyone here is not only knowledgeable in Michael's voice but also highly knowledgeable in regards to Malachi's voice to be able to do that quick determination?

This is a very important point that Ivy is raising here. All of us here are forum nerds who first listened to Breaking Newas as we were discussing it on this forum and others. As you know, I was actually a doubter for a few weeks -- because of my emotions and subjective impressions. And this doubt -- including my belief that it WAS Malachi singing -- was 100% the product of me coming on this forum (or was it MaxJack?) as I was listening to the song. Of course I was influenced by what I read here : I barely knew of Jason Malachi, yet my initial reaction was -- it's him! If I hadn't had access to the Internet before and during the streaming of Breaking News, I would have accepted it as a surprising, disappointing but obviously real MJ song. The idea would not have crossed my mind that it was an impersonator.

I actually remember turning off the song and not even listening to the whole thing for a few days, so outraged was I that we had been fooled. It didn't cross my mind that maybe I should actually listen to the complete song before having a definite opinion about it. And that outrage, that anger on my part was 100% the product of all of the other people on the Internet voicing their own outrage and anger, and doing so so forcefully that I was influenced -- big time!

I like to believe I'm my own man and always make up my own mind, but the truth is we're all humans, and we can be easily swayed by the herd mentality.
 
@kreen: I wish it was that way for me.

I didn't know Jason Malachi, either. I thought Let Me Let Go WAS Michael Jackson and had NO idea of Jason Malachi or an impersonator the first few days after Breaking News. I was not a part of these forums immediately and checking for constant MJ news. I joined to join in the debate after it started.

I became a hardcore Michael Jackson fan in 2008, have been a general fan all my life, but really started researching him in-depth in the summer of 2008, religiously listening to all of his albums and watching every youtube video on him that I could find. In the past year alone I've listened to Michael 8,000 times. I have really grown to know his voice more and more every day, and I guess I approached Jason Malachi as an interesting challenge.

The thing is, when I first heard a Malachi song, knowing it was Malachi, I chuckled to myself and cringed, because it really was difficult for me to tell the difference at first, but I quickly noticed, there was definitely something different about it. Sure, certain moments sound Michael-y enough, but throughout the song you notice an essential piece missing. For me, it started to become easier and easier to detect Malachi's voice over Michael's voice.

Since this debate started I have studied both of their voices so much. I actually enjoy the melodies in many Jason Malachi songs and in the Cascio songs. Trust me, I never wanted to believe they were fake. I never wanted fake songs. I never wanted to feel this extreme disappointment.

Now, a couple years later, I can detect Malachi and Michael apart very easily, as well can my mother and girlfriend from having heard me comparing all the time. Jason Malachi does not have near the power of Michael Jackson. There are obvious copy-and-pastes in the song that perk the ears, but they have all been discovered as samples from previous MJ songs...

I mean I even left these forums for a couple months and just let myself sit on them, incorporating them in my playlists at home and work. They just do not sound like Michael Jackson songs, they don't work next to Michael Jackson songs, in my opinion. Laying in bed, listening to a Michael Jackson song, then a Cascio song comes on, there's a different aura that I feel. It's colder than Michael.

I think part of why people want to believe they're Michael is that they do have catchy pop elements to them that are easy to love. I have found myself addicted to the hooks of nearly all the songs throughout the listening and research process. They are not godawful or they wouldn't have been selected for the first major release. Teddy, Tricky and the team also helped amp up the songs with tons of instruments and effects.

I hope the people who believe Michael sings these songs really study Michael's voice and technique. I have yet to see a doubter post information about Michael's technique, that is lacking from the Cascio tracks, that isn't true. Where's his classic "mmhmm", "uh-huh, alright", "yeah-yeah", etc. ???

ivy's point about this being hard to pull off is very logical, but bizarre things always seem to happen in Michael's world. We have said many times that this is an unprecedented issue. Michael has always been unprecedented. So I agree, this does seem a bit grand, but it really seems to point that there has been a ghost vocalist who was brought in to finish the tracks or already had originally recorded them. All evidence I've heard and seen points to Jason Malachi being this ghost vocalist. It definitely isn't Michael Jackson. Where's the evidence? Hollywood Tonight was shockingly doubted by about seven individuals, but we have handwritten lyrics, notes and audio of Michael speaking in demo recordings of the song. I bet nearly every single song Michael has ever worked on has some evidence attached. There is absolutely no evidence for the Cascio songs being performed by Michael, or I strongly feel we would have seen it by now.
 
Ok, well here we simply disagree then.

ok but I'll actually explain this a little further. To be clear we aren't talking about knowing/ reading every news story or believing at them, the issue is just being merely aware of it.

Friedman had been writing about it for a month. I can believe that people did not follow or read what Friedman wrote given his history but what people are forgetting that the authenticity issue was mentioned quite a lot between the album announcement and the stream of Breaking News (there was a 1-2 week period between those). The reason I'm believe that many people had heard it before the stream is bc of my brother and his friends. I wrote before that my brother used to listen to Michael and currently more into Metallica and he's active on a Metallica board. He told me that the release of a new MJ album, the authenticity issue was written on metallica board and they were aware of it. Sure he didn't stay up for 12 AM to listen to the song but when I called him the next day he had already listened to the song to see for himself if it was Michael or not. So now you expect me to believe that a Metallica board members had heard it before and active members of a MJ board hasn't? Do you think that a MJ fan that heard the album release and the upcoming stream of BN said "sweet I can't wait" and for a week or more did not read a single comment / news story written about the album and/or authenticity issues? Then they listened to the song and immediately determine not only it wasn't Michael but it's Malachi. They then ran to the forum to see that tens of other people have actually done the same. Sorry my friend but that it unbelievable in my mind.

It's a lot more likely that they were aware of the issues and authenticity concerns but scolded it and put it in the back of their minds. They played the song with a "yay new MJ song" approach but they also had "could it be not Michael?" question in their mind. Perhaps they were confused, didn't know what to think , they weren't sure but when they were constantly hitting refresh on the forum they have seen other people write it's terrible, it's not michael and so on, so their suspicion was confirmed. Later the audio comparisons sealed the deal. Do you really believe that there were many people walking around knowledgeable of Malachi's vibrato on their own?


I agree with you that Joe should perhaps be in a category of his own, but I still think that in general, people had more faith in the Estate than in the family (as I said, this was also the time when Katherine Jackson, another highly respected and well-liked family member, was working with Howard Mann, who everybody perceived as shady). The Estate was and is the official authority when it comes to all things Michael - they were the ones appointed by Michael, they were the ones in control of the release, therefore, they were the most authoritative source when it came to this album.

"More faith in Estate" is argumentative as well. Not only Michael's will , whether Branca was hired or fired had been heavy and heated discussion topics. Plus Vision was released shortly before the album and the fans complained quite a lot about it as well. So I don't think fans approach to MJ Estate was all peachy to be honest.


I agree with you, but many believers do seem to think the medium makes a difference. Just the other day kreen commented that Teddy Riley's tweets should not be taken seriously because they were written in the 'heat of the moment'. This is not the first time I have read that. Similarly, several believers have said that the comments by the Jackson family should not be taken seriously because they 'only posted something on Twitter'.

I agree that 140 character limit on twitter makes it hard to communicate and not always everything is understood correctly. For example I agree with kreen when he said we have no idea whether Teddy understood the questions about the issues with vibrato. The answer he gave (melodyne) is a common complaint in regards to processing - go search gearslutz for melodyne and vibrato and you'll see that musicians write that it sounds unnatural and so on. So doubters stating Teddy's answer does not explain the issue at hand is kinda flawed when they don't know if he actually understood the issue to start with. Similarly heat of the moment can affect wording choices, for example Teddy Riley who was being attacked and cursed by fans is more likely to have a defensive mood and use similar curses and attacks than a statement coming from the estate being written by legal department and probably read over by multiple parties before being sent out.

However the content is valued the same. For example Taryll said it's not Michael and he knows his uncles voice on twitter. Estate said it's Michael as their researched showed it. No one gave Estate's statement more weight because it came on a sheet of paper.


Yes, this is something I thought about as well. However, given the fact that I believe many people were not aware of those rumours (I know you disagree about that) or that they did not take them seriously because the idea sounded so ridiculous, I think they only became relevant after BN was streamed and that timing therefore is not a crucial issue. And I still think all the other issues I raised apply as well.

My point was "did they heard it before?"

With the 'why should they have waited' I was referring to people sharing their impressions of the songs: what do they sound like to them? What do they hear? What feelings do they evoke? Your comment seemed to communicate surprise at people immediately posting how they felt about the song, which to me is a totally normal and valid thing to do. That does not mean that people should no longer have listened to what the Estate had to say. On the contrary, if they had provided evidence that the songs were authentic, people should have adjusted their initial opinions. And I think many people did wait for what the Estate had to say, expecting an explanation for what happened. I remember being utterly disappointed with the Estate's explanation because of the total lack of evidence, and then being flabbergasted because there was nevertheless a tremendous shift in opinions: suddenly people heard Michael or were convinced by the Estate's explanation. To say that their statement did not 'stand a chance' is therefore bizarre to me, because it clearly did influence opinions to a great extent.

yeah my comment was about immediate opinions such as people declaring it was Malachi and I don't think it's normal. For example do you think meeting a person for the first time ever and in 2 minutes declaring she'll be the one you'll spend your life forever normal? I don't. I similarly don't consider 1 minute into the song making declarations normal either.

If any shift happened it was because of the logic & rational reasoning - which is a part of our overall decision making - played a part probably and only to the people that were confused but not determined probably. For some people I think it's impossible to change their opinions regardless of what is put in front of them given the emotional investment in the topic.

For example assume tomorrow you are given an expert report that's 100 pages that shows all of the tests that are done by the non arguably best experts in the world and assume the reports says 80% and 85% Michael (remember in this instance there's no perfect proof). What will be your opinion then? Would you believe the expert report and say you were wrong or still continue to have the same opinion and believe each expert was wrong and it was the 10-15% error rate?

I think the incidents you mention about the Bad Tour DVD quality and the use of Monster in that Glee episode are not comparable because they all came after the 'Michael' debacle. In other words, after many fans lost faith in the Estate. If what you say is true (fans always immediately jump to conclusions without awaiting further info), shouldn't fans have been massively protesting the Michael album as soon as the rumours about the fake tracks emerged? But this did not happen of course.

see Vision. fans didn't protest the album? remember the campaign to change the tracklist as well as the fan sites coming together and declaring a position? I don't know what you call "massive" but the protests did start pretty quickly.

As I said in my previous post though, these kinds of questions are the things that have given me pause. However, when I take everything into account, the total lack of evidence for MJ's involvement, the contradictory explanations we have been given, the fact that the vocals sound nothing like MJ and everything like JM, etc., then I still can only come to the conclusion that this did somehow, some way happen.

somehow and some way. see that's not good enough for me.


But to get the point: my general argument was that there is a tendency among some believers to completely disregard or shift the focus away from the fact that the vocals do not sound like MJ at all (and instead for instance focus on how hard it would be to pull of such a conspiracy), and that I do not think we should ignore what we hear. Yeah, the opinion of one single fan might not mean much (as you said, we can be wrong). But if so many of us feel the vocals sound off, that does mean something. And that's also why those initial reactions are so interesting: people made them relatively indepent of one another, before seeing how others reacted to the song.

I think the point that the doubters are missing that the vocals do not sound "not like MJ at all" to the believers. To them it doesn't sound off so you are expecting them to address something they do not believe in at all. That's not gonna happen and it's not a disregard or a shift of focus.

and as for the initial reactions read the first part. I don't think people made them "relatively independent" of one another. I actually think there was quite a lot of idea sharing and help from the others. Just see the two posts above in which people say that they weren't knowledgeable about Malachi so there's nothing "independent" about their opinion, to the contrary their opinion is pretty much shaped by the "help" and opinions of others.
 
Back
Top