Controversial MJ Documentary Leaving Neverland [GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD]

Joined
Jan 17, 2004
Messages
5,463
Points
63
Guys, do we still have the link/article/tweet where it said that Wade was known to be touchy with girls in his dance class or something? And that mothers of the girls didn't want him near them, something along those lines. It was posted last week.
 

terrell

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
9,540
Points
0
myosotis;4249757 said:
1. I hope that 'Mirror' article gets plenty of clicks - it's exactly what we want them to print (about the lies in the film)

2. I hope this article gets plenty of clicks too.... (There are 11 comments on it at the moment, all positive)


Whole article here:

“Leaving Neverland” Weaves A Provocative Narrative But Is It Just One Big Lie?
Posted On 14 Mar 2019By : Dan Stephens

Once the dust has settled, Dan Reed’s calculated storytelling in Leaving Neverland reveals itself to be a continuation of the anti-Michael Jackson narrative bias in news media; cynical emotional manipulation built on lies and ulterior motive. Don’t believe me? See if this doesn’t change your mind…

When I posted my reaction to Dan Reed’s documentary Leaving Neverland, one person on Twitter said it was fake news, that, by extension, I was wittingly contributing to an anti-Michael Jackson media bias. That was certainly not my intention. However, by choosing to highlight the impact of the sordid events alleged by Wade Robson and James Safechuck I was stoking the fires of a narrative that is predisposed to accept the iconic pop singer’s guilt without questioning the facts.

And because Reed’s film is so one-sided – and admittedly effective in piecing together a story that, at face value, appears genuine – we must give ourselves a chance to allow the emotional manipulation of clever storytelling to settle. To take a step back. To consider other factors and other opinions and other potential witnesses and even undisputed facts that, according to investigative journalist and long-time reporter on matters related to Jackson’s life, Charles Thomson, “catastrophically undermine these men’s accusations”.

It is Thomson, author of One of the Most Shameful Episodes In Journalistic History (about media bias in relation to the pop singer’s 2005 trial), who is one of the few commentators acknowledging the holes in Reed’s film. Not only must we consider them given the severity of the crimes alleged, but we must also question if the film is riding a wave of #MeToo hysteria where “truth” is garnered from whatever gains viral traction.

The Truth Needs Only Sensationalism & The Appearance Of Validation
Not only does the film present a compelling story but a search on the internet quickly reveals supposedly supportive conjecture from sources that boast credibility (including Vanity Fair’s 10 Undeniable Facts About the Michael Jackson Sexual-Abuse Allegations) One article published on the BBC’s website questions whether Jackson’s legacy is forever tarnished but this twists public perception away from questioning where this concept originated (the hoopla surrounding Reed’s film) and fuels the Jackson-Is-Guilty narrative by peddling emotion with sensationalist stories of his songs being cut from radio playlists and his Neverland house price dramatically dropping.

His guilt is assumed in this viral cooking pot of media dissemination because, oh, look Canada isn’t playing his songs anymore, The Simpsons aren’t playing the Jackson episode anymore, and his house has dropped in price. All these factors detract from a considered look at what Leaving Neverland said happened. And they detract from accepted truths in a court of law: the fact Jackson was acquitted on child molestation charges in 2005 after the jury unanimously found him not guilty of all charges.

With no right to reply afforded anyone in defence of Michael Jackson, Leaving Neverland is understandably effective in weaving a seemingly credible story of guilt (but one that relies on carefully orchestrated cinematic technique to provoke emotion, favouring sentiment in order to massage supposed truths). Under the guise of being a “documentary” and offering the viewer the freedom to make up their own mind, Reed, Safechuck and Robson conspire to make up your mind for you. As John Ziegler says in his podcast World According to Zig, at the very least this film is completely unfair.

Reed has tried to counter the criticism of bias by saying he showed archive footage of Jackson’s own denials. But as Charles Thomson says, because these allegations were made after the singer had died, the only people who could offer a genuine counter argument were the people who had been litigating the two accusers over the past few years.

Oh, did you know Robson and Safechuck had been suing the Michael Jackson estate since 2013 for hundreds of millions of dollars? “This has generated thousands of pages of court documents – deposition transcripts, witness statements, disclosure motions, etc.,” notes Thomson. “That litany of paperwork includes so many contradictions. Their stories are constantly changing, they contradict their own prior versions of events, and one of them was caught lying under oath so brazenly that the judge ruled that no rational juror could believe his story.”

I’ll repeat that. A judge, experienced and qualified in discerning truth-tellers from fakers, said one of these men’s stories could not be trusted.

That, after the release of Leaving Neverland, was corroborated by Brandi Jackson, Michael’s niece, who declared Wade Robson a liar. Another convenience ignored by Reed’s film is the fact Brandi dated Robson. She told The Kyle and Jackie O Show: “When I was watching [Leaving Neverland], I was completely sickened by it, to be honest with you. The things that he was saying were so over the top and so ridiculous.”

Saying she did not believe her uncle was a paedophile, Brandi added: “[Wade] was not describing my uncle. He was describing a totally different person, but not my uncle. And that’s why this is a narrative that has changed… over the last 15 years. Everything that he’s ever said about my uncle is the complete opposite of who he was painting in this documentary.”

While Reed reveals the fact Robson twice testified under oath (once in 1993 and again in 2005) that Michael had never sexually molested him or behaved inappropriately, arguing, in hindsight, that he didn’t understand the inappropriate nature of his relationship with Michael as a child and thus believed it to be innocent, the filmmaker doesn’t question whether Robson now feels any guilt around missing the opportunity to stop an abuser of children when he appeared in court as an adult in 2005.

Brandi, who was in a relationship with Wade for a decade, is adamant her ex-boyfriend is lying. She says he and James Safechuck are solely motivated by money. The film is perhaps their final attempt to get money out of the Jackson estate having been trying for the last seven years.

The Witnesses That Dan Reed Conveniently Ignored
Says Ziegler, “In my opinion, if you simply listen to the interview with an open mind, Brandi’s credibility speaks for itself. There will still be people who will understandably still believe Robson’s version, but there is no doubting that Brandi’s narrative makes a whole lot more sense. But again, the primary question here is, why was her existence censured from Leaving Neverland and why hasn’t she been interviewed on network television about all of this?!”

Taj Jackson, Michael’s nephew, has also questioned why Wade would be with Brandi if he was being abused by Michael (and, according to Wade, being discouraged from dating women). “He dated my cousin for over seven years and it’s really interesting because they left that out of [Leaving Neverland] – and he dated her during the time period that he’s getting supposedly molested by my uncle. I think it’s ridiculous especially since my uncle Michael was the one that basically brought them together. And so it throws off the whole narrative of Michael Jackson only wanting [Wade] for himself or teaching him to hate women.”

Taj is now developing a a counter-documentary according to NME to dispute the claims made in Leaving Neverland which will likely feature other children who befriended Michael Jackson – such as Macaulay Culkin and Corey Feldman – and who have stated that they neither witnessed nor were the victim of sexual abuse. Singer Aaron Carter, who was friends with Jackson when he was a teenager, told TMZ he had the “time of my life with Michael”, adding “I hung out with Michael Jackson, I stayed at his house, I stayed in his bedroom … it’s hard for me to understand [the accusations in Leaving Neverland] – how am I supposed to understand that when my own personal experience with him was gentle and beautiful and loving and embracing.”

What is ultimately revealing in the fallout of Leaving Neverland is how news media is failing those it purports to inform. “One of the many difficulties in telling a version of events which is contradictory to someone the news media — as opposed to the courts — has determined is a “sex abuse victim” (especially those who, like Robson and Safechuck, have been sanctified by Oprah Winfrey on HBO) is that, particularly post #MeToo, no one data point can ever been seen as a “smoking gun” that their allegation is false,” notes Ziegler.

“However, when viewed in the full context of Robson’s already suspect narrative, I strongly believe that Brandi’s version of events comes as close as possible to being just that (as do many other non-Jackson fans who have spent the time to hear her, and her cousin Taj, out).

For Charles Thomson, this is a continuation of a news media bias that has been peddled for years. Speaking about the coverage of the 2005 trial, he says: “It seemed to me that the media was just loathe to accept the possibility that Jackson could be innocent. Most reporters seemed to already be convinced of Jackson’s guilt because they thought he was a weirdo.”

It almost didn’t matter that Michael Jackson’s innocence was proven in a court of law (“All too often you see right-wing pundits making comments like, “Not guilty is not the same as innocent.”) Indeed, Thomson notes how the prosecution had every advantage to win their case (but “failed to produce a single piece of tangible evidence connecting Jackson to any crime”) and ended up parading witnesses who “collapsed under cross-examination” with the other half “helping the defence rather than the prosecutors.”

He remembers a story by reporter J. Randy Taraborrelli, who was covering the trial and said he was with the press pack queuing for their court passes when a well-known female reporter from a big magazine said: “Does ANYONE here believe Michael Jackson is innocent besides J. Randy Taraborrelli!?”

That story, argues Thomson, “sums up much of the media’s attitude towards the trial: “We know he’s guilty. This is a waste of time. They should just lock him up now.” It tainted their reporting, consciously or otherwise.”

Setting The Narrative, Disregarding The Truth
Leaving Neverland has stirred up similar misreporting and misinformation around Michael Jackson that makes Reed’s effort – supposedly giving sex abuse victims a voice – at the very least distasteful, at worst, as Thomson states, “shockingly unethical”.

“Looking back on the Michael Jackson trial, I see a media out of control,” said the writer of One of the Most Shameful Episodes In Journalistic History. “The sheer amount of propaganda, bias, distortion and misinformation is almost beyond comprehension. Reading the court transcripts and comparing them to the newspaper cuttings, the trial that was relayed to us didn’t even resemble the trial that was going on inside the courtroom. The transcripts show an endless parade of seedy prosecution witnesses perjuring themselves on an almost hourly basis and crumbling under cross examination. The newspaper cuttings and the TV news clips detail day after day of heinous accusations and lurid innuendo.”

We’re seeing some of the same things now. Says Ziegler, “Not being armed with even the basic facts (inexplicably, and quite tellingly, Brandi Jackson is not even mentioned), the audience, including the media, was easily manipulated into being able to disregard even the biggest holes in their stories, and to gladly accept even the most bizarre rationalisations for their nonsensical actions. Once Oprah, an abuse victim herself, effectively validated their stories (even as Safechuck, who barely participated in the post-movie interview, sweated noticeably right in front of her), the preferred narrative was set, and nothing would then be allowed to credibly contradict it.”

Instead of the trial vindicating Michael Jackson, the media’s irresponsible coverage made it impossible. “The legal system may have declared him innocent but the public, on the whole, still thought otherwise. Allegations which were disproven in court went unchallenged in the press. Shaky testimony was presented as fact. The defence’s case was all but ignored,” notes Thomson.

Being critical of Leaving Neverland is not about silencing or shaming victims. That is despite British journalist Louis Theroux, a documentary filmmaker I admire, saying the exact opposite. But if we consider all the facts – facts that we’re not privy to in Reed’s film – we are likely to conclude Leaving Neverland does far more harm to abuse victims than it does good.

Diana Michaels, in her piece entitled “Leaving Neverland Debunked in 10 Minutes or Less”, states: “Abuse survivors need our support, and they especially need to be listened to when they are brave enough to speak out. However, we have to be cautious to not let the #MeToo movement jump the shark. If we accept all allegations without turning a critical eye when necessary, and we allow the #MeToo movement to justify putting the dead on trial, we won’t be doing anything but opening Pandora’s box. And real survivors of abuse deserve better than that.”

The sadness and anger that I felt after watching Reed’s film because I, at first, believed the accusers now remains for a very different reason. I’m angry that Leaving Neverland had that impact on me because I now feel duped, and I’m saddened that Jackson’s family and children have to endure such a negative media circus while his legacy is questioned. If there are stories to be told from behind the closed doors of Michael Jackson’s bedroom, Reed’s film is not the place to start hearing them.

[Edit] The original article referenced the Neverland ranch’s “value” as dropping but this has been changed to “price” as the term is more accurate.

https://www.top10films.co.uk/52219-...ocative-narrative-but-is-it-just-one-big-lie/
This is what I am talking about. start dissecting. And call media out on their bias. WE no longer have to depend on media bias and lies.
 

MJInnocent

Proud Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2012
Messages
371
Points
0
Location
Northern Ireland
The Mirror printing about the lies is a major plus,I'm sure more will follow.
Maybe now the truth is filtering through,they will go with these true stories to sell their rags....here's hoping anyway.

In regards to Ron Newt,lets hope his death is just a coincidence,any more info in what happened to him?

I see Paris taking some flack online from MJ fans.....that's not right.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2004
Messages
5,463
Points
63
The Mirror printing about the lies is a major plus,I'm sure more will follow.
Maybe now the truth is filtering through,they will go with these true stories to sell their rags....here's hoping anyway.

In regards to Ron Newt,lets hope his death is just a coincidence,any more info in what happened to him?

I see Paris taking some flack online from MJ fans.....that's not right.

That's very wrong indeed. She stays relaxed and "mellow" for a reason. It wouldn't surprise me if her father told her to take it easy and don't let it get to you. We all know how much patience that man had.
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2019
Messages
1,676
Points
0
I found anouther haters channel now who simular to MJfacts portraying every boy arround michael includingn Jane Doe as a victim.
(Like Jonathan Spence, Omar Bhatti and others).
The name of the channel is "world of love and peace".

Maybe you want go there and leave some comments under the videos when you can do this without the videos starts playing and a view is counting.
 

Soundmind

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
3,667
Points
0
Guys, do we still have the link/article/tweet where it said that Wade was known to be touchy with girls in his dance class or something? And that mothers of the girls didn't want him near them, something along those lines. It was posted last week.

How would that help mj? the abused become abusers themselves. Actually many of those who believe mj molested children believe he himself was molested as a child.
 

ozemouze

Proud Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2018
Messages
852
Points
18
I see Paris taking some flack online from MJ fans.....that's not right.
That's absolutely wrong, I can't believe some fans want to drag MJ's kids into this. I'm actually happy if they are able to sort of distance themselves into some bubble from this farce, noone - and especially not fans - should be putting pressure on them.
 

StaceyMJ

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Messages
9,124
Points
63
ok.. i will just post this again.. am i the only one who thinks this is very strange that he is now dead?

No, you're not the only one that thinks it's strange...but I would hold off before saying anything sinister has happened tbh. Anyone know how he died? Could just be a massive coincidence and more than likely it is. (Really hope so.)
 

MJInnocent

Proud Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2012
Messages
371
Points
0
Location
Northern Ireland
That's very wrong indeed. She stays relaxed and "mellow" for a reason. It wouldn't surprise me if her father told her to take it easy and don't let it get to you. We all know how much patience that man had.

Its difficult for us so I can only imagine how hard it would be for his kids.
I agree,distancing yourself somewhat can only be a good thing for them otherwise where does it end?

That's absolutely wrong, I can't believe some fans want to drag MJ's kids into this. I'm actually happy if they are able to sort of distance themselves into some bubble from this farce, noone - and especially not fans - should be putting pressure on them.

Some are complaining they are defending MJ non stop while she posts about chillin' with a joint....as I said,her head would go if she was to dive into the deep end of this crap.

No, you're not the only one that thinks it's strange...but I would hold off before saying anything sinister has happened tbh. Anyone know how he died? Could just be a massive coincidence and more than likely it is. (Really hope so.)

That's what I have already said.We have to wait and see what happened.
I read something about his death being suspicious but I don't want to jump the gun and come to any conclusions just yet.
 

MJJ2theMAX

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
673
Points
0
How would that help mj? the abused become abusers themselves. Actually many of those who believe mj molested children believe he himself was molested as a child.

If Wade were to be guilty of assaulting people or molestering underage girls, it would help Mj because Wade would no longer be able to go on chat shows or run his charity victim support thing.
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2019
Messages
1,676
Points
0
That's absolutely wrong, I can't believe some fans want to drag MJ's kids into this. I'm actually happy if they are able to sort of distance themselves into some bubble from this farce, noone - and especially not fans - should be putting pressure on them.

How can we know that these people attacking paris are real MJFans or just haters/influencers who want to give the imagination that they are MJFans?

We can be sure that MJs children are in contact with the estate cause the estate represents them and Michael.
So there will be reasons for their behavior which has to do with the estate and their loyars.
I think we will see much clearer in this after the hearing tomorrow.
I really hope that the estate will take this chance to expose wade, james and reed puplically as much as posibally.
I am sure that Perl will try to get an interview with the loyers which will be live and not edited from the MJanti media.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 17, 2004
Messages
5,463
Points
63
I don't know if you guys know Game/movie reviewer AngryJoe, but he recently uploaded his Devil May Cry V review and he always has these fun sketches/acts in his reviews. Since there's a MJ dance(s) in the game, he does it too. I thought that was quite cool of him. Clearly just not taking the bullshit in consideration, which is GOOD.
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2019
Messages
1,676
Points
0
Support this video from a fan who becamed 10 times more a fan of MJ in the last three weeks after doing a loooot of research about Michael Jackson:


I love what he is saying.
The guy has sadly only 30 subscribers.
 
Last edited:

KrisMJFan

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2019
Messages
29
Points
0
Location
Toledo, Ohio
MJInnocent;4249772 said:
Its difficult for us so I can only imagine how hard it would be for his kids.
I agree,distancing yourself somewhat can only be a good thing for them otherwise where does it end?



Some are complaining they are defending MJ non stop while she posts about chillin' with a joint....as I said,her head would go if she was to dive into the deep end of this crap.



That's what I have already said.We have to wait and see what happened.
I read something about his death being suspicious but I don't want to jump the gun and come to any conclusions just yet.

Same i’m on aboard with that conclusion about Mr. Newt
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2019
Messages
1,676
Points
0
I told you yesterday that this important debunked video from Mary is blocked for people who have no youtube account and many other youtube members who refuse to see the video because of the warning of its adult content.
(Reed and Haters a maybe behind the reports which reached the blocking.)

I find out that you can help people to see the video when you share it exectly like this.


Then it blocking doesn't work and everyone can see it.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2004
Messages
5,463
Points
63
All we know about Ron Newt is that DJVlad had spoken to him two days before his death and that tomorrow a new interview was scheduled where he'd talk about the MJ case. But now it seems he knew more. It's a real shame.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2004
Messages
5,463
Points
63
I told you yesterday that this important debunked video from Mary is blocked for people who have no youtube account and many other youtube members who refuse to see the video because of the warning of his adult content.
(Reed and Haters a maybe behind the reports which reached the blocking.)

I find out that you can help people to see the video when you share it exectly like this.


Then it blocking doesn't work and everyone can see it.

I didn't watch that yet. I will!
 

elusive moonwalker

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2003
Messages
26,839
Points
48
While reed would love nothing more than to goad the kids inorder to get more attention the headlines from the likes of the BBC saying "its not my role to defend my dad" will be used against mj. She would be better saying nothing at all
 

MJInnocent

Proud Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2012
Messages
371
Points
0
Location
Northern Ireland
While reed would love nothing more than to goad the kids inorder to get more attention the headlines from the likes of the BBC saying "its not my role to defend my dad" will be used against mj. She would be better saying nothing at all

I agree.I have already seen headlines that could easily be interpreted into something else.
Yet again,a family member saying something like that doesn't look good.

I have already said I agree she should take a back seat for her own good but she has slipped up here imo.

I don't agree with some fans having a go at her but she hasn't helped herself.
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2019
Messages
1,676
Points
0
I think the estate will have advice the kids.
The less they say the less storys the media can whrite about Leaving Neverland.

The kids didn't deserve to be mention in connections with this shameful part of filmhistory and humankind cause they have nothing to do with it.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2004
Messages
5,463
Points
63
I agree.I have already seen headlines that could easily be interpreted into something else.
Yet again,a family member saying something like that doesn't look good.

I have already said I agree she should take a back seat for her own good but she has slipped up here imo.

I don't agree with some fans having a go at her but she hasn't helped herself.

Has Paris said that? Yesterday she went after the tabloids because of them claiming she had been seeking help etc, and she said she did have the same moral compass as her father but not his patience. It's probably best if she just keeps at that.
 

MJInnocent

Proud Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2012
Messages
371
Points
0
Location
Northern Ireland
Has Paris said that? Yesterday she went after the tabloids because of them claiming she had been seeking help etc, and she said she did have the same moral compass as her father but not his patience. It's probably best if she just keeps at that.

She tweeted it,I think its since been deleted.

It was in the middle of her giving off about the media and certain people questioning her tweets.
She said it wasn't her role but the headlines are more anti MJ of course.

Here's the tweet....

ykOhVbK.jpg
 

WildStyle

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
2,754
Points
38
It's my opinion that none of us should comment on what Michael's children should or should not do. None of us really know what they are feeling or going through right now.
 

Cinnamon234

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
3,366
Points
48
Location
U.S.A
I agree.I have already seen headlines that could easily be interpreted into something else.
Yet again,a family member saying something like that doesn't look good.

I have already said I agree she should take a back seat for her own good but she has slipped up here imo.

I don't agree with some fans having a go at her but she hasn't helped herself.


Agree with all of this.

The fans should back off for sure but Paris needs to know how to conduct herself better when it comes to the media. Her recent statement to me was not a good one although I know she didn't mean it in a negative way but she has to be more careful about what she says publicly especially when it comes to this case.

She should just stay quiet about it if you ask me.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2004
Messages
5,463
Points
63
She tweeted it,I think its since been deleted.

It was in the middle of her giving off about the media and certain people questioning her tweets.
She said it wasn't her role but the headlines are more anti MJ of course.

Here's the tweet....

ykOhVbK.jpg

Oiih that. Yeah I saw that yesterday. I don't see a issue with it. She says Taj is doing a fantastic job and she supports it. Good enough. Media will twist anything anyway.

It's my opinion that none of us should comment on what Michael's children should or should not do. None of us really know what they are feeling or going through right now.

I can't disagree with that.
 

MJInnocent

Proud Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2012
Messages
371
Points
0
Location
Northern Ireland
Oiih that. Yeah I saw that yesterday. I don't see a issue with it. She says Taj is doing a fantastic job and she supports it. Good enough. Media will twist anything anyway.

Of course they will but we don't need family members(especially his kids)publicly distancing themselves from the defending that so many of us are involved in.
 
Top