Yesterday was a sad, sad day. As you will most definitely know, Michael Jackson passed away. Now I'm not going to write about his death because there are a million other places to read about that. However, whilst reading several reports on the matter, I noticed a pattern. The media.
Now, last time I checked, journalists are the mediators between news events and the general public. They deliver impartial, updated news to the public. However, is it just me, or did the Press ruin and ultimately end Jackson's life?
I think the fact that he was so famous and a little bit different was what the Press fed off, he was an easy target due to his paedophilia trials and love of plastic surgery.
Many sources have agreed that after the charges made against him, after all of the bad publicity surrounding the accusations, he never was himself again.
Obviously there's been a tired debate for years over the invasive behaviour of the Press, but, as a lot of things were with Jackson, in this case, it was extreme.
There have been allegations already that the death was caused by overuse of a painkiller injection, and whilst I don't have much belief in this claim, there seems to be a lot of truth in it, too. The story claimed that Michael was a hypochondriac, and it was hard for those around him to tell if he was ill or not. And that this was all because of the medical attention and plastic surgery offers thrust upon him.
His death immediately sparked a lot of hatred and 'good riddance's which to me, was quite disgusting to read. There’s thousands of people that claim to hate him, and still speak ill of him now he has deceased, and why? Because of the media. Hmmm...
I know there is no direct link, and I’m not pointing fingers – but was it all of the stress caused from years and years of bad press and awful, false claims that led to his death? He didn’t have it easy for the best part of his life, and isn’t fair to blame the Press? I think so. I feel guilty talking bad about the industry that I wish to enter, the industry that I’m studying for a degree – but before being a journalism student, I am a human being. As was Michael Jackson, but that fact was bypassed by many.
This has made me think about journalists, do they have to be as invasive as they possibly can and intervene with human rights as much as possible in order to succeed? I know that's quite pessimistic of me, however, I think sometimes this is what seems to be true.
If we didn't have journalists - what would happen? Would we still find out about current affairs eventually? Would we know anything about the world around us?
If the Press can be responsible for the complete break down of someone, someone so talented and kind-hearted, do I really want that kind of job?
Why does anyone choose to be a journalist? Surely it’s to raise awareness, to change people’s lives and to reach out to as many people as possible. But are all these reasons clouded over by monetary priorities?
All I know is that I really felt for Jackson, and I’m not narrow-minded enough to believe everything I read. So my advice to you is to think twice before consider a journalist’s word to be nothing but the truth. Excluding my blog, of course...
Rest In Peace Michael
I entirely agree.
ReplyDeleteA beautiful and truly inspiring man, dragged down further and further by opinionistic public and media, and crushed under false accusations.
As I listen to his music now I am reminded of the extraordinary talent that he both had and shared with the world.
From the beginning he has had an incredibly hard life, and I hope that he has found peace now. June 25th a legend died. The Earth became a sadder place with the loss of Michael Jackson.
definately Jess you've hit the nail on the head there. In all the cases where famous people have suffered as a results of their celebrity status, whats the common factor? Us, the media.
ReplyDeleteWe make them famous, and then we destroy them.
now dear you can do me the honour of commenting on my blog as well!
http://mossonmotoring.wordpress.com
im not sure where to stand on this one. Here i go being 'contraversial' again, but i dont think the media is the problem at all. I honestly beleive that if we didnt buy it, they wouldnt print it - its as simple as that. It wasnt Jade's fault for milking something tragic, nor the people who helped her milk it, its was the idiots that wanted to read about it. Its the same case with MJ, he played the media game and came out looking the 'victim', but journalists are merely exposing the vulnerable, we are the ones pouncing on them. They arent bad people for allowing us that cruel pleasure, and it has to be a pleasure...because we continue to do it, in politics, in entertainment, and in life.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree that the media is such a big culprit in this, the man had underlying health issues which would have happened whether he was famous or not.
ReplyDeleteIt's not so much the media as it is sensationalism which did it, if it was down to that, yesterday I saw the front page of The Sun and it read, "Jackson murdered by lethal jab." Unfortunately, a lot of people seem to digest this as gospel - it's not a common trait in the general public to take things with a pinch of salt.
Personally, I'm not too phased by the whole thing. I agree he was a very famous individual, and very influential in the evolution of modern music and dance, but that's about it, I'm rather indifferent to the whole thing, if I'm honest.
"Only in the USA can a little black boy from a poor American neighbourhood die as a rich white woman from the Netherlands."
Thank you for your comments! :)
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you've argued back, kind disagreement only spurs me on to write more :)
Also, Lewis, if the Press didn't expose the vulnerable, there would be no chance for idiots to want to read about it in the first place. I guess it's a chicken or the egg argument really. x
ReplyDelete