MTV’s coverage & attitude toward MJ in the 00’s

[mj_frenzy]

MJ’s presence on MTV during 90's (in terms of airplay, news coverage, video weekend specials, etc.) was pretty wide & constant while, for the most part, he was depicted in a (very) positive way even when it came to his legal issues (for example, 1993 allegations, plagiarism cases).

I am interested to know about this channel’s coverage & attitude toward MJ during the subsequent years. Although MJ was (artistically) rather inactive during that period, as compared to the previous decades, there is no denying that some really characteristic events took place that put him globally (again) in the center of attention (for example, MSG 2001 shows, 2004-05 court case). I suppose its coverage in relation to him became less extensive (due to other crucial factors as well, such as the exponential growth of Internet, the emergence of widely accepted new artists, etc.) & probably it adopted a rather neutral stance on his life/career.

(I am referring mostly to the American, basic version of this channel, & not to the affiliated ones that broadcast in other countries as well)

 

[HIStory]

I think generally there was an anti-MJ sentiment in the US from the mid 90s on and MTV just jumped on the bandwagon. Besides MTV wasn't what it used to be either. It became more and more a reality show channel rather than a music video channel.

I find it interesting how the rise and decline of MTV kind of correlates with when MJ started to create videos and when he stopped making videos. Of course, I know there were other artists making videos besides him so it is probably not a direct connection, but I do find this correlation interesting.
And yet, MTV often did not treat him fairly.

 

[Psychoniff]

I find it interesting how the rise and decline of MTV kind of correlates with when MJ started to create videos and when he stopped making videos.

Did you get that from hereL: http://www.theatlantic.com/entertai...ichael-jacksons-unparalleled-influence/58616/

 

[PoP]

I think generally there was an anti-MJ sentiment in the US from the mid 90s on and MTV just jumped on the bandwagon. Besides MTV wasn't what it used to be either. It became more and more a reality show channel rather than a music video channel.

I find it interesting how the rise and decline of MTV kind of correlates with when MJ started to create videos and when he stopped making videos. Of course, I know there were other artists making videos besides him so it is probably not a direct connection, but I do find this correlation interesting.
And yet, MTV often did not treat him fairly.

I agree on both these statements. MTV was never same anymore, less entertaining while lost their edge at the same time. It's like they changed from all music videos and concert tour behind the scenes to reality shows. BORING!!! They changed since people began to screw Michael with all those nonsense allegations, Invincible album promotion debacle, countless debts and the trail. I grew distasteful towards MTV since they refuse to ban Eminem's video "Just Lose It" which I dubbed it "Just Booze It" and not supporting Michael at all.

 

[HIStory]

Did you get that from hereL: http://www.theatlantic.com/entertai...ichael-jacksons-unparalleled-influence/58616/

No, never read that.

Simple observation.

 

[analogue]

. I grew distasteful towards MTV since they refuse to ban Eminem's video "Just Lose It" which I dubbed it "Just Booze It" and not supporting Michael at all.

I loved how Stevie Wonder stood up for Michael during all that. While most people were jumping in the ''Eminem is so cool'' bandwagon, Stevie was one of the people who stood up and said ''This is bull shit''. Stevie has always been a true friend

 

[PoP]

I loved how Stevie Wonder stood up for Michael during all that. While most people were jumping in the ''Eminem is so cool'' bandwagon, Stevie was one of the people who stood up and said ''This is bull shit''. Stevie has always been a true friend

Good thing he did and God bless him. BET is the only one agreeing with banning the video, they even stood for Michael.

 

[Amaya]

Let's not forget the shit that happened at the 2002 VMA's. Didn't they tell him he was receiving that Artist of the Millennium award and then switched it around to having it just be a birthday thing and they didn't tell him? Really embarrassing for him.

 

[mj_frenzy]

I think generally there was an anti-MJ sentiment in the US from the mid 90s on and MTV just jumped on the bandwagon. Besides MTV wasn't what it used to be either. It became more and more a reality show channel rather than a music video channel.

I find it interesting how the rise and decline of MTV kind of correlates with when MJ started to create videos and when he stopped making videos. Of course, I know there were other artists making videos besides him so it is probably not a direct connection, but I do find this correlation interesting.
And yet, MTV often did not treat him fairly.

Although I can agree with the rise, I cannot do the same when it comes to this so-called ‘decline’ of MTV because of MJ.

It was simply a change of policy (fewer videos in favor of more live shows) that gradually had begun a little earlier (than early 00’s) when MJ was still making music videos.

Let's not forget the shit that happened at the 2002 VMA's. Didn't they tell him he was receiving that Artist of the Millennium award and then switched it around to having it just be a birthday thing and they didn't tell him? Really embarrassing for him.

I think to claim that MJ was intentionally sabotaged by MTV (during the 2002 VMA) sounds a bit overstressed.

 

[InvincibleMJ]

I think to claim that MJ was intentionally sabotaged by MTV (during the 2002 VMA) sounds a bit overstressed.

They also wrote on their website he was going to get this award then they removed it. Many things that MJ had to deal with sound overstressed, it doesn't mean they're not true.

 

[mj_frenzy]

They also wrote on their website he was going to get this award then they removed it. Many things that MJ had to deal with sound overstressed, it doesn't mean they're not true.

It was still written on their website, even after that event, that MJ officially received the ‘Artist of the Millennium’ award:

http://site2.mjeol.com/MTVAdmitsArtistOfMillenniumAward_big6-27-09.jpg

 

[HIStory]

Although I can agree with the rise, I cannot do the same when it comes to this so-called ‘decline’ of MTV because of MJ.

It was simply a change of policy (fewer videos in favor of more live shows) that gradually had begun a little earlier (than early 00’s) when MJ was still making music videos.

After the 90s he only made YRMW. That's one video. (He had no involvement in Cry so I do not consider it his video creatively.) The last big videos MJ did were Ghosts and BOTDF in 1996-1997 and those were largely ignored by MTV USA. I am not saying it is because of MJ but there IS a correlation which is interesting - whether as a symobolism or something else.

[h=3]Fewer music videos (2000–08)[/h] From 1995 to 2000, MTV played 36.5% fewer music videos. MTV president Van Toeffler explained: "Clearly, the novelty of just showing music videos has worn off. It's required us to reinvent ourselves to a contemporary audience."[SUP][63][/SUP] Despite targeted efforts to play certain types of music videos in limited rotation, MTV greatly reduced its overall rotation of music videos by the mid-2000s.[SUP][64][/SUP] While music videos were featured on MTV up to eight hours per day in 2000, the year 2008 saw an average of just three hours of music videos per day on MTV. The rise of social media and websites like YouTube as a convenient outlet for the promotion and viewing of music videos signaled this reduction.[SUP][65][/SUP]
As the decade progressed, MTV continued to play some music videos instead of relegating them exclusively to its sister channels, but around this time, the channel began to air music videos only in the early morning hours or in a condensed form on Total Request Live. As a result of these programming changes, Justin Timberlake implored MTV to "play more damn videos!" while giving an acceptance speech at the 2007 Video Music Awards.[SUP][66][/SUP]
Despite the challenge from Timberlake, MTV continued to decrease its total rotation time for music videos in 2007, and the channel eliminated its long-running special tags for music videos such as "Buzzworthy" (for under-represented artists), "Breakthrough" (for visually stunning videos), and "Spankin' New" (for brand new videos). Additionally, the historic Kabel typeface, which MTV displayed at the beginning and end of all music videos since 1981, was phased out in favor of larger text and less information about the video's record label and director. The classic font can still be seen in "prechyroned" versions of old videos on sister network VH1 Classic, which had their title information recorded onto the same tape as the video itself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTV#Fewer_music_videos_.282000.E2.80.9308.29

 

[InvincibleMJ]

It was still written on their website, even after that event, that MJ officially received the ‘Artist of the Millennium’ award:

http://site2.mjeol.com/MTVAdmitsArtistOfMillenniumAward_big6-27-09.jpg

edited back after his death.

 

[HIStory]

It was still written on their website, even after that event, that MJ officially received the ‘Artist of the Millennium’ award:

http://site2.mjeol.com/MTVAdmitsArtistOfMillenniumAward_big6-27-09.jpg

Do you realize that this article was written after his death when attitudes towards him changed?

 

[InvincibleMJ]

If you're going to use the screenshot (Dated June 26th, 2009) from mjeol maybe you should also post (and read) the rest of it:

http://site2.mjeol.com/mj-news/mtv-comes-clean-about-artist-of-the-millennium-award.html

But apparently nobody warned to the guys running MTV's website that the award had been yanked or that Jackson was being made a fool out of because they posted the information about the Artist of the Millennium Award on MTV's site that night. See screenshot from 2002 below:

BTW how is that helping your point that "it's overstressed" to think "MJ was intentionally sabotaged by MTV"? They wrote on their website that he was going to get it and then publicly denied that he did and tried to make him look like a fool. Do you still think it was unintended?

 

[mj_frenzy]

I am not saying it is because of MJ but there IS a correlation which is interesting - whether as a symobolism or something else.

I think this correlation is not underpinned by hard evidence.

Do you realize that this article was written after his death when attitudes towards him changed?

I know that this article was written after his death.

BTW how is that helping your point that "it's overstressed" to think "MJ was intentionally sabotaged by MTV"? They wrote on their website that he was going to get it and then publicly denied that he did and tried to make him look like a fool. Do you still think it was unintended?

Obviously, I cannot tell for sure whether it was unintended or not (that’s why I used the word ‘sounds&#8217 & I suppose nobody can 100-percent tell that.

I think during that period, right after the event, MTV claimed that MJ actually received such an award. Later, it baffled people by saying that such an award never existed. In a same way, they edited & re-edited their articles on their website probably more than one times regarding that matter.

It could have been a mistake on their part (for other unknown reasons), not necessarily aimed at embarrassing (or humiliating) MJ.

I cannot understand your insistence that they wanted to make him look like a fool.

 

[HIStory]

I think this correlation is not underpinned by hard evidence.

And it doesn't have to be. We are not in court. We are exchanging opinions. If you simply want an outlet for your opinion with no interest in others' views then say so and then I am not going to bother to reply to your threads.

Obviously, I cannot tell for sure whether it was unintended or not (that’s why I used the word ‘sounds&#8217 & I suppose nobody can 100-percent tell that.

I think during that period, right after the event, MTV claimed that MJ actually received such an award. Later, it baffled people by saying that such an award never existed. In a same way, they edited & re-edited their articles on their website probably more than one times regarding that matter.

It could have been a mistake on their part (for other unknown reasons), not necessarily aimed at embarrassing (or humiliating) MJ.

I cannot understand your insistence that they wanted to make him look like a fool.

Why would they edit and re-edit articles, as you say, probably more than one times, if it was just an honest mistake? How do you even make a "mistake" about such a matter?

 

[InvincibleMJ]

MTV's unintended article on the 2002 VMA

http://www.mtv.com/ontv/vma/2002/

Michael apparently got confused, not understanding the concept of his birthday or the big birthday cake on stage, and instead thought that MTV was honoring him with an Artist of the Millennium award. Uncomfortable hilarity ensued as Jackson accepted the non-existent honor with a stirring speech about his childhood in Indiana. For this priceless moment in VMA history, we've been trying to give him the Awkwardness of the Millennium Award ever since, but he never shows up to get that one.

And MTV's unintended Jack Black "parody" the following year:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfU3rQ9dNpw

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0332226/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_wr#writers
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0375940/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_wr#writers

 

[HIStory]

^ It baffles me how some can still think it was something unintentional.

And then they have the nerve to change the story again in 2009 when they said they did give him the award. So it wasn't MJ being delusional after all?

 

[Bringing Brighter Days]

to be fair to the American press, every single time Michael Jackson released a new album, it always gave him recognition for his amazing achievements, this is the same guy who became a national icon with Thriller, this is not why the problems started

 

[mj_frenzy]

And it doesn't have to be. We are not in court. We are exchanging opinions. If you simply want an outlet for your opinion with no interest in others' views then say so and then I am not going to bother to reply to your threads.

Why would they edit and re-edit articles, as you say, probably more than one times, if it was just an honest mistake? How do you even make a "mistake" about such a matter?

I agree that we are not in court.

I express my opinion & expect others to express their personal point of view (on condition that they do not get off topic).

As a result, if an opinion is different than yours, this does not mean that no interest in others’ views exists.

Generally, I am (always) willing to hear all the different explanations on a matter, even though the ones that I cannot embrace.

MTV's unintended article on the 2002 VMA

And MTV's unintended Jack Black "parody" the following year:

I am aware of these acts.

Again, that could have been due to other reasons & not necessarily because they wanted to specifically embarrass MJ (because of their overall change of policy that it adopted a more reality/live show character, etc.).

^ It baffles me how some can still think it was something unintentional.

And then they have the nerve to change the story again in 2009 when they said they did give him the award. So it wasn't MJ being delusional after all?

Personally, it does not baffle me at all that people may provide different explanations on specific issues.

 

[mj_frenzy]

to be fair to the American press, every single time Michael Jackson released a new album, it always gave him recognition for his amazing achievements, this is the same guy who became a national icon with Thriller, this is not why the problems started

I am not exactly sure if the majority of the American citizens (mostly in the 00’s) were against him, or, at least indifferent to him, in the same way that American press did.

Also, I am not exactly sure if American citizens were being influenced to such an extent by the American press, or they had already formed their opinions, regardless of what press broadcasted or said.

 

[HIStory]

I agree that we are not in court.

I express my opinion & expect others to express their personal point of view (on condition that they do not get off topic).

As a result, if an opinion is different than yours, this does not mean that no interest in others’ views exists.

Generally, I am (always) willing to hear all the different explanations on a matter, even though the ones that I cannot embrace.

I just don't think what I expressed requires any evidence. It was a simple opinion about what I see as an interesting correlation between the rise and fall of MTV and MJ's career. As the article Psychoniff posted shows I am by far not the only one seeing that either. I stated I did not say this is some direct connection, much less did I attribute MTV's decline to MJ not making music videos any more. I did state that more than once. It can be a coincidence, but the correlation is there. And if it is a coincidence it is a pretty symbolic one IMO.

Again, that could have been due to other reasons & not necessarily because they wanted to specifically embarrass MJ (because of their overall change of policy that it adopted a more reality/live show character, etc.).

Personally, it does not baffle me at all that people may provide different explanations on specific issues.

So how would you explain MTV making fun of MJ and the incident the next year if it wasn't to embarrass MJ?

 

[Bringing Brighter Days]

I am not exactly sure if the majority of the American citizens (mostly in the 00’s) were against him, or, at least indifferent to him, in the same way that American press did.

Also, I am not exactly sure if American citizens were being influenced to such an extent by the American press, or they had already formed their opinions, regardless of what press broadcasted or said.

the problems started in the late 80s, years before those legal challenges, the press did not dictate public reaction, it was what the public saw taking place w/him personally

 

[HIStory]

the problems started in the late 80s, years before those legal challenges, the press did not dictate public reaction, it was what the public saw taking place w/him personally

Actually the press does have a big effect on public reaction. When you read "freak" this, "weirdo" that in the press all the time that does have an effect on how the public perceives an artist. Many people are very much influenced by what they see or read in the media.

 

[mj_frenzy]

I just don't think what I expressed requires any evidence. It was a simple opinion about what I see as an interesting correlation between the rise and fall of MTV and MJ's career. As the article Psychoniff posted shows I am by far not the only one seeing that either. I stated I did not say this is some direct connection, much less did I attribute MTV's decline to MJ not making music videos any more. I did state that more than once. It can be a coincidence, but the correlation is there. And if it is a coincidence it is a pretty symbolic one IMO.

So how would you explain MTV making fun of MJ and the incident the next year if it wasn't to embarrass MJ?

It is perfectly normal to have a personal, simple opinion about what you see.

But, notice that people can make correlations for almost anything, especially in those cases when sufficient & reliable evidence is not given.

I think this kind of (parody) acts does not aim at embarrassing specific persons.

They probably resort to that such kind of acts for other, more important for them reasons (high TV ratings, etc.).

 

[HIStory]

I think this kind of (parody) acts does not aim at embarrassing specific persons.

So MJ is not a specific person?

Not to mention MTV's back and forth about whether they gave him that award or not. Here they make fun of MJ for thinking they would give him such an award, but it was on their own website that they did and then in 2009 again they admitted they did. In 2003 however the "hip" thing was to mock MJ so MTV went with the flow.

But, notice that people can make correlations for almost anything

Maybe this sounds good to you, it is just not true. I could not make an observation about that MTV's rise and decline has a correlation with Cyndi Lauper's career, for example.

especially in those cases when sufficient & reliable evidence is not given.

What is it exactly that I should give hard cold evidence for? MTV gradually started to shift towards a non-music video format since the second half of the 90s, which does correlate with the time when MJ stopped making videos. Once again (and I do not know how many times I need to repeat this) this is not to say that MJ not making videos any more is the direct reason for that, but there IS a correlation and if nothing else I do see that as symbolic.

 

[mj_frenzy]

the problems started in the late 80s, years before those legal challenges, the press did not dictate public reaction, it was what the public saw taking place w/him personally

But, in other countries the public saw what was going with him, too, & despite the phenomenal influx of negative news, people did not show, for the most part, such overt apathy (if not hostility) toward him.

So, I think that American press played a significant role regarding that matter.

 

[mj_frenzy]

What is it exactly that I should give hard cold evidence for? MTV gradually started to shift towards a non-music video format since the second half of the 90s, which does correlate with the time when MJ stopped making videos. Once again (and I do not know how many times I need to repeat this) this is not to say that MJ not making videos any more is the direct reason for that, but there IS a correlation and if nothing else I do see that as symbolic.

Personally, I do not believe at all that MTV’s change of policy had to do with the decline of someone’s career, even on a symbolic level.

By claiming that, someone could believe that, for example, MTV had already predicted in a very accurate way his forthcoming inactivity (in terms of videos) from the mid 90’s onwards & decided to adapt (on time) its direction solely to that. It sounds rather illogical.

 

[HIStory]

Personally, I do not believe at all that MTV’s change of policy had to do with the decline of someone’s career, even on a symbolic level.

By claiming that, someone could believe that, for example, MTV had already predicted in a very accurate way his forthcoming inactivity (in terms of videos) from the mid 90’s onwards & decided to adapt (on time) its direction solely to that. It sounds rather illogical.

I have already said many times that I did not claim that MTV changed their policy as a direct result of what was happening in MJ's career. Yet you continue to interpret my words as if I am saying that. It seems you do not get what I am saying, which is maybe my fault, but whatever.

I see you skipped the other part of my post about the award.