You really are arguing against your own point without me having to say anything!
I guess my point is you can hardly just suddenly forget all the less possitve aspects of his life in a report which is designed to sum up his life, to do so would be silly.
Are you sugesting on Obit reports, broadcasters just foget the last 10 years?
Last edited by Jon on 26 June 2009 10:45am - 2 times in total
No surprise at the continued coverage this morning, and although of course some stories are being overlooked, I think it's pretty much justified - certainly the biggest "showbiz" death in my life time.
However, 12 hours later I don't think it can still be classed as "Breaking News". Not surprised Sky are doing that, but the BBC as well. Not really sure either that showing his body, although covered, being moved is appropriate or necessary either.
Not really sure either that showing his body, although covered, being moved is appropriate or necessary either.
Didn't look very "real" to me - not that I'm accustomed to seeing corpses, you understand.
Thought the BBCs coverage was better last night. I was dozing off on the couch and thinking about going to bed when I flicked over. Ended up watching til about 2. The selection of guests seemed better on the Beeb - with the exception of that old fraud Uri Gellar.
"He was my dear friend, my best man at my wedding - we were very close".
Perhaps it's something to do with being respectful and polite. An alien emotion for you no doubt, even after someone has died, but rather obvious to most normal people.
I'm sure there will be many bitchy documentaries you can revel in, which will focus on the negative aspects of Jackson's life in the months and years to come. I don't think now is the time to portray that, do you?
I presume when Thatcher dies you'll expect the media to ignore the miners strike, poll tax, Belgrano and Pinochet?
As I said, one cannot simply sweep negative aspects of a persons life under the carpet and I hardly think the odd bit of film in a rolling obit package was an attempt to crucify him, simply to give an accurate portrayal of the man who was being discussed.
From what I've seen so far, the UK coverage seems far more than that of the US coverage. CNN and Fox are both covering other stories of the day, but Sky and BBC seem to have been rolling with it since last night. Also, from what i could see the US networks did not put out what TMZ.com put out that he had died, until the L.A times said - do they not trust TMZ.com? Even the BBC was quoting them.
It's amazing how fast the news spread. I siwtched to Sky News at 9.58pm and stayed with it, flicking through.
Perhaps it's something to do with being respectful and polite. An alien emotion for you no doubt, even after someone has died, but rather obvious to most normal people.
I'm sure there will be many bitchy documentaries you can revel in, which will focus on the negative aspects of Jackson's life in the months and years to come. I don't think now is the time to portray that, do you?
I presume when Thatcher dies you'll expect the media to ignore the miners strike, poll tax, Belgrano and Pinochet?
As I said, one cannot simply sweep negative aspects of a persons life under the carpet and I hardly think the odd bit of film in a rolling obit package was an attempt to crucify him, simply to give an accurate portrayal of the man who was being discussed.
I certainly wouldn't expect such comments or images to be broadcast immediately: either out of respect for the family or those viewers who enjoy over-reacting to such events with public displays of weeping and wailing.
I appreciate that the news organisations should offer a balanced view; but usually these obit reports are prepared well in advance and are able to offer a wide selection of carefully chosen comments to match the archive video.
I got the impression last night that some channels were simply running library footage that would've previously accompanied any report about Jackson in the absence of current pictures.
Perhaps it's something to do with being respectful and polite. An alien emotion for you no doubt, even after someone has died, but rather obvious to most normal people.
I'm sure there will be many bitchy documentaries you can revel in, which will focus on the negative aspects of Jackson's life in the months and years to come. I don't think now is the time to portray that, do you?
I presume when Thatcher dies you'll expect the media to ignore the miners strike, poll tax, Belgrano and Pinochet?
As I said, one cannot simply sweep negative aspects of a persons life under the carpet and I hardly think the odd bit of film in a rolling obit package was an attempt to crucify him, simply to give an accurate portrayal of the man who was being discussed.
I certainly wouldn't expect such comments or images to be broadcast immediately: either out of respect for the family or those viewers who enjoy over-reacting to such events with public displays of weeping and wailing.
I appreciate that the news organisations should offer a balanced view; but usually these obit reports are prepared well in advance and are able to offer a wide selection of carefully chosen comments to match the archive video.
I got the impression last night that some channels were simply running library footage that would've previously accompanied any report about Jackson in the absence of current pictures.
Seriously - what a lot of tosh.
Obituaries are there to reflect the life and times of the subject.
The news isn't given to editing out unpalatable aspects to allow mourners to grieve.