Latest on MJJC

Aaron Carter Claims MJ Gave Him Drugs *Update Post 41* Merged

That is what we are finalizing now. See above a few posts. :)
 
ginvid;3425719 said:
On 29 May, 2011 90s pop singer Aaron Carter filmed an interview with freelance 'journalist' and friend Daphne Barak for OK Australia magazine's 27 June edition. The article and excerpts that have been released have spread rapidly across all media for one reason - it involves Michael Jackson.

Carter’s friendship - and we use that word loosely - with Jackson is not in question. However, the Michael Jackson fan community strongly rejects the elements of the story that suggest and imply that Mr Jackson gave Aaron Carter drugs or alcohol or would have acted in any way improperly with him.

Indeed, the fan community finds it puzzling that Mr Carter would give this kind of interview, after all the years of defending Mr Jackson (even as recently as 2010). He spoke highly of Jackson’s influence on his life and his work and strongly denied that anything inappropriate had occurred between them (see Howard Stern interview:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtURi...layer_embedded).

As for the claims made by Carter. They can be debunked not only by what he said previously and consistently. In fact, Aaron Carter was on the witness list for the defense in the 2005 trial.

They can also be refuted by those who were there: "I saw Michael leave for just a few minutes to wash off that cake, he was later sipping on a glass of wine, and he never finished it. They were out driving around the ranch with the fourwheelers and we were many (<--remove the word 'many'?) out there having a laugh about it. When talking to Michael he said he didn´t even know half of the people being there but he loved that the fans could be there. When he finally left the party after driving around the ranch, he was alone except for one security guy. He invited a few (I was among them) into the house, we were there for about an hour. He left for his bedroom and didn´t ask us to leave, it was more like "enjoy yourself, I trust you". And there were no Aaron Carter anywhere to be found in that house during that night. He´s taken care off by Tucker I think, I didn´t see him after the drive around the ranch. So much more happened, but not a single minute was Michael out of sight except when he cleaned up himself."

Frank Cascio who maintained a friendship with Jackson tweeted "I knew Michael for over 25 year and NEVER once did he use cocaine or suggest to anyone else to use cocaine. Never!!!!" (http://twitter.com/#!/fdcascio/status/86547254990733312).

In light of this and other evidence, the Michael Jackson fan community is questioning the motive for this seeming change of heart and story.

The timing of the interview is also suspect. In June millions around the world mourn the passing of Mr Jackson and those with even the remotest connection to him seem to find it an ideal time to promote a book, CD or project. Aaron Carter’s willingness to jump on that bandwagon is disappointing but not surprising. He has said, through his representative, that he was misquoted in the article. However, in watching the edited excerpts of the interview, it is clear that Mr Carter's answers allowed for speculation and innuendo.

Carter's denial is now being widely reported. But more needs to be done. Mr Carter must demand a full retraction from OK magazine, if it is indeed misrepresenting what he said. But as the story continues to unfold it becomes clear that the Carter camp have seen the benefits of tying his name in a negative way to Mr Jackson’s and is taking full advantage.

This story had been circulating for two weeks and some concerned Jackson fans had reached out to Aaron Carter, as early as 15 June, only to be rebuffed and ignored. An official and strong statement of denial would have halted this story in its tracks. This is what that (<----- remove 'that'?) an honourable person would do in love and respect for a friend and mentor who has died. However, the speculation and insinuations were allowed to linger. And the only person who has been damaged in this debacle is Mr Jackson who is not here to defend himself. All of the others who are involved have been able to raise their profiles on his back.

Daphne Barak has also had a very dubious past . She has "created" stories before. After Michael Jackson died, she became friendly with Grace Rwanda (is it Rwanda or 'Rwaramba'?) - a nanny for several years for Michael Jackson's children for the purpose of taking advantage of her in the hopes of finding out information about Michael Jackson. In a story written by Mallika Chopra for The Huffington Post, Mallika said the following: "I witnessed Daphne act as a friend while trying to bait information from Grace on her conversations with Jackson family members and friends about his death... I found that Daphne indeed had written an article full of quotes by Grace for a tabloid magazine. (A quick search of her other work not surprisingly shows she did a recent feature on Amy Winehouse.) Grace’s quotes are now being picked up by other tabloids and will find their way into more magazines and articles. (People Magazine is also featuring some today, including the inaccurate claim the Grace pumped Michael’s stomach several times. For the record, Grace never pumped Michael’s stomach. She has no idea how she would even do such a thing.) " (<--- remove inverted comma?)

Daphne Barak was also at the center of controversy because of an inteview with Sanam Bhutto. An article at SouthAsiaWatch chronicles her faux journalism. It says, "Daphne Barak... has been foisting herself upon the famous and noteworthy families of the world for years now. Her living is made by offering "exclusive" interviews, scintillating gossip, and manufacturing rumor and innuendo at every turn. She is often spotted interviewing members of families in crisis, taking advantage of their grief and need for hope, in order to fuel her personal drive for fame, access, and notoriety. Daphne portrays and tarnishes the image of Bhutto by revealing or blatantly manufacturing details that cannot be independently verified about Bhutto's life... any references to Bhutto or Pakistan that she writes should be taken as near-fiction or nothing less than a complete fabrication... In more recent Pakistan news, Daphne Barak has done the nation of Pakistan and its people a grave disservice by manufacturing a news story featuring "statements" from Benazair Bhutto's sister, Sanam, regarding the President of Pakistan, Asif Zardari. While biased journalism may be tolerated in many circles, Daphe Barak crossed the line into complete fiction. Sanam Bhutto, outraged and distressed at the lies attributed to her, vigorously denounced the fiction produced by Daphne Barak, via print and video ." The article also mentions how she "cozied" up to the parents of Amy Winehouse, "feeding off their grief and concern for their daughter" in order to get a story on Amy Winehouse.

Her methods have been consistent, befriending a person for the purpose of interviewing them so that she can then put a spin on said interview. Is that what happened with Aaron Carter? Note her tweet about him on May 29th.


This speaks volumes about Ms. Barak's ethics and values as a journalist.

Furthermore, it is disturbing that we live in a time when our media is willing to copy and paste a story without first verifying its accuracy and veracity. No one attempted to check the accuracy or veracity. No mention was made of Carter's previous denials, nor of the reputation of the interviewer. This is even more disturbing when this practice is adopted by news outlets that are supposed to report factual stories. Although the story about this interview originated from OK! Magazine, which is not known for being a reputable publication, it didn't take long for over 150 media outlets to take the story and run with it. It is apparent that facts are not of great concern to the media, which is shameful.

Now that there has a denial of some aspects of the interview, we can only hope that there will a more rigorous screening process before stories are aired or published, especially when the source is a tabloid and the author has a questionable reputation (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9Dz7rs8VfA).

We call on all Michael Jackson fans to boycott the magazine and to express their opinion to the editors of OK magazine and to Daphne Barak (the author). Fans also need to let their sources of news and information know that they are no longer interested in uncorroborated, salacious stories.

Michael Jackson was defamed and maligned in life, his fans are committed and determined to see that this defamation does not continue in death.
Click to expand...

My comments and corrections in read. May not be a perfect proof check, I could have missed out a few things.
 
Wait, is this going to be published or just sent to editors?

Also what of the idea of buying out ads to denounce Barak and targeting the sponsors of OK magazine?
 
Soundmind said:
Strauss-khan case is all over the internet now , for those who are leaving comments on blogs and sites, please mention this case. the new revelations about the accuser destroyed the prosecution's case. what happened to this man is very similar to what happened to MJ in 1993, in 2003 and now. point out how easy it was for her to make those horrific accusations against the man , the monetary gain,how many people were very willing to believe her and send the man to jail and their only evidence was " he's a well known womanizer"

Perfect lesson in why people should be looked at as innocent until proven guilty in a court of low.

the story is making headlines, the 'victim's behavior' very similar to those who accused mike ;want money, caught on tape talking about money.

the media and people hurried to believe her because in their minds a womanizer is very likely a rapist , the same happened to mj a child-like man was very likely a pedo !!!!

they have her on tape telling her boyfriend not to worry about her , that she knows what she's doing and the guy has alot of money. tell me now is not this what Evan said on that taped conversation ?

of course here the prosecution are not overzealous like sneddon was , they did not bribe so called victims, and the media did not pay 100.000 and $ 500.000 to any boy who was willing to say something 'damaging'.

please leave comments on the articles that cover the strauss khan case, mention how similar it's to MJ's , how easy it's to create false accusation and bring a powerful man down . and mention this case under the articles covering the new fabrications made by carter.

the story is BIG worldwide , the readers are not idiots interested in reading what crackhead like Carter has to say, people are reading and commenting it's our chance to force the public to make comparisons and if they are willing to believe Strauss khan's framed why not MJ?
Click to expand...


Here in NY the case is front page news and leads all news cast. The similarities to MJ case jumps out at you. Glad the shocking revelations are unfolding in the midst of the Aron Carter nonsense. Powerful reminder not to rush to judgement, and it is always about money. Shows the media could have unravel the MJ allegations in a NY minute if they wanted.
 
ginvid said:
Daphne Barak has also had a very dubious past . She has "created" stories before. After Michael Jackson died, she became friendly with Grace Rwaramba- a nanny for several years for Michael Jackson's children-
Click to expand...

Change this to: "...she became friendly with Grace Rwaramba,who was the Jackson children's nanny for several years,..."

ginvid said:
Now that there has a denial of some aspects of the interview, we can only hope that there will a more rigorous screening process before stories are aired or published, especially when the source is a tabloid and the author has a questionable reputation (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9Dz7rs8VfA).
Click to expand...

That first sentence should read as follows: "Now that some aspects of the interview have been denied..."
 
I agree, the letter is fantastic. Thanks to all who have contributed to its composition, and to Rhilo for the awesome editing. If any of you are planning on writing e-mails and want someone to look over your letters and edit for spelling/grammatical/sentence structure errors, or want someone to let you know if it's polite/assertive enough, you can PM me.
 
Just some things I noticed whilst reading through,corrections in red:


They can also be refuted by those who were there: "I saw Michael leave for just a few minutes to wash of that cake, he was later sipping on a glass of wine, and he never finished it. They were out driving around the ranch with the fourwheelers and we were many out there having a laugh about it. When talking to Michael he said he didn´t even know half of the people being there but he loved that the fans could be there. When he finally left the party after driving around the ranch, he was alone except for one security guy. he invited a few (I was among them) into the house, we were there for about an hour. He left for his bedroom and didn´t ask us to leave, it was more like "enjoy yourself, I trust you". And there were (was?) no Aaron Carter anywhere to be found in that house during that night. he´s taken care of by Tucker I think, I didn´t see him after the drive around the ranch. So much more happened, but not a single minute was Michael out of sight except when he cleaned up himself."
 
Soundmind said:
Strauss-khan case is all over the internet now , for those who are leaving comments on blogs and sites, please mention this case. the new revelations about the accuser destroyed the prosecution's case. what happened to this man is very similar to what happened to MJ in 1993, in 2003 and now. point out how easy it was for her to make those horrific accusations against the man , the monetary gain,how many people were very willing to believe her and send the man to jail and their only evidence was " he's a well known womanizer"

Perfect lesson in why people should be looked at as innocent until proven guilty in a court of low.

the story is making headlines, the 'victim's behavior' very similar to those who accused mike ;want money, caught on tape talking about money.

the media and people hurried to believe her because in their minds a womanizer is very likely a rapist , the same happened to mj a child-like man was very likely a pedo !!!!

they have her on tape telling her boyfriend not to worry about her , that she knows what she's doing and the guy has alot of money. tell me now is not this what Evan said on that taped conversation ?

of course here the prosecution are not overzealous like sneddon was , they did not bribe so called victims, and the media did not pay 100.000 and $ 500.000 to any boy who was willing to say something 'damaging'.

please leave comments on the articles that cover the strauss khan case, mention how similar it's to MJ's , how easy it's to create false accusation and bring a powerful man down . and mention this case under the articles covering the new fabrications made by carter.

the story is BIG worldwide , the readers are not idiots interested in reading what crackhead like Carter has to say, people are reading and commenting it's our chance to force the public to make comparisons and if they are willing to believe Strauss khan's framed why not MJ?
Click to expand...

Thank you for posting this!
You're right, it is very similar to what happened to Michael.
My mother always thought Michael was guilty, now I think she starts to believe he was innocent. She follows Strauss-khan case closely and on French TV they even mentioned Michael Jackson and compared the 2 stories, how Michael was treated brutally by the police, how they arrested him without any proof that he was guilty..same happened with Strauss-khan and they had the same lawyer, Brafman. And yes, like you mentioned the tape, I immediately thought about Chandler's father. Anyway, my mom and I had a conversation about this and I explained how Michael was set up and how the accuser? wanted to grab money from him and how the media brainwashed the public, as usual and decided that Michael was guilty, even before the trial and ruined him completely..but at the end, he was found innocent. Now my mom says 'I think you might be right'..now she looks at this from another perspective. So again, thanks for posting this and I'm going to help and comment on major sites like CNN about the 2 cases. I suggest you to do the same, it could help..people can look at this from another perspective.
 
LindavG said:
I would strongly encourage people to do this. I believe it is much more effective than posting comments on MJ related articles, for the following reasons:

1) The Strauss Kahn story is posted by more reputable media outlets (as it concerns a high-profile politician) and read by more educated people, rather than the type that believes anything the tabloids say. I agree with Joe Vogel when he recommended not to comment on tabloid articles. Rather, save your effort to reach out to the more mainstream and respectable media.

2) The situation Strauss Kahn is currently in is very similar to that of Michael, so one can easily draw parallels without sounding like an obsessed fan. I've noticed that people are often quick to dismiss our comments, no matter how factual they are, because we are considered biased. In this case, we can respond to the Strauss Kahn situation and link it to MJ, without going into detail (as that would give away our fandom, which damages our credibility). It will get people thinking. If someone as powerful as Strauss Kahn is able to be framed, then why couldn't it happen to other celebrities?

3) The people who respond to MJ related articles are mostly fans and haters, as the neutral public generally doesn't care enough to engage in debates about him. Neither side is going to change its position so writing comments in Michael's defense mostly falls on deaf ears.

Just my $0.02 :)

ETA: when commenting on Strauss Kahn articles, please do NOT bring up Aaron Carter and his recent allegations. Many people have not heard about it yet and we don't want to be the ones spreading the news. Only talk about the 1993 and 2003-2005 cases.
Click to expand...

Your thoughts are very important. Perhaps so more people would ask the media more critically questions.
-----------------------
Thank you for all your hard work to fight for Michael :flowers: and the letter is great.
 
ginvid;3425756 said:
On 29 May, 2011 90s pop singer Aaron Carter filmed an interview with freelance 'journalist' and friend Daphne Barak for OK Australia magazine's 27 June edition. The article and excerpts that have been released have spread rapidly across all media for one reason - it involves Michael Jackson.

Carter&#8217;s friendship - and we use that word loosely - with Jackson is not in question. However, the Michael Jackson fan community strongly rejects the elements of the story that suggest and imply that Mr Jackson gave Aaron Carter drugs or alcohol or would have acted in any way improperly with him.

Indeed, the fan community finds it puzzling that Mr Carter would give this kind of interview, after all the years of defending Mr Jackson (even as recently as 2010). He spoke highly of Jackson&#8217;s influence on his life and his work and strongly denied that anything inappropriate had occurred between them (see Howard Stern interview:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtURi...layer_embedded).

As for the claims made by Carter, they can be debunked by what he himself said previously and consistently. In fact, Aaron Carter was on the witness list for the defense in the 2005 trial.

Frank Cascio who maintained a friendship with Jackson tweeted "I knew Michael for over 25 years and NEVER once did he use cocaine or suggest to anyone else to use cocaine. Never!!!!" (http://twitter.com/#!/fdcascio/status/86547254990733312).

In light of this and other evidence, the Michael Jackson fan community is questioning the motive for this seeming change of heart and story.

The timing of the interview is also suspect. In June millions around the world mourn the passing of Mr Jackson and those with even the remotest connection to him seem to find it an ideal time to promote a book, CD or project. Aaron Carter&#8217;s willingness to jump on that bandwagon is disappointing but not surprising. He has said, through his representative, that he was misquoted in the article. However, in watching the edited excerpts of the interview, it is clear that Mr Carter's answers allowed for speculation and innuendo.

Carter's denial is now being widely reported; but, more needs to be done. Mr Carter must demand a full retraction from OK magazine, if it is indeed misrepresenting what he said. But as the story continues to unfold it becomes clear that the Carter camp have seen the benefits of tying his name in a negative way to Mr Jackson&#8217;s and is taking full advantage.

This story had been circulating for two weeks and some concerned Jackson fans had reached out to Aaron Carter, as early as 15 June, only to be rebuffed and ignored. An official and strong statement of denial would have halted this story in its tracks. This is what an honourable person would do in love and respect for a friend and mentor who has died. However, the speculation and insinuations were allowed to linger; and, the only person who has been damaged in this debacle is Mr Jackson who is not here to defend himself . All of the others who are involved have been able to raise their profiles on his back.

Daphne Barak has also had a very dubious past. She has "created" stories before. After Michael Jackson died, she became friendly with Grace Rwaramba, who was the Jackson children's nanny for several years, for the purpose of taking advantage of her in the hopes of finding out information about Michael Jackson. In a story written by Mallika Chopra for The Huffington Post, Mallika said the following: "I witnessed Daphne act as a friend while trying to bait information from Grace on her conversations with Jackson family members and friends about his death... I found that Daphne indeed had written an article full of quotes by Grace for a tabloid magazine. (A quick search of her other work not surprisingly shows she did a recent feature on Amy Winehouse.) Grace&#8217;s quotes are now being picked up by other tabloids and will find their way into more magazines and articles. (People Magazine is also featuring some today, including the inaccurate claim the Grace pumped Michael&#8217;s stomach several times. For the record, Grace never pumped Michael&#8217;s stomach. She has no idea how she would even do such a thing.)... "

Daphne Barak was also at the center of controversy because of an inteview with Sanam Bhutto. An article at SouthAsiaWatch chronicles her faux journalism. It says, "Daphne Barak... has been foisting herself upon the famous and noteworthy families of the world for years now. Her living is made by offering "exclusive" interviews, scintillating gossip, and manufacturing rumor and innuendo at every turn. She is often spotted interviewing members of families in crisis, taking advantage of their grief and need for hope, in order to fuel her personal drive for fame, access, and notoriety. Daphne portrays and tarnishes the image of Bhutto by revealing or blatantly manufacturing details that cannot be independently verified about Bhutto's life... any references to Bhutto or Pakistan that she writes should be taken as near-fiction or nothing less than a complete fabrication... In more recent Pakistan news, Daphne Barak has done the nation of Pakistan and its people a grave disservice by manufacturing a news story featuring "statements" from Benazair Bhutto's sister, Sanam, regarding the President of Pakistan, Asif Zardari. While biased journalism may be tolerated in many circles, Daphe Barak crossed the line into complete fiction. Sanam Bhutto, outraged and distressed at the lies attributed to her, vigorously denounced the fiction produced by Daphne Barak, via print and video ." The article also mentions how she "cozied" up to the parents of Amy Winehouse, "feeding off their grief and concern for their daughter" in order to get a story on Amy Winehouse.

Her methods have been consistent, befriending a person for the purpose of interviewing them so that she can then put a spin on said interview. Is that what happened with Aaron Carter? Note her tweet about him on May 29th.

daphnebarak Daphne Barak
So glad, my friend Aaron Carter is joining me, for a charity gala in Marbella. What a perfect place, to kick off his upcoming record?!
29 May Favorite Retweet Reply
This speaks volumes about Ms. Barak's ethics and values as a journalist.

Furthermore, it is disturbing that we live in a time when our media is willing to copy and paste a story without first verifying its accuracy and veracity. No mention was made of Carter's previous denials, nor of the reputation of the interviewer. This is even more disturbing when this practice is adopted by news outlets that are supposed to report factual stories. Although the story about this interview originated from OK! Magazine, which is not known for being a reputable publication, it didn't take long for over 150 media outlets to take the story and run with it. It is apparent that facts are not of great concern to the media, which is shameful.

Now that some aspects of the interview have been denied, we can only hope that there will a more rigorous screening process before stories are aired or published, especially when the source is a tabloid and the author has a questionable reputation (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9Dz7rs8VfA).

We call on all Michael Jackson fans to boycott the magazine and to express their opinion to the editors of OK magazine and to Daphne Barak (the author). Fans also need to let their sources of news and information know that they are no longer interested in uncorroborated, salacious stories.

Michael Jackson was defamed and maligned in life, his fans are committed and determined to see that this defamation does not continue in death.
Click to expand...

I hope the letter hasn't been sent yet, I am still correcting some little details.
 
I am so proud to be part of this community, so proud.

The letter is very comprehensive and explicit, I only wish that they really read it entirely.

I don't know how these things work so I can't come up with ideas, I can't help by writing letters, not even correct them, but I am willing to do something so if you need money, my signature, sending the above letter by email, I'll do anything :yes:

I am so sad right now :sad2:
 
Here are some suggestions from me. I used (stronger and more formal) adjectives here and there:

On 29 May 2011, 90s pop singer Aaron Carter filmed an interview with freelance 'journalist' and friend Daphne Barak for OK Australia magazine's 27 June edition. The article and excerpts that have been released have spread rapidly across all media for one reason - it involves Michael Jackson.

Carter&#8217;s friendship - and we use that word loosely - with Jackson is not in question. However, the Michael Jackson fan community strongly rejects the elements of the story suggesting and implying that Mr. Jackson would have given Aaron Carter drugs or alcohol or would have acted in any way improperly with him.

Indeed, after all the years of defending Mr. Jackson --even as recently as 2010-- the fan community finds it puzzling that Mr. Carter would all of sudden give such an inconsistent interview. He has always spoken highly of Jackson&#8217;s positive influence on his life and his work, and has strongly denied that anything inappropriate had ever occurred between them (see Howard Stern interview:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtURi...layer_embedded).

As for the claims made by Carter, they can be debunked by what he himself said previously and consistently. As a matter of fact, Aaron Carter was on the witness list for the defense in the 2005 trial.

Frank Cascio who maintained a friendship with Jackson tweeted "I knew Michael for over 25 years and NEVER once did he use cocaine or suggest to anyone else to use cocaine. Never!!!!" (http://twitter.com/#!/fdcascio/status/86547254990733312).

In light of this and other obvious evidence, the Michael Jackson fan community is questioning the real<FONT face=Calibri> motive for this seeming change of heart and story.

<FONT size=3>The timing of the interview is also extremely suspect. In June, while millions around the world were mourning the passing of Mr Jackson, some with even the remotest connection to him seem to find it an ideal opportunity to promote a book, CD or project. Aaron Carter&#8217;s willingness to jump on that bandwagon, although quite disappointing, is<SPAN style="COLOR: #3e3e3e; FONT-SIZE: 14pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN; mso-fareast-language: FR; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin" lang=EN> not surprising. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
P><P alt=
According to Aaron's representative, he was misquoted in the article. However, in watching the edited excerpts of the interview, it seems clear that Mr. Carter's answers purposely allowed for speculation and innuendo.

Carter's denial is now being widely reported, nevertheless, more needs to be done. Mr. Carter must demand a full retraction from OK magazine, if it is indeed misrepresenting what he really said. But as the slander continues to unfold, it becomes clear that the Carter camp have seen the benefits of tying his name in a negative way to Mr. Jackson&#8217;s and is taking full advantage of the frenzy and (inter)national media coverage.

This slander had been circulating for two weeks before some concerned Jackson fans reached out to Aaron Carter as early as 15 June, only to be rebuffed and ignored by the latter. <o:p></o:p>

An official and strong statement of denial would have halted this slander in its tracks. This is what an honorable person would do in love and respect for a friend and mentor who has died. Unfortunately, the sickening speculation and insinuations were allowed to linger. As a result, the only person who has been fully damaged in this debacle is Mr. Jackson --an easy target-- who is not here to defend himself. All of the others who are involved have been able to raise their profiles on his back.

Daphne Barak has also had an extremely dubious past. She has already "created" stories before. After Michael Jackson died, she suddenly became friends with Grace Rwaramba --the several years long Jackson's children's nanny-- in order to take advantage of her in the hopes of finding out information about Michael Jackson. <o:p></o:p>

In a story written by Mallika Chopra for The Huffington Post, Mallika said the following: "I witnessed Daphne act as a friend while trying to bait information from Grace on her conversations with Jackson family members and friends about his death... I found that Daphne indeed had written an article full of quotes by Grace for a tabloid magazine. (A quick search of her other work not surprisingly shows she did a recent feature on Amy Winehouse.)

Grace&#8217;s quotes are now being picked up by other tabloids and will find their way into more magazines and articles. (People Magazine is also featuring some inaccuracies today, such as the claim that Grace pumped Michael&#8217;s stomach on several occasions. For the record, Grace never pumped Michael&#8217;s stomach. She has no slightest idea how she would even do such a thing.)... "

Daphne Barak was also at the center of controversy in reference to an inteview with Sanam Bhutto. An article at SouthAsiaWatch chronicles her faux journalism. <o:p></o:p>
It says, "Daphne Barak [...] has been foisting herself upon the famous and noteworthy families of the world for years now. Her living is made by offering "exclusive" interviews, scintillating gossip, and manufacturing rumor and innuendo at every turn. She is often spotted interviewing members of families in crisis, taking advantage of their grief and need for hope, in order to fuel her personal drive for fame, access, and notoriety. Daphne portrays and tarnishes the image of Bhutto by revealing or blatantly manufacturing details that cannot be independently verified about Bhutto's life... any references to Bhutto or Pakistan that she writes should be taken as near-fiction or nothing less than a complete fabrication... <o:p></o:p>
In more recent Pakistan news, Daphne Barak has done the nation of Pakistan and its people a grave disservice by manufacturing a news story featuring "statements" from Benazair Bhutto's sister, Sanam, regarding the President of Pakistan, Asif Zardari. <o:p></o:p>
While biased journalism may be tolerated in many circles, Daphe Barak crossed the line into complete fiction. Sanam Bhutto, outraged and distressed at the lies attributed to her, vigorously denounced the fiction produced by Daphne Barak, via print and video ." <o:p></o:p>
The article also mentions how she "cozied" up to the parents of Amy Winehouse, "feeding off their grief and concern for their daughter" in order to get a story on Amy Winehouse.

Her methods have been consistent: befriending a person for the purpose of interviewing them so that she can then put a spin on said interview. <o:p></o:p>
Is that what happened with Aaron Carter? Note her tweet about him on May 29th:

daphnebarak Daphne Barak
So glad, my friend Aaron Carter is joining me, for a charity gala in Marbella. What a perfect place, to kick off his upcoming record?!
29 May Favorite Retweet Reply
This speaks volumes about Ms. Barak's ethics and values as a journalist.

Furthermore, it is disturbing that we live in a time when our media is willing to copy and paste a story without first verifying its accuracy and veracity. No mention was made of Carter's previous denials, nor of the reputation of the interviewer. This is even more disturbing when this practice is adopted by news outlets that are supposed to report factual stories. <o:p></o:p>

Although the slanderous story about this interview originated from OK! Magazine, which is not known for being a reputable publication, it didn't take long for over 150 media outlets to copy the story and run with it. It is apparent that facts are not of great concern to the media, which is shameful.

Now that some aspects of the interview have been denied, we can only hope that there will be a more rigorous screening process before stories are aired or published, especially when the source is a tabloid and the author has a questionable reputation (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9Dz7rs8VfA).

We call on all Michael Jackson fans to boycott the magazine and to express their disagreement to the editors of OK magazine and distress to Daphne Barak (the author). Fans also need to let their sources of news and information know that they are no longer interested in uncorroborated, salacious stories.

Michael Jackson was defamed and maligned in life, his fans are committed and determined to see that this defamation does not continue in death. <o:p></o:p>

<o:p></o:p>
 
Last edited:
~Lindsey~ said:
Just some things I noticed whilst reading through,corrections in red:
Click to expand...

I agree with the above-stated corrections, however, the paragraph in question wasn't included in the draft I went over [post-Rhilo edit]. It was included in the first draft ginvid posted, and I thought she might have omitted it, which is why I made no mention of it in my mini-edit. However, if it is to be included, I agree with your corrections, but would like to add a few more:

"... for just a few minutes to wash off that cake. He was later sipping on a glass of wine, but he never finished it. They (who?) were out driving around the ranch with the fourwheelers and we were many[
 
Thank you so much everyone!!! :D I will post a final draft below.
 
Re: Aaron Carter Story Progression & Updates

Edit.
 
Last edited:
^^Got it! I made the changes. I will delete all of the older drafts so no one mistakes them as a final. :)

Thanks very nuch again! :D
 
I would make the following changes to the draft posted above:

Frank Cascio, who maintained a friendship with Jackson, tweeted "I knew Michael for over 25 years and NEVER once did he use cocaine or suggest to anyone else to use cocaine. Never!!!!" Put a comma after Cascio, and after Jackson. It might also help to specify who Cascio is, in case they don't know.

"it becomes clear that the Carter camp have seen the benefits of tying his name in a negative way to Mr. Jackson&#8217;s and is taking full advantage of the frenzy and (inter)national media coverage." Change "have" to "has." Camp is a singular noun, therefore, "Aaron Carter's camp" would require a singular verb rather than a plural one. I would also change "it becomes clear" to "it is increasingly clear."

"... with Grace Rwaramba --the several years long nanny of Michael Jackson's children--..."
This needs to be corrected. It totally (and abruptly) breaks the flow of a glowing piece. I suggest changing the statement in bold to: "who was the Jackson children's nanny for several years."
 
Mikage Souji;3425946 said:
I would make the following changes to the draft posted above:

Frank Cascio, who maintained a friendship with Jackson, tweeted "I knew Michael for over 25 years and NEVER once did he use cocaine or suggest to anyone else to use cocaine. Never!!!!" Put a comma after Cascio, and after Jackson. It might also help to specify who Cascio is, in case they don't know.

"it becomes clear that the Carter camp have seen the benefits of tying his name in a negative way to Mr. Jackson&#8217;s and is taking full advantage of the frenzy and (inter)national media coverage." Change "have" to "has." Camp is a singular noun, therefore, "Aaron Carter's camp" would require a singular verb rather than a plural one. I would also change "it becomes clear" to "it is increasingly clear."

"... with Grace Rwaramba --the several years long nanny of Michael Jackson's children--..."
This needs to be corrected. It totally (and abruptly) breaks the flow of a glowing piece. I suggest changing the statement in bold to: "who was the Jackson children's nanny for several years."
Click to expand...

It is a parenthetical clause, it is completely normal to break the flow. So I wouldn't change it at all.
 
Well, I have to say that even though my mother taught English, I often ignored her lessons on grammar (I know - terrible) so I am at a lost as to what should take place in this instance. So, I wlll just ask that everyone who uses the letters, will use their best judgment??
 
ginvid said:
Well, I have to say that even though my mother taught English, I often ignored her lessons on grammar (I know - terrible) so I am at a lost as to what should take place in this instance. So, I wlll just ask that everyone who uses the letters, will use their best judgment??
Click to expand...

Both suggestions are correct.

What Mikage suggest is not a mistake, I just find the style too heavy.

Mikage prefers a relative clause.

I prefer a parenthetical clause because the verb is too far from the subject, hence difficult to find back the subject if the flow of the sentence isn't clearly interrupted.
 
Last edited:
have u put that cascio was friends with michael since being a child? as well as him and his family spending a lot of time with him for over twenty five years. it might be important to say more about who frank is as some people think he only showed inappropriate behaviour around children.. so dismiss what his adult friend say. also they might not know that frank stayed at neverland n travelled with mj etc.. so is a good witness for michaels behaviour.
 
^I do like "heavier" style, more typical of pre-20th century works. The style you prefer is more popular and typical of modern writing.
 
Or you can get rid of the parenthetical clause by saying:


with Jackson's children's nanny, Grace Rwaramba, in order to take advantage ...

This way Grace becomes parenthetical :D
 
Mikage Souji said:
^I do like "heavier" style, more typical of pre-20th century works. The style you prefer is more popular and typical of modern writing.
Click to expand...

It was not a criticism from my part, it was a concern regarding the second verb being too far from the subject and the first verb:

After Michael Jackson died, SHE suddenly BECAME friends with Grace Rwaramba --the several years long Jackson's children's nanny-- IN ORDER TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF...


I'd prefer your relative clause if the sentence ended there:

After Michael Jackson died, SHE suddenly BECAME friends with Grace Rwaramba, who was Jackson's children's nanny for several years.

And then I'd start a new one:

She actually befriended her IN ORDER TO....



p.s. Let's not forget the double possessive case here. It's not an adjective:

"nanny of the children of Jackson => Jackson's children's nanny"
 
Last edited:
:worried: ok

Rockin how about I mention that Frank knew him since childhood, frequently visited Neverland, and was present on the night in question??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top