Since the untimely death of Michael Jackson the news programs have been covering little else. Before Jackson’s death was even confirmed, rumors swirled about how he died, who was with him, whether or not he was the father of his three children, who would be the executor of his will, etc. Did any of that really matter in the immediate hours after his passing? It’s no secret that he led an eccentric life, riddled with public debate and legal problems. Whether you were a fan of Jackson’s or not, it has to be acknowledged that he and his family were pioneers. They broke through racial barriers in the music business and beyond, and paved the way for countless others. All of that aside, I have to ask, did Jackson’s eccentric life predicate the type of media coverage that would ensue after his death?
I believe that we are fortunate to live in an era where news is delivered immediately. Look at the grassroots coverage that’s been coming out of Iran over the past few weeks. If it weren’t for cell phone video and the Internet would we even know what’s happening there?
There is so much information being reported about Jackson’s life and death, it’s almost impossible to disseminate what’s true and what’s hearsay. People are coming out of the woodwork to comment about his life and speculate about his death. Wouldn’t it be better to wait until all of the facts were gathered and verified? If it is hearsay, say it is.
Here’s what I think Michael Jackson would say…did you know there were more bombings in Iraq last week, and there was a coup in Honduras yesterday, and Bernie Madoff is getting sentenced to 150 years behind bars for the biggest Ponzi scam in history? Did you know any of this?
Just my two cents.
~Leslie