You know what the FUNNIEST thing about all these tv and radio show hosts complaining about the endless Michael Jackson coverage is?

They are all covering Michael Jackson!!! I mean, COME ON! Do people not see right through this stuff? Bill O'Reilly is fed up with the coverage then spends 8 minutes complaining about him? Not only complaining about him but he even invites a "Fox News Contributor" to discuss him some more AND based on a comment or two O'Reilly made in this segment, it's not the first time he's discussed Jackson on his show.

I've also heard several radio hosts doing this. they complain about the coverage then go on for about 5 to 10 minutes complaining about Michael Jackson himself.

don't throw stones in glass houses.

Bill O'Reilly is being O'Reilly. There's no discernable (sp) rhyme or reason to his opinions. Sometimes he's an idiot. Sometimes he has a valid point. But when all is said and done, he is just reaching for ratings. However I love it when he gets overwrought. Maybe one of these times he will have a heart attack on the air.

Yeah, that's right, Bill, maybe you will die on air and I will enjoy watching the video.

Meanwhile I will remember the show where you suggested San Francisco should be attacked by terrorists. That will show them all!

On a large amount of his points I'd have to agree. This about face in the media, from constantly ridiculing the man, to all of a sudden declaring him the greatest entertainer of all time and showering him with praise annoys me.

It's not that he isn't deserving of said praise, it's the way that they've all gone from one extreme to another, demonstrating just how spineless some of them really are.

I was not a fan of Michael's, he had past his peak and descended into irrelevancy by the time that I came around, but I do recognize his various innovations and the impact that he may have had on many in his role as an entertainer.

As far as this business with the kids, I would grant that his behavior may have been strange, but as Billo says, he was acquitted in a court of law.

[edit on 13-7-2009 by sorennn]

[edit on 13-7-2009 by sorennn]

Just know that Jackson had greater impact on other parts of the world than in the US. Especially in China, USSR, Japan, and India.

Honestly I think this is bizarre.

Regardless of negative/positive media recognition during the years Michael was alive, the matter of the fact is he inspired people and music as a whole. He touched (no pun intended) the souls of people as well as different genres in the music industry.

More importantly though, he was a generous donater to charity and shared millions of dollars with those less unfortunate people. Famously known as the King of Pop, and a legend, he has every right to get the positive coverage he did upon his death.

Was that not the case with Elvis and many other iconic figures too? It was.

Didn't think somebody could stoop so low if I'm honest.

Though I can't say that Michael Jackson is not worthy of coverage, after all, he was a fantastic entertainer. I will say, however, that the amount of coverage is getting a tad out of hand.

Walter Cronkite died yesterday? Two days ago? (My sense of time is all messed up since I work overnights at the moment and never have any idea what day it is unless I have the day off.) All I noticed on tv was (still) Michael Jackson coverage.

There are much much larger issues at hand.

One thing I will say, that disgusts me to no end is the amount of money spent on his memorial service and the fact that California tax payers had to pay for it, as well as shutting down a highway. (Yes, I am from NY but my girlfriend currently resides outside of LA)