Update: Behind the Scenes on Jan 28th 8PM ET OWN Channel / Katherine Jackson May Be 'Oprah' Bound

[xPrincessx]

Actually, I would never call anyone a "monster" or create some sort of 'horned one' photoshops.
I appreciate Winfrey using her cloud to do good, I do.

What I don't appreciate is that literally everyone is forcing their own issues at the expense of Michael Jackson.

Being the victim of a abuse is horrendous and nobody should ever be experiencing that.

However, that does not mean that it's fair to make life hell for those who have not committed any crime whatsoever.

And one doesn't need explicit words to be hurting someone. Passive-aggressive mind games don't always require words. The message gets across anyway. And that is what members here are bemoaning and have noticed for years.
Scheduling child abuse shows in questionable timeframes seems to be a popular way to put the 'allegations' scenario from the backburner onto a higher flame in people's minds.

The members here have rightly noticed that Winfrey has a history of conveniently scheduling abuse shows around shows that deal with Michael Jackson.

It is also insidious to be using the word 'allegations' and 'charges'- because that sounds a heck of a lot different than 'vindicated and proven innocent'.
Let's face it- to many people even 'indicted' means something like 'guilt'.

Journalistic ethos would DEMAND that when mentioning 'allegations and indictment' one would also mention the final outcome of said trial- it would simply be journalistic competence to go full circle. Somehow with Michael Jackson supposed 'journalists' are suddenly proud of their own bias and incomplete, purposefully misleading build-ups- just as photographers suddenly became proud when snapping a picture of MJ became a contest of shooting the most horrendous picture ever, when normally professional pride would result from the opposite.

When it comes to MJ, that is not being done on purpose. Whenever you hear about other high profile court case you will ALWAYS hear the outcome being mentioned.

Michael Jackson was and is being abused himself- verbally and emotionally.

Everyone agrees that the victims of sexual abuse are traumatized.

What people take lightly is how traumatizing it is to be wrongly accused of horrendous crimes that one can't even fathom.
To purposefully leave out the fact that Michael Jackson was pronounced not guilty on 10 felony counts and 4 misdemeanors- that would be the full story.

While the trauma of sexual abuse is horrendous, one trauma will never justify traumatizing another because of one's own trauma.

Ever noticed how MJs name conveniently gets lumped in with OJ Simpson- just because they both happen to be black men? How come? What does MJ have in common with him? Black and male?

MJ has been abused in different ways as a child, youth AND adult. I can only fathom how debilitating and heart stopping this farce of a trial for him was.

To keep implying 'allegation, allegation, allegation' means to abuse and traumatize Michael once more.

(also, you would be surprised to what degree unprocessed trauma can make life hell for other innocent people)

People need to stop living their issues through Michael Jackson. On a side remark- in a society where we presume that 'not guity x14' would suffice even for the densest of people- Oprah Winfrey does not need to 'know' Michael Jackson personally to not be slandering and defaming somebody who is now passed on.

It is insidious and horrifying to be watching a 80+ woman who buried her child having to defend said innocent son. If people want to use the fact that Winfrey herself is a victim of sexual abuse- then people should also take into account the fact that off all people Winfrey should be the first to exhibit kindness toward a fellow mother who buried a child.

To be torturing a grieving elder person (whom I don't consider to be an innocent angel) to that degree is tasteless.

People also forget that Michael's 3 children are highly traumatized by having to live through this nightmare in the world's eyes- exactly what Michael was trying to avoid.

It is hypocrisy to be saying that one doesn't want to put the children in harm's way, hurt them or otherwise make them feel uncomfortable- and then let a camera film you while you once more bring up 'allegations'.
Michael's children are not idiots and nobody has the right to traumatize his children even further.
The kids are practically orphaned, have their own share of trauma- yet we are supposed to accept that people had 'concerns' about the children? How about they start by not supplying innuendo bringing up the 'half truth' and then leaving out the actual truth?

If concern for the children was on the producers mind, 'allegations' would not have been brought up yet again- but we don't want the public to EVER forget, do we? 'Cause Michael is being celebrated a bit too much, ain't he?

His children are traumatized, miss their Dad and need to deal with cruelty that constantly reminds them that their Dad was wrongly accused of something horrendous. Way to go!!!! NOT.

If true compassion was on anyone's mind, the children would never ever have to deal with their father being defamed and slandered even in death.

MJ was and is being abused himself- and that simply needs to stop.
And MJ would not being standing by idly, watching a TV host hurl the word allegations to get a rise out of his elder mother and he most certainly wouldn't condone his litte girl having to be on National TV, trying to 'keep it together'.
It would mean Michael's bleeding heart that his baby girl has to 'humanize' her Dad on TV.

I wanted to highlight everything i disagreed with but it became tiresome towards the end so let me just say this. FIRST OF ALL Oprah has NEVER called Michael a monster and i know for a FACT you did not see or hear her say it with your own eyes or ears because it never happened. I also know this because you will NEVER be able to show evidence of this, once again because it NEVER happened. You also say "everyone is forcing their own issues at the expense of Michael Jackson" ummm who exactly is everyone??? And how have you come to such an odd conclusion? Surely you can only speak for yourself...

You have used so many over dramatic statements your entire post can not be taken seriously at all.. "that does not mean that it's fair to make life hell for those who have not committed any crime whatsoever" again what and who are you talking about? This has me assume that you have had the luxury and fortune of a very easy going life if you believe that what oprah has said (which for the record is nothing as everything you have stated in your post never took place at all) equates to making somebody's life "hell" as you put it.

I should also point out to you (and it only takes a google search to find this out) that Oprah did not start doing sexual abuse shows in 2004/2005 during the trial or even after she met Michael in 1993. You have tried to write that she was "conveniently scheduling" them with Michael in mind, the notion is actually laughable. Since 1986 she has been talking about sexual abuse in GREAT detail and it is the single most topic she's talked about most on her show in the last 25 years, and alot of lives she has saved doing this.

Did you actually WATCH the interview yourself because if you did you would know, while the children were present NOTHING about the allegations was even implied, so that lie you stated was unnecessarry.

I have little else to say to you other than choose your words better because to say that by asking a question (last i checked freedom of speech was still a human right) Oprah was traumatizing Katherine who for the record did not appear "traumatized" as the english dictionary would define it is actually insulting to myself and others who have been through REAL trauma.

My advice to you would be not to argue points that you don't know as fact because it makes your entire argument benign. Words like traumatised, torture and the like simply aren't appropriate for this situation.

 

[The Lost Child]

"booking the children" :doh:

I am just disgusted by this business. I never criticized Mrs Jackson, but I am really concerned with her recent doing. Cooperating with shady man while getting enough money from the Estate and letting the Children being interviewed by Oprah - this should never happen. It's not like they said something wrong - I was touched by their words. But you cannot just "book the children" They should live their childhood and being protected from the media hyenas like Oprah - it was mistake to invite her to the Encino home. Just let them grow up and decide for themselves whether they want to be interviewed by media ppl or not.

Plus, while watching behind the scenes I got that impression that Katherine is kinda like easy to manipulate, to play with her feelings to befriend her. I mean, she knew how Oprah felt for Michael and then holding her hand and saying how much she admires her?
I'm not thinking here about any avenge or thinks like that. I just felt sorry for Michel, his mother holding hands with phony Oprah, that's all.

 

[Ashtanga]

I guess we have seen different shows of hers then. You are correct that Oprah never said "he IS a molester" but how can you give her a pass when we all KNOW what kind of remarks she has done in the past, ie leading into the sexual abuse charges and joking about him etc.

- Oprah had a show about unrelated men who share intimate relationships, no sexual, with one another and they insisted they were heterosexual. One of the men said that he often shared a bed with his friends and Oprah laughed and said “You’re sounding like Michael Jackson.”

- One show was about Body Dysmorphic Disorder and Oprah went on to say she thought MJ had this disease.

- During jury deliberations she had a show about pedophilia

- For some reason she asked several guest on her show (Chris Rock/Jay Leno etc) about their opinions about Michael and the trial when Michael was not even the topic of the show. She basically let them crack a few jokes about him while MJ was on trial.


What I have mentioned above is just a few things of what Oprah has said/done.
Sooo i mean, there is really not much more to add to this story and even Taj said on twitter that the family is aware of how Oprah has treated MJ in the past.

:clapping:


Thanks for these reminders about some of the horrible things that Oprah puke: :tease said about Michael in the past.... This can not be forgotten and ignored.

 

[PaceMioDolceCuore]

I wanted to highlight everything i disagreed with but it became tiresome towards the end so let me just say this. FIRST OF ALL Oprah has NEVER called Michael a monster and i know for a FACT you did not see or hear her say it with your own eyes or ears because it never happened. I also know this because you will NEVER be able to show evidence of this, once again because it NEVER happened. You also say "everyone is forcing their own issues at the expense of Michael Jackson" ummm who exactly is everyone??? And how have you come to such an odd conclusion? Surely you can only speak for yourself...

You have used so many over dramatic statements your entire post can not be taken seriously at all.. "that does not mean that it's fair to make life hell for those who have not committed any crime whatsoever" again what and who are you talking about? This has me assume that you have had the luxury and fortune of a very easy going life if you believe that what oprah has said (which for the record is nothing as everything you have stated in your post never took place at all) equates to making somebody's life "hell" as you put it.

I should also point out to you (and it only takes a google search to find this out) that Oprah did not start doing sexual abuse shows in 2004/2005 during the trial or even after she met Michael in 1993. You have tried to write that she was "conveniently scheduling" them with Michael in mind, the notion is actually laughable. Since 1986 she has been talking about sexual abuse in GREAT detail and it is the single most topic she's talked about most on her show in the last 25 years, and alot of lives she has saved doing this.

Did you actually WATCH the interview yourself because if you did you would know, while the children were present NOTHING about the allegations was even implied, so that lie you stated was unnecessary.

I have little else to say to you other than choose your words better because to say that by asking a question (last i checked freedom of speech was still a human right) Oprah was traumatizing Katherine who for the record did not appear "traumatized" as the english dictionary would define it is actually insulting to myself and others who have been through REAL trauma.

My advice to you would be not to argue points that you don't know as fact because it makes your entire argument benign. Words like traumatised, torture and the like simply aren't appropriate for this situation.

I referred to people on this thread referring to her as 'monster', 'disgusting' , quoting photoshops of Oprah Winfrey that depict as devil etc.
Although the thread is long, it does help considerably to at least skim the last 4-5 pages to get a feel for the discussion taking place, when others have been discussion already. It would be polite. When not reading my post selectively you might notice that I commended Oprah Winfrey on using her influence in a positive way- or as I wrote "to do good."

Secondly, please do not assume to know my life and particularly any presence/lack of trauma. I am a survivor of abuse as an adult myself. "Real trauma" as you might say. There seems to be an assumption that survivors of sexual abuse and abuse in general must agree on this issue. Far from.

Thirdly, you don't have any knowledge on the background of my work that I have actually done in the domestic violence field which happens to include some 'real trauma'.

Number four, I did watch the interview. Katherine Jackson was interviewed separately at one point, yes. The 2 older kids no doubt have seen the interview, or will in the future. So they will get to enjoy to see their grieving Grandmother having to defend her innocent son. I'm sure verbal communication is somewhat established in the Jackson household so that they might have had an exchange or two regarding this interview.

I saw 3 highly uncomfortable children and particularly one girl in immense acute pain who does not need that sort of torture added to her boatload. (I shall continue to use the word torture where I see fit- a teenager dealing with the fact that people use her deceased parent and her grieving grandmother is quite the challenge).

Michael Jackson has been on the receiving end of snide remarks, allegation comments and the butt end of jokes for far too long. He has been the ultimate rate bringer. And the abuse of Michael Jackson has to stop. Very simple. Michael Jackson was pronounced not guilty of ANY charges against him and to keep asking just about every friend, relative and acquaintance "do you thing there is something to these allegations" is abusive, slanderous and defaming.

The word 'torture' is very much appropriate for a man who found himself on an international with hunt that played out world wide, on every channel, every newspaper. If that is not torturous, cruel, abusive and traumatizing, then we might need to redefine those very words.

Please feel free to debate discuss the actual topic, instead of launching into highly emotional attacks that are supposed to discredit my opinion because I 'cannot be taken seriously'. If refuting my points is too much work, so be it, but please do not substitute that with personal attacks and orders. ('chose your words better.')

 

[Petrarose]

I referred to people on this thread referring to her as 'monster', 'disgusting' , quoting photoshops of Oprah Winfrey that depict as devil etc.
Although the thread is long, it does help considerably to at least skim the last 4-5 pages to get a feel for the discussion taking place, when others have been discussion already. It would be polite. When not reading my post selectively you might notice that I commended Oprah Winfrey on using her influence in a positive way- or as I wrote "to do good."

Secondly, please do not assume to know my life and particularly any presence/lack of trauma. I am a survivor of abuse as an adult myself. "Real trauma" as you might say. There seems to be an assumption that survivors of sexual abuse and abuse in general must agree on this issue. Far from.

Thirdly, you don't have any knowledge on the background of my work that I have actually done in the domestic violence field which happens to include some 'real trauma'.

Number four, I did watch the interview. Katherine Jackson was interviewed separately at one point, yes. The 2 older kids no doubt have seen the interview, or will in the future. So they will get to enjoy to see their grieving Grandmother having to defend her innocent son. I'm sure verbal communication is somewhat established in the Jackson household so that they might have had an exchange or two regarding this interview.

I saw 3 highly uncomfortable children and particularly one girl in immense acute pain who does not need that sort of torture added to her boatload. (I shall continue to use the word torture where I see fit- a teenager dealing with the fact that people use her deceased parent and her grieving grandmother is quite the challenge).

Michael Jackson has been on the receiving end of snide remarks, allegation comments and the butt end of jokes for far too long. He has been the ultimate rate bringer. And the abuse of Michael Jackson has to stop. Very simple. Michael Jackson was pronounced not guilty of ANY charges against him and to keep asking just about every friend, relative and acquaintance "do you thing there is something to these allegations" is abusive, slanderous and defaming.

The word 'torture' is very much appropriate for a man who found himself on an international with hunt that played out world wide, on every channel, every newspaper. If that is not torturous, cruel, abusive and traumatizing, then we might need to redefine those very words.

Please feel free to debate discuss the actual topic, instead of launching into highly emotional attacks that are supposed to discredit my opinion because I 'cannot be taken seriously'. If refuting my points is too much work, so be it, but please do not substitute that with personal attacks and orders. ('chose your words better.')

^^Powerful post, and yes we need to look at a few pages in a thread to see the context of the discussion to fully understand what is going on. I feel if more people did this back reading a lot of the misunderstandings could be avoided.

Further, whether someone likes or dislikes Oprah, it cannot be denied that she has done some negative coverage and portrayal of Michael. Why deny this if the facts can be easily found?

 

[prettygirlmj]

That's why I say those kids should be with Diana Ross. None of this would have ever happened if they would have been in her care. Hell, Katherine doesn't monitor the kids on the internet, forget about the Oprah thing and the belt thing.

 

[Thetruthbetold]

even if the kids are with diana ross they still will be in the public eye i know many of you feel different sense her kids are not all in the spotlight it is what it is they are with their grandmother as of now

 

[marebear]

Oprah has never said he was guilty but she never has said she thinks he was innocent either. Her actions tend to show she thinks he was guilty. We are just tired of her bringing this up when she is talking to someone about Michael. He was found innocent on all the charges. She could ask people a million times and it's the same answer each time.

I read the Conspiracy book about the trial and there is a lot of things the media didn't report. She knows what it's like in the entertainment business and people trying to scam you and take advantage of you. Oprah is the one that needs to educate herself. Or she does know the truth but something else is going on and she doesn't like Michael.

Michael's children didn't look thrilled to talk to her either. Michael would have hated all of this and Oprah knows that. His family knows that too but they decided to do it anyways. As they get older they can do whatever they like but they don't need to do interviews or anything now.

These interviews by his family hardly show who Michael was to be honest because all that gets talked about are drugs, allegations and plastic surgery. Michael was so much more than that. That makes me sad because I don't think that people see who Michael really was.

 

[noirnoar]

Noirnoar posted some videos on page 163 of this thread, but I think those videos are missing some of the stuff with the kids. MsCassieMollie posted a short video with missing parts on page 165.

I added the 4th part on page 163, I guess that one was missing...

 

[AnnieRUOkay89]

That's why I say those kids should be with Diana Ross. None of this would have ever happened if they would have been in her care. Hell, Katherine doesn't monitor the kids on the internet, forget about the Oprah thing and the belt thing.

How do you figure that?

 

[LoveMJackson]

Is it even worth watching? I really can't stand Oprah.. and to hear her again mentioning the allegations and other crap. It makes my blood boil. Anything for rating, huh? I think I'll just skip this.

 

[AngieJ]

Is it even worth watching? I really can't stand Oprah.. and to hear her again mentioning the allegations and other crap. It makes my blood boil. Anything for rating, huh? I think I'll just skip this.

As much as I love the kids, I skipped this behind the scenes thing.

 

[PCR]

As much as I love the kids, I skipped this behind the scenes thing.

Same here.
I don't care at all about Oprah. She is old enough to know this is wrong and she will not change, for certainly she doesn't care about our opinions.

I just feel for the kids and for Michael. This shouldn't have been done. Once the kids are adults then can make any decitions on what shows they want to go to, if they ever feel like doing it at all. But at this stage, no matter how lovely they had been in the interview, this is simply wrong. This is not what Michael wanted and we all know that, don't we? So if Katherine felt the need to go to Oprah... it's her choice, but offering the kids and, AGGGG, opening the doors of the very house where those kids should be protected .... it's simply so wrong :doh:

I just don't understand it.

 

[xthunderx2]

Oprah probably paid her.....I wouldn't put it past her.

 

[Petrarose]

As much as I love the kids, I skipped this behind the scenes thing.

Me too. I simply read people's comments. Oprah will milk the footage until the end--poor kids.

 

[144000]

I agree. thats what I saw and got from this behind the scenes program. Of course Im not one to try
and seek something evil and sinister in everyone or everything surounding Michael. I try and look for
the good in people. Becuase everyone has some faults. Including myself. My motto is its best to treat
others as you would like to be treated.

It is what it is _ If someone wants to add thier own spin to it still doenst change what was put foward
at face value for everyone to see. It gave me a better insight of the original interview and how much
care went into planning this interview from both sides ..

Oprah didnt even know the children were going to be part of the interview untill she was told and seemed
genuine in her concern about not expoiting or causing the children to be uncomfortable. It was very positive
for the children to be seen in this settingand let the world see how well rounded and sweet they were.

Oprah even stopped the cameras when she seen Katherines tears.she had respect for her and it showed.
Katherine also admired Oprah, remember Oprah also come up from humble beginnings and had to prove herself.

Also Oprah wasnt their to entertain or interview all the added house guests looking for promotion and it wasnt
rude on her part not to. They were the ones intruding on the planned interview with Katherine and the children.

Now im not a big fan of Oprah by any means and disagree with her on many issues, But she is not an evil person
or a devil as some like to make her out to be. I see more lack of character in the statements used to attack her.

Some people just cant exsist unless they have someone to hate on. If is wasnt Oprah it would be someone else
and if there isnt someone else then they turn on other fans who dont agree with them.

In my very humble opinion

you just mirrored yourself, because you use condemning language for those you disagree with.

the thing is, people must think we're stupid, because we don't let the subliminal get by. there are a thousand ways to abuse a person. and even more.

anyway..kudos to the poster with three names, that sounds italian..i forget that one, who said that abuse takes on many subtle forms, and that Oprah is using the media to exert it. and i don't even think she has anger issues for posting it. how about that?

if we're going to accuse another of hate speech or anger issues(for those who do), try not to use extremist language to do it, because then that is hypocritical. and that extremist language, without exception, is what is happening here.