Latest on MJJC

Media back to their old tricks. It's Jackson not Jack*- Update USATODAY removes JACK* from headline

Re: Media is back to their old tricks. It's Jackson not Jack* email USAToday: accuracy@usatoday.com

I have sent an email and this is what I said:


It has been brought to my attention of the constant negative slander towards Mr. Michael Jackson, given by you as one of the many shameless tabloid media. Mr. Jackson has been a consistent punching bag for your lies and your jokes for decades and did it fail to occur to you that he was a human being just like all of us? that he hurt, cried and bleed? was flesh and bones like every human being? Only a decent soul can imagine what it feels like to be the center of racist/tabloid hell or at least understand it. Mr. Jackson's message of love and healing the world of our people of every generation, and race has been overlooked by the harsh names such as "wacko *****" What was so "whack" about him in a sense of wanting to help others? I must have missed the memo, please explain it to me. Our world is completely falling apart with hatred, destruction, poor, violence, hunger, and war but the media takes the attention away from what needs to be our main concern to focus on tormenting Mr. Michael Jackson, what a shame that we cannot lift each other other by beating an innocent man down just to gain some attention. Mr. Jackson has left behind three children, and do you think it is fair for them to hear nonsense about their father? who was and meant everything to them for the love of the lord please give some respect! Mr. Jackson is no longer here to defend himself anymore and enough is enough with your lies, your hurt, your slander and your racism. It's Time to LEAVE MR. MICHAEL JACKSON ALONE!!



Sincerely,


MJ supporter.
 
morinen;3475163 said:
If this is an old story, how come nobody ever said anything about it? Michael's been called J*cko for more that 20 (!) years, and as far as I know there were no massive fan campaigns against it in the past. To my knowledge (from old media and interviews), back in the 80s even fans and fan magazines used this nickname and didn't think of it as offensive. There are quite a few mags from the 80s that are devoted solely to Michael and praise him as hot and talented, and yet they use the nickname. Why only now, when mentions of "J*cko" in the media are few and far between compared to how it was 3 years ago, are fans bringing up rasist parallels? I'm not saying they are not legit, I'm just wondering how this could have gone unnoticed in America which is known for its political correctness and relentless fight against all public manifestations of rasism.
Click to expand...

There's a lot of reasons why. The short answer is that, for some, it's just a genuine lack of knowledge and awareness. If an individual is from a different culture and isn't educated about African American history or sensitized to issues of subtle racism (as opposed to overt racism — which is what is brought to light more often in mainstream media) they wouldn't realize anything was wrong. (On a personal level, I have known individuals [fans and non-fans alike] who have brought up the parallels over the years. Whether those concerns ever see publication is another matter).

For others, it's matter of there being bigger fish to fry. Especially after the allegations, but even back in the 80s there was people who thought he didn't want to be black and had "gone too white." The ***** thing took a back seat for some people for a while. But with the gathering of old and new fans after Michael passed, the internet as a platform for education and communication, and the advent of social networking sites such as twitter, it's easier now to gather fans for campaigns like this. You've brought up a lot of interesting questions — I hope I've helped explain somewhat, this is a very sensitive and tricky subject to root around in. I'm always open to chat more by PM, I don't want to derail United4MJLegacy's thread too much.
 
Re: Media is back to their old tricks. It's Jackson not Jack* email USAToday: accuracy@usatoday.com

maral said:
true, and at his 40th birthday a headline read "fat and forty". back in the day Elvis was called all kinds of things. and even today i see them write cruel untrue things about him that only a fan like me can pick up. BUT even so Elvis still get that respect that MJ has never gotten yet have EARNED. and i say this as a longtime fan who has been angry by how Presley has been treated ever since he started. i love him to death but i doubt they'd write "Dr Nick being on trial for Elvis the pelvis' death".

and just because the word "Pelvis" or "n***r lover" was once use for Elvis doesn't mean the nam ***** should be accepted.
Click to expand...

I drove by a place called "Fat Elvis Diner"- I guess it's supposed to be witty and funny. Medialoid isn't the only place that doesn't care about humiliating someone.
 
Re: Media is back to their old tricks. It's Jackson not Jack* email USAToday: accuracy@usatoday.com

After being contacted by Michael Jackson fans @USATODAY removed the deratory term *****
from thier headline replaced it with Jackson. Im so proud of MJ fans for standing up and for USATODAY
for listening to our concerns and doing the right thing.

It important that the MJ community recognise and thank those who are willling to "Make That Change"

Please send a short thank you note to Editor Brent Jones at this email address >> accuracy@usatoday.com

and we can also send a short thanks tweet to thier twitter http://Twitter.com/USATODAY
 
Interesting, I never thought of "*****" as racist but then I never knew it was an actual word. Still, I congratulate the fans for working together to have this headline changed to something less derogatory. Regardless of the meaning, Michael hated being called that and these publications need to be more respectful...
 
I think we should fight fire with fire, send an email to the RAG reporter or journalist Brent Jones and say if you won't respect you give respect. His name is Mr. Michael Joseph Jackson.
 
United4MJLegacy doesn't have permission to post pics here. So, at their request:



USA+TODAY+HEADLINE+AFTER.png




Thank you.

http://united4mjlegacy.blogspot.com/2011/09/small-victories.html
 
Congratulations to all of us who helped make this possible. Now that you all know the word has racists connotations, use that information to make the media change, especially those like Dimond who called him the J word in a tweet.
 
Now that is a beautiful thing. I'm sending my note of thanks right now. Goes to prove, letter responses respectably can bring about positive change. Go MJ fans, go! :)
 
You know one day we must make a sticky of all the projects that Michael's fan family undertook that brought about change for the better, in relation to Michael. No other family has done such a great job.
 
Why i have the feeling that USAtoday in that article deliberately used that idiotic term in order to get hits on the piece? Very lame way to get site traffic but apparently very effective. I fear the we will get to see the use of J**** term more often now because of that.
 
teli-mj said:
Why i have the feeling that USAtoday in that article deliberately used that idiotic term in order to get hits on the piece? Very lame way to get site traffic but apparently very effective. I fear the we will get to see the use of J**** term more often now because of that.
Click to expand...


We are not sure they got that much more traffic. As soon as we became aware of the degrading headline, we had screen capped the full stories and ask our members not to visit USA Today's website and not to share the link.

We promoted use of the screen cap if people wanted to read the full story for themselves.
 
teli-mj said:
Why i have the feeling that USAtoday in that article deliberately used that idiotic term in order to get hits on the piece? Very lame way to get site traffic but apparently very effective. I fear the we will get to see the use of J**** term more often now because of that.
Click to expand...

I think with this knowledge, people will think twice before writing that name again.
When a term it's so obviously racist, the media is afraid of using it. If they removed that name is not because Michael didn't like it, I bet it was because some fans informed them about of the racism of that name. Knowledge is power :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top