I know I’m not alone in this surreal feeling I’m having as we watch the news and the tributes to the King of Pop.
Because of Michael Jackson’s two-part career—one part child star, one part worldwide entertainment phenomenon—just about everyone over the age of 16 has knowledge of, or at least experience with, Jackson and the way he changed the music and entertainment industries forever.
But for my two eldest daughters, ages 7 and 4, the news reels and B-roll tonight offered them their first exposure to Jackson.
Their comments were interesting.
They wanted to know what happened to him.
We talked about drugs.
Seeing photos of him later in life, they first asked whether he was a boy or a girl. Then, seeing photos of him as a child, they asked who that person was; they seemed perplexed as I explained that that, too, was Michael Jackson.
We talked about plastic surgery.
After a while, they began asking why the news was talking so much about him. I told them about his career and how famous he was. The eldest girl said, “He’s not more famous than Hannah Montana!“
To which I replied, “You know how famous Hannah Montana is? Take that and multiply it by about a million. Then you know the kind of fame we’re talking about.“
So they began to pay more attention to the video clips. The verdict from my four-year-old: “Well, he is a pretty good singer. And he does have good moves.“
Which spurred the seven-year-old to ask, “Mommy, did Michael Jackson win ‘American Idol?‘“
I marveled at the parallel she drew between AI and fame. And then I marvelled at the disconnect.
“No, honey. Michael Jackson was THE American idol,“ I said.
I don’t know the real story behind the allegations that clouded Jackson’s later years. But this much is irrefutable: Rarely, if ever, has the force of one man’s talent, vision and performance ability had so much impact for so long. Jackson pioneered the concept of the music video as art; his dance moves, frequently copied but never truly duplicated, are the stuff of legend; he gave away millions to some 40 different charities. Yet his personal life was riddled with bizarre, sometimes disturbing, curiosities, and the drugs that had once helped him to function slowly choked him of his strength.
The only real parallel to the King of Pop is, of course, the King of Rock ‘n’ Roll—Elvis Presley. It is a sad reality that, in death, Jackson appears to have developed another parallel with his counterpart in enduring fame.
But time has burnished Elvis’s legacy in music, somewhat glossing over the drugs and the personal failures to emphasize only the fairytale story of unknown guitar picker to international sensation and cultural phenomenon. And so I hope it will be with Michael Jackson.
May his enduring symbol be the glove, not the mask.
R.I.P., Michael Jackson.
UPDATE: Check out the front page of Friday’s Los Angeles Times. This is why people still save newspapers for their children.
Unless you’ve been hiking on the Appalachian Trail for the last two weeks, you know what’s going on in Iran.
I urge you to watch this short video clip that features commentary from one of CNN’s iReporters in Tehran.
This young woman recounts the story of her beating this week at the hands of Iranian militia members who are trying desperately to tamp down the fires of freedom there, and she reflects on her role in the revolution going on in her country.
On her encounter with a militia man:
He hit me, and he was twice (as big) as me. He was so big. And I said, “You want to hit me?“ And he said yes. And then he hit me with a club.
On why she keeps going back out, despite the violence and brutality that await:
Because I think it’s my responsibility, because many of my friends are dead in this situation. And when I stay home, I am worried about my friends; other women, other boys that are killed, that are hit, and I think I should go. Maybe I can help them.
On whether she is afraid:
I think I am a little braver now, because when someone gets hit once, the second time I think doesn’t matter. For me, it’s like this. Because when they want to hit me, I say, “Hit. I have been hit so many times, and this time it doesn’t matter.“ I just want to help my brothers and my sisters.
On the future:
I am absolutely optimistic, because history has taught me that all the revolutions start like this. Every revolution has its violence, and some people die. But nothing stays like this forever.
And one more thing: The woman heard in this clip?
She is 19 years old.
Were you this brave, and did you appreciate freedom this much, at 19?
Yeah. Me either.
See also:
For more on this young woman’s story, read CNN’s story about her here.
I got a kick out of this article from Vanity Fair’s Matt Pressman, who took a swing at the top nine reasons people hate the news media and how valid those reasons are or are not.
This isn’t some scientific breakdown or the groundbreaking work of a big sociological investigation. It’s just Pressman’s personal—though educated and experienced—opinion.
IRONY ALERT: Pressman lists reason No. 5 as, “We are total narcissists.“ Ha hahahaha ha ha ha ha!!! END IRONY ALERT
Anyway, along with listing the reasons, Pressman assesses their validity on a scale of 1 (least valid) to 10 (most valid).
Some of the reasons on the list don’t come as a surprise; charges of liberal and conservative bias both appear.
But my favorites come in at numbers 7 and 8.
7. (Non-journalists) think they could do a better job.
A recent article in the Christian Science Monitor that media-haters no doubt ate up, entitled “Why Journalists Deserve Low Pay,” pointed out in service of its argument that “journalists are not professionals with a unique base of knowledge such as professors or electricians.” That is, any idiot could do it.
Validity: 2. There’s no degree required, and certainly more people possess the necessary aptitude to be a journalist than, say, a rocket scientist or a professional basketball player. But most people (indeed, many journalists) are far worse writers than they think they are, and they don’t have the necessary gumption and, let’s face it, shamelessness to be a reporter.
Did you get that? Most people are far worse writers than they think they are. Can I get a witness?? But somehow, that doesn’t stop those non-writers from telling the writers how to do their jobs. Someone who doesn’t know what he’s doing telling you how to do what you’re doing? Trust me, folks; that’s just as annoying to us in our industry as it is to you in yours.
And about that point that journalists “are not professionals with a unique base of knowledge:“ I’m reminded of that old saying, “Jack of all trades, master of none.“ It’s true that journalists aren’t specialized for individual professions. They just have to be familiar enough—or able to become familiar enough—to write knowledgeably about anything and everything under the sun.
Oh, and one more thing: If you think Pressman’s article is in any way, well, contradictory, don’t sweat it. Note that in Reason No. 8, he notes that VF writers can “drink during lunch.“
It is an age-progressed photo of what Danny Barter might look like today.
Fifty years have passed since Danny, then just four years old, disappeared from a campsite in Perdido Bay, Ala., in 1959. But his family—and the FBI—continue to search for him, convinced that chances are good that he is still out there somewhere.
As cold case cops know, a wisp of a lead can turn into a big break, a fact FBI Special Agent Angela Tobon believes can solve the Daniel Barter mystery.
“Even if [people] think it’s insignificant, it’s probably not,“ Tobon said. “Each little piece of the puzzle may not mean something, but when you put it all together, you get the big picture.“
Police already have their “wisp” of a lead. The FBI and the Baldwin County Sheriff’s Office reopened Danny’s case last year after someone sitting “in a public area” overheard a conversation about the missing boy, who has now been missing so long that he would now be eligible for membership in the AARP.
Look at the picture. Again. Check out the story; look through the family’s web site.
You might be the break that brings this man home to his family.
I feel like Chandler in that episode of “Friends” when Joey walks in wearing an elf suit: “Too ... many ... jokes ... Must ... mock ... Joey!“
The governor ... took a hike. He was going to write, or work on projects he had neglected while fighting the federal stimulus, so he went to a remote region where, presumably, he could be more ... productive?
How about the potential tie-in with the “Where’s Waldo?“ franchise? That could really open up a new audience to politics.
Or, how about this one: He was going to take a break from the kids ... on Father’s Day.
Wow.
Some pundits and other politicos took their shots at the governor, too, offering their possible explanations for his sudden disappearance underground. My favorite: He wanted some privacy in which to write the new articles of secession. Come on; now that’s funny.
Anyway, the governor is coming back to work tomorrow, and according to his spokesman, he just can’t figure out why anyone would notice, or care, that their governor was AWOL for several days in a row. From the RCP blog:
“Governor Sanford called to check in with his Chief of Staff this morning. It would be fair to say the governor was somewhat taken aback by all of the interest this trip has gotten,“ spokesperson Joel Sawyer said in an e-mail to reporters. “Given the circumstances and the attention this has garnered, the governor communicated to us that he plans on returning to the office tomorrow.“
I am somewhat taken aback that the governor is somewhat taken aback. Come on, governor. Is this really the kind of judgment you want to be displaying as you get ready to run a big-time campaign in 2012?
Because, you know, if you were to win, people would like, notice that you were missing and stuff.
How about you guys? Any bright ideas, or funny suppositions, about where Mark Sanford has been for the last several days? Let’s hear them.
