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

[Bringing Brighter Days]

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.

But his problems started in 1987, before certain segments of the media started to refer to him as such

 

[InvincibleMJ]

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

The article is specific and since Jack Black did not make fun of the MTV Video Music Awards in general, he and the VMA people did make fun of a specific person, not the situation.

 

[HIStory]

But his problems started in 1987, before certain segments of the media started to refer to him as such

It was exactly in 1987 when the media started to refer to him as such. When Bad was released there were TV reports about the release in which he was mocked even before the album was released for just how he looked on the cover. And then he was mocked for playing tough guy in the Bad video. Then the printed media started to mock him too. It was obvious that the media-tide was slowly turning.

 

[mj_frenzy]

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.

The article is specific and since Jack Black did not make fun of the MTV Video Music Awards in general, he and the VMA people did make fun of a specific person, not the situation.

I can understand that issue regarding the award was something more than confusing & in no way that specific handling flattered the channel.

I can understand also that such behaviors (parody acts, for example) can be easily interpreted in different ways & people be offended by them. That’s why, I believe they probably should not have taken place in the first place.

 

[Bringing Brighter Days]

It was exactly in 1987 when the media started to refer to him as such. When Bad was released there were TV reports about the release in which he was mocked even before the album was released for just how he looked on the cover. And then he was mocked for playing tough guy in the Bad video. Then the printed media started to mock him too. It was obvious that the media-tide was slowly turning.

Everything starts with the source and the image being projected

 

[Spaceship]

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.

This is really hypocritical coming from you. People are exchanging their opinions in this thread, and mj_frenzy simply expressed his opinion that the correlation you were speaking of was not underpinned by hard evidence. That's no reason for you to show to show such an attitude. If anything, the one with no interest in others' views is you.

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

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?

That screen cap of MTV's website doesn't prove MTV was ever planning to give MJ the award. The screen cap doesn't show that MTV said MJ was going to get the award; it just shows that MTV said Michael got the award after the VMAs.

 

[HIStory]

That screen cap of MTV's website doesn't prove MTV was ever planning to give MJ the award. The screen cap doesn't show that MTV said MJ was going to get the award; it just shows that MTV said Michael got the award after the VMAs.

And if MTV never gave him that award and never meant to then why were they so back and forth about whether they did or not? The next year they mocked MJ in a quite distasteful way for something that they themselves weren't consistent about. How is that fair behaviour?

I also think MTV's attitude wasn't always fair to MJ before the 2000s either, but this thread is about the 2000s so I am not going to get into that. Only, I want to mention that this wasn't the first time IMO where they weren't fair to him, to say the least. Which is low from them considering how much they have to thank to him.

 

[Antwort]

And if MTV never gave him that award and never meant to then why were they so back and forth about whether they did or not? The next year they mocked MJ in a quite distasteful way for something that they themselves weren't consistent about. How is that fair behaviour?

I definitely remember those incidents in 2002 and 2003. I most definitely do.

I also think MTV's attitude wasn't always fair to MJ before the 2000s either, but this thread is about the 2000s so I am not going to get into that. Only, I want to mention that this wasn't the first time IMO where they weren't fair to him, to say the least. Which is low from them considering how much they have to thank to him.

He pretty much invented the whole format, gave it value and meaning, artistic relevance and a platform for MTV to actually grow on. The ingratitude of people tends to be a characteristic in Michael's life. More than once he's been a benefactor whose merits went not only unrecognized, but also trampled.

But hey, he was also a forgiving spirit as well and all that is in the past, right? No point in dwelling on it anymore. Not only that, but they also had some good stuff on there - Daria was pretty funny lol. Plus, other MTV networks, especially in Europe, were quite Michael-friendly, so one cannot paint a totally negative picture.

 

[InvincibleMJ]

That screen cap of MTV's website doesn't prove MTV was ever planning to give MJ the award. The screen cap doesn't show that MTV said MJ was going to get the award; it just shows that MTV said Michael got the award after the VMAs.

Hardly the point given the fact they later denied it. Please read page 2.

There must be another way to explain the actual award MJ was given that night... Maybe it's some sort of office decor.

 

[KOPV]

I tuned in specifically because I knew MJ was getting the 'artist of the millennium award' on his birthday... The entire fan community was under that impression because MTV advertised it that way... Then just to make Mike the butt of there joke they turned around and made Michael look 'out of the loop' and lost...

 

[CrazyVegasMJ]

Him orchestrating the hyperbaric chamber and elephant man's bones tabloid stories also backfired on him..

 

[MAQ]

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

Eminem was losing his edge in Encore. Most people who found him "cool" were those who only considered The Eminem Show and MMLP. Plus, making a video disrespecting Michael only cost him more. Eminem was cool in the early and late 2000's, however in the mid he got fat, and his popularity waned in most parts of the globe. I love Eminem and some of his Encore songs were pretty good, but he was pretty "out" in those years.

 

[MAQ]

Things would've been so different if MJ hadn't kept on with the Peter Pan persona. Like in the 90's and Bad era he was pretty badass and he lashed out to his critics much more. I sometimes get frustrated over why Michael hadn't responded to an offensive joke with a clever retort or insult. I mean, why? :/

 

[HIStory]

Things would've been so different if MJ hadn't kept on with the Peter Pan persona.

Thing is, the Peter Pan persona is a part of him. He was not all PP but it is a part of him. It wasn't just an image he put on for album or two like say David Bowie did with some of his personas. It was simply a part of him. When people say they wish he had not kept up with that they actually wish he had not been genuine about who he was and had acted instead of being genuine.

 

[Bringing Brighter Days]

Him orchestrating the hyperbaric chamber and elephant man's bones tabloid stories also backfired on him..

big time.......he was bigger than that, he didn't have to resort to tactics like this for publicity sake

 

[MAQ]

Thing is, the Peter Pan persona is a part of him. He was not all PP but it is a part of him. It wasn't just an image he put on for album or two like say David Bowie did with some of his personas. It was simply a part of him. When people say they wish he had not kept up with that they actually wish he had not been genuine about who he was and had acted instead of being genuine.

He used to curse and vent like a normal man - that's what LMP said in Michael's presence during the sawyer interview. So, it's not like he won't be genuine when he isn't Peter Pan.

 

[mj_frenzy]

He used to curse and vent like a normal man - that's what LMP said in Michael's presence during the sawyer interview. So, it's not like he won't be genuine when he isn't Peter Pan.

Perfect answer!

 

[InvincibleMJ]

He used to curse and vent like a normal man - that's what LMP said in Michael's presence during the sawyer interview. So, it's not like he won't be genuine when he isn't Peter Pan.

So cursing on stage could have saved him from the VMA incident?

Him orchestrating the hyperbaric chamber and elephant man's bones tabloid stories also backfired on him..

Is that the reason he was falsely accused too?

 

[HIStory]

He used to curse and vent like a normal man - that's what LMP said in Michael's presence during the sawyer interview. So, it's not like he won't be genuine when he isn't Peter Pan.

People are more than one dimensional. That he cursed doesn't mean his PP persona was not a genuine part of his. And if so then why be ashamed of it? There is nothing wrong with not being like everyone else. In fact, what is really "a normal man"? Is there even such a thing? And if there is is that a positive thing at all? Cursing makes "a normal man"? Should we desire MJ, who was an exceptional artist with an exceptional world view and exceptional personality, be like a "normal man"? Would that really be a positive thing? Artists are rarely "normal", whatever that means. (Flashback from "Ghosts" where the inhabitants of "Normal Valley" attack him for being different. Michael wasn't and maybe did not even want to be a part of "Normal Valley".)

Of course, PP is just one dimension of his personality and it is equally wrong to portray him as this one-dimensional PP figure. But it was there. Genuinely. It wasn't like he acted this child-like way in public for image, while he was a completely different man in private. That he cursed does not change that. Nor that he could be serious and business minded when needed. He also had his childlike side and there is nothing wrong with that. Michael embraced it and was not ashamed of it at all. And he should not have. That's just who he was.

 

[analogue]

Him orchestrating the hyperbaric chamber and elephant man's bones tabloid stories also backfired on him..

I hate how some people try to justify the media's attacks on Michael by saying ''He started it''

 

[KOPV]

MY take on a few things..

Michael was never the type to curse much, he even admits as he got older you can catch him saying a few more curse words etc.. I really do believe Michael was so infatuated by LMP that (like many men) became what he believed she would like.. so would curse more around her, be the 'guy she wanted'... A lot of people get caught up in this when you are trying to win someone you like.. Shoot it happens around friends all the time!


Michael idealized the idea of Peter Pan, he would not have bought Neverland if that was not the case.. It was more than a PR move, he wanted to hold onto youth.. It was more so the media that tried to twist that into something stranger than it was. He knew he was an adult.. He just had the heart of a child..

You mix the mental capacity of an adult with a heart of a child you are going to get a very 'different' product that people are used to.. And many of which contradict themselves... "How's he like a kid when he does _____________"


The PR stunts that he did partake in in the 80's was working for some time and at some point (especially after the allegations) it crumbled.. The public used that as the "ah-ha" moment to explain all of his eccentricities..

At that point he used PR stunts to distract people from it which it only brought more attention to it.. I think he should have just been the REAL Michael by that point, but spending over 30 years creating an image and secluding himself for emotional protection, how was he supposed to 'come out' in a time he was most attacked when all he wanted was to be loved?? It would have been very mentally tough for him.

 

[MAQ]

So cursing on stage could have saved him from the VMA incident?

No but a simple line such as "There have been numerous cases where people have tried to belittle me - the most recent one being somebody who couldn't sell more than a few thousand records (or whatever). Well, there's a reason why I've been named the Artist of the Millennium and they haven't!"

Now imagine this! Imagine the cheers! Imagine the fans' hooting! Michael was more than 40 years old at that time and he was capable of defending himself in an implicit and explicit way ('93 Grammys, '94 NAACP, Diane Sawyer's interview). He should have opted for his edgier style in 2000s which he had displayed early on.

 

[MAQ]

People are more than one dimensional. That he cursed doesn't mean his PP persona was not a genuine part of his. And if so then why be ashamed of it? There is nothing wrong with not being like everyone else. In fact, what is really "a normal man"? Is there even such a thing? And if there is is that a positive thing at all? Cursing makes "a normal man"? Should we desire MJ, who was an exceptional artist with an exceptional world view and exceptional personality, be like a "normal man"? Would that really be a positive thing? Artists are rarely "normal", whatever that means. (Flashback from "Ghosts" where the inhabitants of "Normal Valley" attack him for being different. Michael wasn't and maybe did not even want to be a part of "Normal Valley".)

Of course, PP is just one dimension of his personality and it is equally wrong to portray him as this one-dimensional PP figure. But it was there. Genuinely. It wasn't like he acted this child-like way in public for image, while he was a completely different man in private. That he cursed does not change that. Nor that he could be serious and business minded when needed. He also had his childlike side and there is nothing wrong with that. Michael embraced it and was not ashamed of it at all. And he should not have. That's just who he was.

Well I haven't mentioned that his PP persona wasn't natural. But there are times when you have to be edgy, when you have to defend yourself properly. Peter Pan only earned him pity and sympathy. He was the King of Pop and he was humble - but even a humble man should fight for himself. Not for PR. But for himself.

 

[HIStory]

No but a simple line such as "There have been numerous cases where people have tried to belittle me - the most recent one being somebody who couldn't sell more than a few thousand records (or whatever). Well, there's a reason why I've been named the Artist of the Millennium and they haven't!"

Now imagine this! Imagine the cheers! Imagine the fans' hooting! Michael was more than 40 years old at that time and he was capable of defending himself in an implicit and explicit way ('93 Grammys, '94 NAACP, Diane Sawyer's interview). He should have opted for his edgier style in 2000s which he had displayed early on.

I actually liked it that MJ was above that level. MJ was classy and IMO it put Eminem more to shame than if MJ had gone down on his level. He was being mature and adult and at the end of the day it was Eminem who looked childish and foolish.

 

[CodaBroda]

That's one of the reasons why Michael's image and work has stood the test of time IMO, and one of the many reasons I'm a fan. Such great achievements, yet so humble. He let his work speak for itself.

 

[CrazyVegasMJ]

So cursing on stage could have saved him from the VMA incident?



Is that the reason he was falsely accused too?

I hate how some people try to justify the media's attacks on Michael by saying ''He started it''

He definitely didn't start the tabloid stories, but he himself did in fact fuel the flames.. He wanted to be seen as different and "out of this world" so-to-speak.. It's painfully obvious how badly it eventually backfired on him, that's all I was trying to say..

And I agree with someone who said he was bigger than the tabloid stories he himself started.. But at the time, tabloids hadn't gotten so out of hand as they grew to be and still are.. The crazy/wacky stories weren't seen as horribly publicity, not until they began bringing child abuse scandals into it..

 

[KOPV]

I don't think there is anything wrong with Mike being "edgier"... I don't think when people are saying that word they mean bring on a persona.. Just be himself!!! His realy self was 'edgier' in the way is he was a normal person that had specific ideals... Not the actual image of that Ideal he tried to showcase!

That's different... It's almost like knowing the Pope personality, he is a human... Take off the robe, you see a man that has normal conversations outside the IMAGE of the Pope..


Michael, if he just took off his 'robe', and let people see the real Michael... So much garbage would have been able to look past by the general public..

Imagine if he did an SNL show - showing his humor and personality.. THAT alone would have slashed so many public notions of who he was and show him in a much better light!! Just fun..

 

[HIStory]

So some of you want MJ to be a different person, a "normal person" instead of who he really was? Geniuses are usually not "normal people", esp. artistic ones - and it is not just about their talent but also their personalities. A lot of you are fans of MJ because he was not normal. A normal person is the dull guy who works nine to five and there is nothing exceptional in him, everything is just "normal" around him, like it is expected to be. There is nothing exciting about people who are "normal".

And how do we know he would have felt comfortable in a SNL-like talk show? Comfortable enough to "show his humour" and put on some shallow act like people usually do on such shows? Maybe it just wasn't in his personality to go on shows like that. (I never wished him to be on such a show. Most of it is shallow IMO. And I don't think it is for everyone (I mean to be a guest on such a show.)

And what does it actually have to do with the original topic? Are we now blaming Michael for MTV's treatment of him? As far as I know he was always nice to MTV. He gave them interviews over the years, went to their award shows where he pulled off some of the most memorable performances of the history of the channel. So lack of accessibility or cooperation is not really a good excuse for MTV.

 

[HIStoric]

No but a simple line such as "There have been numerous cases where people have tried to belittle me - the most recent one being somebody who couldn't sell more than a few thousand records (or whatever). Well, there's a reason why I've been named the Artist of the Millennium and they haven't!"

TBH I read this with Eminem as the context and I was like... ...you know Em's one of the biggest selling musicians of this century right? Then I realised you were talking about that guy who ran on stage during Earth Song.

I think he said he did it because he disagreed with MJ portraying himself as a Jesus-like figure (which I can see how his arms-out pose can spark that interpretation, not that I'm on that randoms side cos I ain't). If it makes you feel any better though, I don't even know that guys name and I've looked up the incident once or twice before. The fact I earlier referred to him as 'that guy' states it pretty loud and clear

 

[MAQ]

So some of you want MJ to be a different person, a "normal person" instead of who he really was? Geniuses are usually not "normal people", esp. artistic ones - and it is not just about their talent but also their personalities. A lot of you are fans of MJ because he was not normal. A normal person is the dull guy who works nine to five and there is nothing exceptional in him, everything is just "normal" around him, like it is expected to be. There is nothing exciting about people who are "normal".

And how do we know he would have felt comfortable in a SNL-like talk show? Comfortable enough to "show his humour" and put on some shallow act like people usually do on such shows? Maybe it just wasn't in his personality to go on shows like that. (I never wished him to be on such a show. Most of it is shallow IMO. And I don't think it is for everyone (I mean to be a guest on such a show.)

And what does it actually have to do with the original topic? Are we now blaming Michael for MTV's treatment of him? As far as I know he was always nice to MTV. He gave them interviews over the years, went to their award shows where he pulled off some of the most memorable performances of the history of the channel. So lack of accessibility or cooperation is not really a good excuse for MTV.

Have you heard HIStory? Have you heard Dangerous? Have you seen the '94 NAACP awards? Have you seen that Giraldo Rivera interview back in '05? It's not like he couldn't be edgy when he wanted to. He could defend himself. We just wish he'd done it more in the 2000's instead of letting himself be made the butt of the joke - which he obviously hated. He didn't have to flaunt his achievements but he could silence his adversaries with just a retort (I'm sure of it).