[Discussion] Michael Jackson Slandered By The Mirror / New assult Pg 38

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

That's William Waneger, isn't it. Not the best person for this. He just uses Michael and his fans for his own campaign against Sneddon.

I think spreading articles from people who are not considered biased for Michael are the best route to go. They have more credibility that way and are not viewed as having an agenda.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

That's William Waneger, isn't it. Not the best person for this. He just uses Michael and his fans for his own campaign against Sneddon.

So Ive heard, but I don't know, all I know is he is not popular, though T.Mez seems to approve of him. Only time will tell I guess? He does have his own vendetta to get back on Sneddon & the system I think, but I try not to judge.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

There needs to be a highly publicized, factual, meticulous, high quality, well made and compelling documentary debunking the "Michael Jackson pedophile" myth once and for all. Something that will get a lot of attention. Somehow, something needs to happen and the right person or people need to get together and make this happen. Not even fans. Just people dedicated to the truth and against injustice. I've always hoped for something like this but it's never happened. The information is all there and I'm sure there is more waiting to be dug up. The idea needs to be sparked in the right persons head somehow. I can dream.

I think a lot of fans have a lot of good info. We just don't know what to do with it. Put out on a blog or website, alright, but who will read it? Mainly just other fans.

I'm not sure how much the Estate knows. I mean I think fans tend to know a lot more about this than anyone. I also don't know if it would be fortunate if the Estate would finance a documentary about it or something. People would say it's a biased whitewash even if it would be accurate. Just the fact the Estate would finance it would make people think so.

I really don't know what's the solution. It really is like an uphill battle. It's media that has the power over people's minds. Crap like this spreads like wildfire, as you can see, and everyone prints it without double-checking it. While it's a struggle to get out accurate and fair info about MJ to the public. It's like a complete mass brainwash that is going on about MJ.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Huh well as much as I don't like Roger Friedman or Charles Thomson much either I still tweeted their articles debunking that crap tabloid story! Desperate times desperate measures. Sad that this is the only help we can get, from people who also accused MJ once of these very things themselves! SMH But, hell at least NOW they see and KNOW different!

But, man am I getting sick of this crap! I hate the Chandlers for life! Grown ass Jordan Chandler still silent! That pisses me off when this can end if he would just speak up finally! No way he believed this actually happened to him cause even in the settlement his parents and himself say nothing happened! So I don't want to hear excuses like a therapist could have brainwashed him and blah Blah Blah! Please! That isn't what happening to Wade lying ass either! He knows what he is doing! The fact that he pretends he didn't even know there was an MJ estate is an obvious give away, among other things too! :mat:
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

There needs to be a highly publicized, factual, meticulous, high quality, well made and compelling documentary debunking the "Michael Jackson pedophile" myth once and for all. Something that will get a lot of attention. Somehow, something needs to happen and the right person or people need to get together and make this happen. Not even fans. Just people dedicated to the truth and against injustice. I've always hoped for something like this but it's never happened. The information is all there and I'm sure there is more waiting to be dug up. The idea needs to be sparked in the right persons head somehow. I can dream.

The media are either too heavily invested in the "Michael the freak" concept as an ongoing source of stories, or they're too afraid of being seen as attacking the victim to take this on. I'm afraid it really is up to us to set the record straight.
 
I agree with Smooth72
It's time for the estate to put there big boy pants on and go after these tabloids.


I hope that the Estate will consider taking action via the UK Press Complaints Commission.

This is the Editors Code of practice, and a link to the details

THE Editors' CODE

All members of the press have a duty to maintain the highest professional standards. The Code, which includes this preamble and the public interest exceptions below, sets the benchmark for those ethical standards, protecting both the rights of the individual and the public's right to know. It is the cornerstone of the system of self-regulation to which the industry has made a binding commitment.

It is essential that an agreed code be honoured not only to the letter but in the full spirit. It should not be interpreted so narrowly as to compromise its commitment to respect the rights of the individual, nor so broadly that it constitutes an unnecessary interference with freedom of expression or prevents publication in the public interest.

It is the responsibility of editors and publishers to apply the Code to editorial material in both printed and online versions of publications. They should take care to ensure it is observed rigorously by all editorial staff and external contributors, including non-journalists, in printed and online versions of publications.

Editors should co-operate swiftly with the Press Complaints Commission in the resolution of complaints. Any publication judged to have breached the Code must publish the adjudication in full and with due prominence agreed by the Commission's Director, including headline reference to the PCC.


Accuracy

i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures.

ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and - where appropriate - an apology published. In cases involving the Commission, prominence should be agreed with the PCC in advance.

iii) The Press, whilst free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.

iv) A publication must report fairly and accurately the outcome of an action for defamation to which it has been a party, unless an agreed settlement states otherwise, or an agreed statement is published.

2 Opportunity to reply
A fair opportunity for reply to inaccuracies must be given when reasonably called for.


There is more at the link
http://www.pcc.org.uk/cop/practice.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It seems that the writer of the 'Sunday People' article, James Desborough, has been taken to the Press complaints commission before, and the paper made to apologise ( This was in relation to a Brad Pitt /Angelina Jolie story.

On January 23rd 2010, a London newspaper “News of the World” published a misleading article declaring Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt were visiting divorce lawyers and had agreed to divide their fortune and share custody of their six children. The article, written by journalist James Desborough, sparked a global media frenzy and the story was re-published around the world.

However, Angelina and Brad vehemently denied these allegations and took the matter to the high court in London, suing News Group Newspapers - the News International subsidiary that publishes the News of the World - for contravening the Press Complaints Commission code of conduct. They claimed the article was misleading, inaccurate and intrusive, adding “that publication of the story amounted to a serious misuse of private information”.

Proving that the story was indeed an unethical one, News of the World was made to formally apologise to the couple and pay defamation damages.

In all organisational practice there is a need for a chain of accountability. Journalism as a profession is fraught with a myriad of ethical dilemmas. To ascertain whether certain actions are ethical or unethical we must dissect the decision making process undertaken by journalists, editors and publishers and compare these processes to the professional codes and practices put in place to maintain ethical conduct.

According to Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative, Desborough acted unethically according to the principle of reversibility (Breit, 2007). In the decision making process of whether or not to write the story, Desborough does not appear to act in a way that he would wish to be treated. Desborough wrote a story that was inaccurate and not properly researched. It affected the couple involved in an emotional and professional way, which in a reversed situation, I assume Desborough would not want done to him. He has disregarded Angelina and Brad’s individual right to privacy because of his belief that the public’s collective right to know outweighs individual rights. This action neglects the principle of respect for others and illustrates how Desborough capitalised upon the misfortune of others as a means for him to potentially get a scoop in the end. Furthermore, I assume that these decisions and the action of publicizing inaccurate information would not be welcomed as universalizeable by Desborough.

You can see more details here:
http://s41763698.blogspot.co.uk/
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

As Charles Thomson noted, the British tabloid mirror are smearing MJ because AEG is in the middle of the wrongful-dead lawsuit. AEG is one of the major advertisers for the Mirror so there is a huge financial interest.
 
myosotis;3858280 said:
I hope that the Estate will consider taking action via the UK Press Complaints Commission.

This is the Editors Code of practice, and a link to the details

THE editors' CODE

All members of the press have a duty to maintain the highest professional standards. The Code, which includes this preamble and the public interest exceptions below, sets the benchmark for those ethical standards, protecting both the rights of the individual and the public's right to know. It is the cornerstone of the system of self-regulation to which the industry has made a binding commitment.

It is essential that an agreed code be honoured not only to the letter but in the full spirit. It should not be interpreted so narrowly as to compromise its commitment to respect the rights of the individual, nor so broadly that it constitutes an unnecessary interference with freedom of expression or prevents publication in the public interest.

It is the responsibility of editors and publishers to apply the Code to editorial material in both printed and online versions of publications. They should take care to ensure it is observed rigorously by all editorial staff and external contributors, including non-journalists, in printed and online versions of publications.

Editors should co-operate swiftly with the Press Complaints Commission in the resolution of complaints. Any publication judged to have breached the Code must publish the adjudication in full and with due prominence agreed by the Commission's Director, including headline reference to the PCC.


Accuracy

i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures.

ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and - where appropriate - an apology published. In cases involving the Commission, prominence should be agreed with the PCC in advance.

iii) The Press, whilst free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.

iv) A publication must report fairly and accurately the outcome of an action for defamation to which it has been a party, unless an agreed settlement states otherwise, or an agreed statement is published.

2 Opportunity to reply
A fair opportunity for reply to inaccuracies must be given when reasonably called for.

There is more at the link
http://www.pcc.org.uk/cop/practice.html

It seems that the writer of the 'Sunday People' article, James Desborough, has been taken to the Press complaints commission before, and the paper made to apologise ( This was in relation to a Brad Pitt /Angelina Jolie story.

On January 23rd 2010, a London newspaper “News of the World” published a misleading article declaring Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt were visiting divorce lawyers and had agreed to divide their fortune and share custody of their six children. The article, written by journalist James Desborough, sparked a global media frenzy and the story was re-published around the world.

However, Angelina and Brad vehemently denied these allegations and took the matter to the high court in London, suing News Group Newspapers - the News International subsidiary that publishes the News of the World - for contravening the Press Complaints Commission code of conduct. They claimed the article was misleading, inaccurate and intrusive, adding “that publication of the story amounted to a serious misuse of private information”.

Proving that the story was indeed an unethical one, News of the World was made to formally apologise to the couple and pay defamation damages.

In all organisational practice there is a need for a chain of accountability. Journalism as a profession is fraught with a myriad of ethical dilemmas. To ascertain whether certain actions are ethical or unethical we must dissect the decision making process undertaken by journalists, editors and publishers and compare these processes to the professional codes and practices put in place to maintain ethical conduct.

According to Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative, Desborough acted unethically according to the principle of reversibility (Breit, 2007). In the decision making process of whether or not to write the story, Desborough does not appear to act in a way that he would wish to be treated. Desborough wrote a story that was inaccurate and not properly researched. It affected the couple involved in an emotional and professional way, which in a reversed situation, I assume Desborough would not want done to him. He has disregarded Angelina and Brad’s individual right to privacy because of his belief that the public’s collective right to know outweighs individual rights. This action neglects the principle of respect for others and illustrates how Desborough capitalised upon the misfortune of others as a means for him to potentially get a scoop in the end. Furthermore, I assume that these decisions and the action of publicizing inaccurate information would not be welcomed as universalizeable by Desborough.
You can see more details here:
http://s41763698.blogspot.co.uk/

Please send this link to the Estate. I think they can easily sue for compensation. The story can easily be debunked and many media outlets are also debunking it as inaccurate and plain false.

I think there is a feeling that AEG is going to lose the wrongful-dead lawsuit and so their supporters such as the Daily Mirror are resorting to desperate tactics of smearing and intimidation.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

yep! that link needs to be sent to them although I am sure they are aware of how to file a lawsuit against a British tabloid
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

If it's true people, in this case the Estate couldn't sue tabloids for libeling a deceased person because there isn't a law that protects their rights, it'd such an unfair low. I really hope there's something they can do to stop this newest media smearing campaign.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I really think the Estate needs to find a way to handle it because if they won't this will go on and on and on and it eventually will destroy Michael's legacy and his marketability as an artist. If the media is allowed to repeat lies over and over and over again unchallenged, they will keep repeating it for as long as everyone believes it.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

guys, BE ACTIVE ON THE NET, ADD YOUR COMMENTS ON THE ARTICLES, USE COMMENTS and factual reports FROM MJJC....
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Why on earth haven't the estate responded? I haven't seen any statement in this thread. Do they think it will just all blow over as long as they don't make too much fuss about it. Mj is a brand and a billion dollar corporation, they get paid $millions to represent him - there is no other corp or individual that wd allow those allegations to be made in all media without some type of rebuttal. Weitzman is actually mentioned as drawing up that bogus lawsuit so he'd better be getting ready to sue. They're not fbi files, they don't prove mj paid off 24 boys, none of the revelations are new, all the informants have been discredited - so why has mj only got roger friedman batting for him in the media.

(I've zilch expectations of the family, so don't even bother to expect anything from them.)

greeneyedone said:
Does the Anschutz company own or have a stake in "The Mirror"? I just found this, and right under The Mirror is Anschutz company (aka AEG).
The mirror is owned by a company called trinity mirror. I don't see a connection with aeg. I guess the motivation of the 'pi' who supplied the papers and the timing is the significant issue. It seems to be linked to the wade revelations, and the aeg trial maybe makes mj more newsworthy. James desborough is ex notw and is based in la, he's a contact of oxman which is why this muppet was the only one allowed to give mj's 'side of the story'.
 
Last edited:
I was reading some past cases published on the 'Press complaints commission' website, and one of them described an article (by an unrelated journalist) who wrote about someone being charged, but failed to mention the subsequent acquittal. In all 4 closely written pages of the printed 'People' article, there are just 5 words relating to the result of the court case in 2005 , and these are hidden in a lengthy box of small print across the bottom of pages 4 and 5. They read 'He's acquitted in June 05'. The heading for this long box of text is: 'Pop King's timeline of Shame' and it includes such occasions as 'J marries Elvis's girl' and 'Murray found guilty' ie although all dates are in red print, many are completely unrelated to any accusations. The sheer manipulation overall is absolutely breathtaking.



Interestingly, the Press Complaints Commission says that anyone can make a complaint about inaccuracy in any press article, although the Commission would then have to contact the 'person or group concerned' to see if they wished to make a complaint themselves.

Who can complain to the PCC

Wherever possible, the Commission will take forward complaints it receives, including those about factual inaccuracies from concerned readers. However, when the Commission receives a complaint from a member of the public that relates directly to a named or identifiable individual or group, it will - where appropriate - endeavour to contact the relevant person or group to explain its services and to ask whether they wish to complain. Where no complaint is made by the directly affected party (for whatever reason), it may not be appropriate to take forward a complaint from an unrelated individual for some or all of the following reasons:

•the Commission may not be able to investigate effectively: that is, to understand the full circumstances and determine whether any breach of the Code had occurred;
•the investigation might do harm: in cases where the subject has co-operated with apparently intrusive coverage, for example, a PCC investigation might cause embarrassment and in itself pose an intrusion (where none had occurred previously); and/or
•remedial action undertaken by a publication might do harm (for example, by causing upset or posing an intrusion).

In such cases, it is not possible to know what the party concerned would consider to be a suitable resolution without their involvement. Further, the Commission acknowledges that individuals have a right not to complain about matters that concern them.

The Commission may continue with an investigation or consideration of a complaint in such circumstances, either through a complaint from an unrelated individual or on its own behalf, when it believes that such an investigation or consideration is appropriate and in the public interest.

http://www.pcc.org.uk/complaints/makingacomplaint.html
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Huh well as much as I don't like Roger Friedman or Charles Thomson much either I still tweeted their articles debunking that crap tabloid story! Desperate times desperate measures. Sad that this is the only help we can get, from people who also accused MJ once of these very things themselves! SMH But, hell at least NOW they see and KNOW different!

Charles Thomson has never accused Michael.

Of course there is a connection with AEG and the Mirror. They run advertising in it.
 
StellaJackson;3858492 said:
Charles Thomson has never accused Michael.

Of course there is a connection with AEG and the Mirror. They run advertising in it.



According to the last Annual report, the circulation of the Mirror group national tabloids was sliding badly...they must be very desperate to be running pieces like today's.

Trinity Mirror reports 11 per cent slump in group revenue
08 November 2012

The nationals division – including the Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror and People – saw revenue fall 12 per cent to £135m during the period, with advertising down 9 per cent and circulation down 18 per cent.

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/trinity-mirror-reports-11-cent-slump-group-revenue


INTERIM MANAGEMENT STATEMENT 17 weeks ended 28 April 2013
Whilst the trading environment remains challenging we continue to see an improvement in revenues, with March and April down 7% compared to a decline of 13% in January and February.

http://www.trinitymirror.com/documents/financial-reports/2013/ims-may-2013-final.pdf
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Charles Thomson has never accused Michael.

Of course there is a connection with AEG and the Mirror. They run advertising in it.
From my understanding Charles Thomson use to post on another MJ forum a few yrs back as a poster called "Twisted Vision" and he would speculate on whether MJ was really innocent and blaming MJ on his behavior as to why he keep getting accused. And I also got into an argument with him On FB some time ago because he was saying MJ kids were not MJ Bio kids and that fans need to stop saying things like that because it's one of the reasons why the media doesn't take us seriously! He kept posing pics of MJ kids and saying how white they looked! SMH

That's two reason why I don't really like him much! Same with Roger because he goes with whomever give him the scoop. He has been on TV next to Diane Dimond saying some B.S before like he know names of other boys. So I don't trust him either. But, unfortunately I guess when it comes to MJ people who report on him negative in the pass and then all of a sudden do something positive they get seen as more credible or unbiased. I think it's a shame! Cause just because ur an MJ fan doesn't mean u don't know the facts! That kind of cycle will get MJ truth no where! IMO!
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

From my understanding Charles Thomson use to post on another MJ forum a few yrs back as a poster called "Twisted Vision" and he would speculate on whether MJ was really innocent and blaming MJ on his behavior as to why he keep getting accused. And I also got into an argument with him On FB some time ago because he was saying MJ kids were not MJ Bio kids and that fans need to stop saying things like that because it's one of the reasons why the media doesn't take us seriously! He kept posing pics of MJ kids and saying how white they looked! SMH

He never speculated that Michael might be guilty at all. What he said was that Michael was taking a risk of being falsely accused again by being seen with boys, which is a fair point.

I think his comments about the kids are valid and he is right that fans make themselves look less than credible when arguing about it.

But fact is, he has been one of he best advocates in the mainstream media for Michael's innocence and it is down to him that the FBI files were released in the first place.
 
Re: [Discussion] Michael Jackson Slandered By The Mirror

It makes me really sad when I see a nice article about Michael about the cirque shows and some people leave nasty comments. They say why people are celebrating a child molester etc. I wish people would stop seeing him like that. I wish something could happen that people could see the truth.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

He never speculated that Michael might be guilty at all. What he said was that Michael was taking a risk of being falsely accused again by being seen with boys, which is a fair point.

I think his comments about the kids are valid and he is right that fans make themselves look less than credible when arguing about it.

But fact is, he has been one of he best advocates in the mainstream media for Michael's innocence and it is down to him that the FBI files were released in the first place.

Yes NOW he is a good advocate for MJ innocence, I'm not denying that. But, I don't think what he said about MJ being around lil boys is a fair point nor a good point if u wanna help clear MJ by using personal opinions instead of FACTS, like he did back then and still feels today! That sounds like blaming MJ for the lies put on him, which is unfair and doesn't come off as someone believing in MJ innocence when that is ur argument!! Cause I don't think anything justifies what the Chandlers did to MJ! NOTHING! Also Thomson also complained that MJ saw the play Oliver and then speculated on how maybe he invited the boy in the play to meet with him and how he thought that was wrong. Which is ridiculous! Nor do I think he has a right to question if MJ is the Bio parent of PPB and call others out that think they are which is what he was doin and why should that bother him if others want to believe it? And no he wasn't the only one asking for MJ FBI files to be released!
 
Re: [Discussion] Michael Jackson Slandered By The Mirror

Hi everyone. I'm absolutely sure AEG is behind all this. They 'leak' old staff afresh to tabloid media they have networks with. It's their way of exercising pressure. Although it's so sicking for us fans to live again those moments of 2003-05, the good thing is, they have nothing new to bring in, and end up circulating the same crap that they couldn't give any credit to back then -much less now..
The answer, as rightly said, is for the estate to SUE. Stop this thing as it starts.
 
The Estate finally reacted:

Hello:

Many of you have sent us articles this weekend about Michael, from the Mirror and other UK-based tabloid magazines. Here is the response from the Co-Executors of the Estate to the nonsense:


“As MJ said, just because you read it in a magazine does not make it factual…we personally detest these supposed news organizations that profit at Michael’s expense. We hope the fans can stay vigilant with us in protecting Michael’s legacy. We hope everyone has the opportunity to see the MJ ONE show…that’s the real Michael.”


Thank you for remaining vigilant with the Estate in protecting Michael’s Legacy.

http://home.mj-upbeat.com/2013/06/30/statement-from-estate-of-michael-jackson-re-tabloids/
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Excellent. Dense and concise. A must-read for anyone who has doubts
 
Re: [Discussion] Michael Jackson Slandered By The Mirror

nice words but are they going to sue?
 
Re: [Discussion] Michael Jackson Slandered By The Mirror

I really hope they can take measures against those filthy tabloids, neither Michael, nor his children deserve it. At least we know they're aware already...
 
Re: [Discussion] Michael Jackson Slandered By The Mirror

Probably the Estate and lawyers are evaluating the situation. We aren't really sure if it's possible suing.
 
Back
Top