As I watch/read all of the information that the media has been clamoring to break out first,
I can't help but feel that they are going too far. I realized this when I sat glued to the television screen in amazement as last night's "Insider" episode was entirely about MJ. I was astonished at some of the information they were disclosing...they even showed a picture of the bedroom that Michael died in!
Is this true journalism? When do we as journalists draw the line? I realize that this is entertainment journalism, and some consider it just "the nature of the business", but at what point is it going too far?
TMZ has been in the lead when it comes to reporting new information on MJ; they even reported Michael Jackson's death before the coroner's stated time of death. But in a CBS interview, TMZ's Harvey Levin assured America that there is a line in entertainment journalism that he is conscious of, and he is determined to not cross it. So what was his example of going too far you ask? Levin said that it's publishing pictures of MJ's dead body, of course. But given the way this media rat race has been going, I guess anything else is fair game. And I do mean anything.
No hard feelings to MJ's family members and loved ones...it's "just business", right?
My words are up.
**UPDATE**
After word got out that OK! Magazine's next issue is going to be publishing MJ's "last picture" on their front cover, in which he is lying on a strecther possibly dead...Even MSNBC's "The Scoop" is starting to acknowledge how far the media is going! Read the article HERE:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31699142/ns/entertainment-gossip/
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
The Recently Exposed Blurry Line in Entertainment Journalism **UPDATED**
So in the recent media frenzy over Michael Jackson's death(may he rest in peace), I have noticed some disturbing aspects of entertainment journalism. Over the last few days, I have learned almost everything there is to know about MJ: from whether or not he fathered his own kids, to information on if he had a sexual relationship with the video girl from "Thriller", and to what his last meal consisted of before his death(chicken and romaine lettuce).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
First off hello Alex. Long time no talk, how are things going? I've been trying to come up with some definitive thought about this situation for the past couple of days and haven't come up with anything concrete. But I do have a few takes.
ReplyDelete1. I'm amazed by the overwhelming positive response by everyone but especially people our age who don't remember 1970-1987 MJ. I thought the response would be more tragic, "Wow Michael Jackson he had everything and lost it all" than what I've seen on the statuses of people's fb profiles. I mean for 20 years he was a bizarre individual but I'm glad that it's looking like he will be remembered as an outstanding performer.
2. It is interesting to see how one's image and how one is thought of changes with death and specifically death before their time. I don't want to take anything away but it feels as if MJ has been pushed to a higher level than maybe he was at. It's hard to say since I wasn't around for the Thriller days but it feels as if he was that much higher than everyone else. I know he was at the top but there were other artists there as well. The same happened with Elvis, John Lennon, Kurt Cobain, Tupac, and Biggie. I think of what the reaction will be if Paul McCartney dies lets say in 2018, 50 years after Beatlemania, what will the reaction be? One like we're seeing with MJ or a quieter one.
3. On your subject about the media the internet has made almost everything fair game. A line only exists if we (readers) choose not to look or get involved. No mater what the subject is there is an expert on it and to be able to appear to have some knowledge you have to know way more than you did in 1995. It's not that we have more information just more avenues to receive that information.