by WildHorses 4 Replies latest jw friends
I was just sitting here watching TV and there was a commercial about Micheal Jackson and it stated that we will see footage that was not shown during his interview. He had his own film crew taping as well.
I heard the guy that was giving the interview talking to him, stating what a good father he felt Michel was to his children.
I will make sure to watch this next week.
I heard the guy that was giving the interview talking to him, stating what a good father he felt Michel was to his children
I saw this footage yesterday, and the ratbag interviewer was saying how wonderful a father MJ was to his children, "Its obvious to all who see you with them" that you are very close and loving....
Even in the original interview it was obvious that the reporter was trying to get the sleeze and twist everything, dishonest man, dishonest journalism. He stinks.
Brummie
Edited to say....Sorry I thought you were someone else
Edited by - Brummie on 13 February 2003 21:29:59
Brummie, please check your e-mail.
Edited by - WildHorses on 13 February 2003 21:24:0
Even in the original interview it was obvious that the reporter was trying to get the sleeze and twist everything, dishonest man, dishonest journalism. He stinks.
WHILE I AGREE IN CONTEXT - one must ask the question , what do we expect a reporter to do and ask when interviewing one of the world's most different persons
to think that a reporter or the public would be interesting in THE MAKING OF THRILLER in my view is to fool oneself to the usual life style and behavoior of MJ
while it can be argued all day long did he do anything to the kids in his bed - i am sure that the vast majority of folks on this site would perhaps be fired from thier job if they said the EXACT same thing he did about having kids in your bed who are not related to you and you or i are a 44yr old man-
Can you see Fred in the mailroom telling a Partner in the law firm that he sleeeps with kids on the weekend and keeping his job in the mailrooom I THINK NOT!!!!!!!!
so did the reporter get over, of course he did,
but to try and paint MJ and his "Handlers" PR, Lawyers, ETC as some inexpericence folks who don't know how the media works in my view is a joke
WHile i agree 110% THE guy was looking for a story- MJ & Co. walked into this one and now THEY STILL WILL NOT LET IT DIE
this man has been in front of the public for 30yrs- he is surrounded by advisors up the Ying Yang and for them to allow the man they work for to come on national tv as if they had no idea of the issues /questions that would be dealt with is a JOKE-
NOW did they advise him not to and he decided he would do the 8 MONTH interview anyway, i will be the first to say i don't know, but if they didn't they need to be fired
and now for him to COME BACK WITH HIS VERSION IS EVEN WORST
the american public has a very short memory - each night Access Hollywood presents the new and latest gossip, and yes many of us discussed this around the watercooler, in a week or two it would have all blown over, but for him to REOPEN this issue is a DUMB DUMB DUMB --IMHO
so whatever he gets i feel he will deserve
None of these revelations are new. This has all surfaced before. I guess JT is right. The public does have a short memory.
Here's a scan of the lawsuit against him from Dec of 1993. At the time, the details were all swept under the rug for an undisclosed settlement. Guess somebody finally broke the confidentiality agreement.
