Posted by
Catmman on Friday, June 26, 2009 11:27:24 AM
I never and will never understand the attention given, nor the overbearance of supposed "news" coverage when a celebrity, espcially a big star like Michael Jackson, dies.
Let me say up front I have sympathy for his family as I would when anyone's loved one passes away, particularly when it is unexpected as it was in this case. But this incident is illustrative of many things, some of which I found particularly appalling when I watched some of the "news" coverage last evening.
The one thing which I saw which literally disgusted me was the showing of the moving of Michael Jackson's body from the helicopter to the coroners van. How insensitive, how uncouth, how intrusive was this? Don't give me that whole "it's news" or "he's a celebrity" spiel either. The man died and deserves a certain amount of respect, especially when it comes to "seeing" the body. Have we become so vacuous as a culture that we can't even defer some human dignity to the deceased? Did anyone really need to see the "sheet draped" body of Michael Jackson being taken from a helicopter and put into a van? If you did, then it speaks volume to your lack of character and lack of respect you have for others.
Was the incessant coverage neccessary? Really? Fox News ran the "story" non-stop late into the night from what I can gather. I'm not sure of the other cable outlets, I didn't watch them. But in this instance, Fox News really disappointed me. They trotted out Geraldo Rivera who did not shut up for hours. I saw clips of some interview he did with Michael back in 2005, over and over. I heard Geraldo pontificate about how he was sure Michael Jackson was innocent of the child molestation charges and was told over and over about what a good father he was. Pardon me, but any parent who names on of their children "Blanket" has something wrong with them upstairs. Yes, yes, Gwyneth Paltrow named on of her children "Apple". She's nuts as well.
Side note: A word on Michael Jackson's acquittal in his child molestation case. Color me unimpressed that a huge celebrity like Michael Jackson was found innocent. OJ Simpson was found innocent too as we all remember. Of course I'm not intimating Michael Jackson was guilty. But it's almost a forgone conclusion that celebrities in Hollywood are given huge passes for behaviors and actions any one of us would be keel-hauled for.
There is a striking dicohotmy in the coverage. Farrah Fawcett also passed away yesterday after a very long and very public fight with cancer. The media coverage of her death, by contrast to the death of Michael Jackson, was respectful and dignified. It also did not take control of the airwaves for hours on end. Culturally, Farrah Fawcett was an icon, just as was Michael Jackson. From their respective eras, they were the epitomy of celebrity and stardom. Michael Jackson was arguably a bigger star, but both of them had major impacts on the culture of their time. Yet one was treated with a fair amount of dignity and respect by the media, the other was treated as if his death were a circus.
Ultimately, what's the fascination with a celebrity dying? I talked with my wife about another instance where the media went batcrap crazy for a celebrity, yet a person truly deserving of remembrance was almost an afterthought.
Remember Princess Diana and Mother Teresa? They both died within a week or so of one another in 1997. Princess Diana was given non-stop press coverage, people all over the world lost their frickin minds with the wailing and "tributes", etc. When Mother Teresa died, her passing was given the same kind of treatment as Farrah Fawcett, dignified and mostly respectful, yet not able to compete with the covereage of Diana. What did Diana ever do to deserve such attention? She married into the British Royal Family. Whoa! Oh, and she did some crap against landmines. Whoa again! Mother Teresa devoted her entire life to God and the people of the world. Mother Teresa had nothing, asked for nothing in return for what she did and died doing what she had done her entire life. Princess Di was a celebrity for the sake of celebrity itself. Though she did do charitable work, it wasn't even on the same plane of existance as was Mother Teresa. Yet who garnered all the attention, press, and coverage? Who still garners attention on the anniverssary of her death - Diana or Mother Teresa?
I thought to myself last night, "How would I feel if an icon I enjoyed passed away?" I thought of John Wayne, but I wasn't into him so much when he died in 1979. Then I thought of Charleton Heston. I grew up watching his movies, from his iconic portrayal of Moses, to the sci-fi classic The Omega Man. When he later became the president of the NRA and I found out about his past political (Right) activism, I grew to respect the man more and more. When he died, I felt some sorrow but I didn't feel the need to wear black, light candles or leave flowers at a fence somewhere. Incidentally, when he died he didn't receive near the attention either Princess Di or Michael Jackson has, irregardless of his decades of public and political avtivism, or his numerous decades as a movie star.
I suppose ultimately my point is, I don't see the big deal (the attention) in Michael Jackson dying. He put his pants on the same way as anyone else. He was an entertainer. He did some good charity work, but he was also a flake in a lot of areas. Personally, I do not think his passing is deserving of the attention and press it is receiving. All of this attention ultimately cheapens death in my opinion. I am not a prude by any stretch of the imagination when it comes to death. But all of the celebrity attached to this and the way the populace absorbs it is a negative critique on the culture itself.
So, Michael Jackson passed away.
Meh.