Comments on: Are we over-doing Jackson’s death?

By: al brace

al brace — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 13:43:23 +0000

Children of the World, sleep a little easier
now that this strange”man?” can’t cause anymore damage. In any decent society he
would have been incarcerated years ago
in MY opinion.

By: Dennis Junior

Dennis Junior — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 19:53:53 +0000

Yes, Sarah the media is over-doing the coverage of Michael Jackson…

By: Brian Quinn

Brian Quinn — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 15:37:12 +0000

Michael Jackson was greatly overrated in my opinion. He could dance well but did not have much of a voice and only sang in one or two musical genres. Further, he never matured as an artist andhad an inflated opinion of himself and his place in history. He would have done well to take the example of the REAL King of Music – Elvis Presley – who was the whole package.

By: Teresa Howard

Teresa Howard — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 14:38:15 +0000

To me Michael Jackson was someone who I watched on TV as a child. I grew up with the Pop Star’s music on TV and bought records and videos. He had such talent and preasence with his life. He was an intertainer to the world who gave so much. Now at this time of sadness for the family of Micheal and us,as fans may are prayers and love bring us all closer together in our time of grief. TH

By: mac jordan

mac jordan — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 06:41:29 +0000

Some of us aren’t particularly interested in celebrities, no matter how “huge” they are. He wrote some good pop songs, but his life was a car crash, and that’s why the media are going over the top. I hoped for better from C4 News, really.

I wish I could think that the world’s seeming obsession with celeb culture would go away soon, but I can’t.

By: Peter Stewert

Peter Stewert — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 21:46:56 +0000

For an intelligent and persuasive answer to the “how much coverage is appropriate?” question, try Charlie Brooker’s column posted to the Gaurdian’s website today [Monday]. Read on for my somewhat answer.

The news should really be about serving the public interest, getting across information/facts the at least some portion of the population needs to know.

Beyond the actual death, a reminder to look out for the well being of young and/or impressionable friends likely to be hard hit with a sense of loss, and maybe a brief obituary, there didn’t seem much that was in the public interest in a lot of the coverage. Canvasing public opinion on Michael Jackson’s legacy by stopping people on the streets of London is something left to the inheritors of “That’s Life” (as are celebrity reactions), reporting the opinion of a well respected music critic would be a steep in the right direction, but only music shops need to know how the death will affect demand for the music and they have well paid marketing people for such things. Too much of the coverage seemed justified or executed under the guiding principle of “this could be interesting to the public” rather than being in the public’s interest.

The Charlie Brooker link:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jun/29/michael-jackson-glastonbury-charlie-brooker

By: Kris Jones

Kris Jones — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 18:51:51 +0000

Friday night’s news programme did seem a little hagiographic. However, that wasn’t helped by the fact the bulletin was only 30 minutes and there weren’t any other significant events, other than those in Iran (which is difficult to cover presently), to report.

Whatever one might think of Jackson, he was a significant figure in popular culture, so naturally C4 News should cover his death. However, I’d have expected the story to fade and was somewhat surprised to see an interview with the Rev Jesse Jackson included in this evening’s programme. I don’t think you should dwell too much on the rumours, conspiracy theories and other alleged scandals that emerge in the coming days.

By: Jay

Jay — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 18:03:49 +0000

From a personnel point of view, my sympathy goes out to his family and in particular his children. it’s a tragedy when any one dies. But the truth is this time last week nobody was giving him a second thought or if they were it wasn’t for the contribution to music. Even when he announced his come back tour it fuelled nothing but cynical comments about his reasons for doing so.

Now he has died, become some sort of icon and is being compared to President Obama. Some would say that its because he wasn’t appreciated until he died but the truth is his death has simply created a media opportunity. A chance for TV stations to fill their schedules, the press to fill their papers and yes, news casters to fill their bulletins. It’s the hypocrisy I stand. For years the media have hounded and mocked him and are at least partly responsible for the mess he was in.

By: Anthony Martin

Anthony Martin — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 16:39:20 +0000

10 billion people can’t be wrong! News is demanded, news is given, simple as.

By: Alan

Alan — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:03:14 +0000

I’m going to be the voice of dissent and say the volume of coverage doesn’t bother me. You have to take into account what a massive cultural figure Jackson is and just how massive an impact he has had on music and music television. That he is a troubled and complex character only makes the story even more interesting.

I personally was far more annoyed when the 2008 Pakistan earthquake and the rebel offensive in the Congo were knocked off the headlines because of an irrelevant prank phone call by two BBC presenters. That little self-indulgent exercise by the British media still leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and I still can’t believe Channel 4 thought it was a worthy lead story.