Today, Bill O'Reilly gave a scathing report about the coverage of Michael Jackson's memorial service and not only was it completely distasteful and insensitive, it was also all sorts of wrong. (link below)
http://foxnews1.a.mms.mavenapps.net/mms/rt/1/site/foxnews1-foxnews-pub01-live/current/launch.html?maven_playerId=oreillyhomeplayer&maven_referralObject=6637200
So let's break this down:
:: Bill starts off with "you can't choose your family" in reference to Jackson's family who are in MOURNING. What the hell does that mean? What the fuck is he implying here? He follows that with, "I do not wish to intrude... they are entitled to grieve any way they like." Well, thanks, Bill, I'm sure the Jackson family appreciates that you won't judge them... although it sounds suspiciously like he is.
:: He then calls the "adulation pathetic in the extreme." Yes, Michael was just an entertainer but the man's talent made a meaningful impact on people's lives, inspiring many. Fans really liked this guy and were interested in his life. Besides, what's pathetic about mourning another human being? If Madonna died, I'm pretty sure I'd be really upset, too. Her music inspired me, gave me hope in dark times and made me feel better about myself. Just because she isn't Mother Theresa, it doesn't mean she isn't a hero to me and others. Same goes for Michael.
:: "Enough with the phony platitudes"??? From who? If he's referring to media coverage, Michael Jackson broke records in the music industry. Those ain't empty platitudes. If he's referring to those participating in the memorial? I'm pretty sure a lot of those people were his friends; and if not, he inspired their work.
:: Then he slams Michael as "selfish" for spending hundreds of millions of dollars on himself while singing "We Are the World." Excuse me? Isn't Bill all about capitalism? Is Bill Gates selfish for spending millions on himself, too? O'Reilly better be careful or someone might brand him a "socialist"! And btw, in addition to Michael's MANY charities, "We Are the World" raised over $63 million for famine relief. But I guess I'm not a "clear thinking American" because it doesn't make me nauseous.
:: He also talks about how people are playing the "race card" and that Michael was not a civil rights activist esp. because he was all about being white (I'm paraphrasing here). Maybe Bill is just ignorant about the music biz but Michael Jackson was the first black artist to cross over into mainstream in a huge way. Many have said he bridged the gap between "white rock" and "black r&b." He was the first black artist to be heavily featured on MTV and paved the way for many of today's african american singers.
:: He also defends Congressman Pete King for his comments about Jackson. King called Michael a pedophile and Bill was like, yeah, a lot of people have that assesment so what's wrong with him saying that? Well, Jackson was never convicted of that, so I'm pretty sure there's something wrong with labeling him a pedophile. Innocent until proven guilty, right? Seems "American" to me. But Bill disagrees. No, it doesn't make King a racist -- but it does make him inaccurate and wrong. And it's funny coming from Bill who made a settlement in his own sexual harassment case. BTW, I'm pretty sure no one (credible) is saying if you don't respect Michael you're a racist. Bill has a tendency to manipulate people's words and make them into statements that no one can possibly disagree with -- but that's because no one would actually SAY those things in the first place.
:: He also points out the crowd outside the Staples Center was less than expected. Yeah, because a lot of people were expected to stand outside an event when they didn't have a ticket... I guess he's trying to point out that not as many people care as one would predict. That's really nice of him. I hope his funeral will be more popular -- otherwise that'll be really embarrassing!
:: What's surreal about Katie Couric analyzing the event with Babyface? Babyface is an expert on music and worked with Michael. Is this hard news comparable to analysis of the war? Of course not. But it's pertinent to the event being covered.
Sure, the media coverage is a bit overwhelming... but when is it not??? And perhaps it's a bit ironic that the media is hyping Michael up after tearing him down all these years... but the man died. Without any proof of wrongdoing on Michael's part, what SHOULD they be doing? Applauding his death? It's human nature for people to look back on those who passed away with a little less judgement. (And I might be crazy, but I think the media has also been talking about all the allegations, etc.) But at least we have Bill to make judgements for us!
