In the Wake of Michael Jackson's Death, Let's Get Back to Real News

Steven Moneyworth
This week has been undeniably bad for celebrities. Beyond the divorce of Jon and Kate Gosselin, the world has also been witness to the deaths of Ed McMahon, Farrah Fawcett, and now Michael Jackson. However, I feel that the media has overstepped its limits in the coverage of the death of the lattermost star.

Allow me to ask this question - how does a news channel offer 24/7 coverage of someone's death? What really changes in that time? Granted, at this point we don't know the cause of Michael Jackson's death beyond "cardiac arrest" (which, ultimately, is the cause of most deaths and only means that the heart stopped), but that's even more reason not to broadcast such extensive coverage.

I was not alive for the majority of Jackson's career, and perhaps do not have as great an appreciation for the way in which he changed the music industry. The majority of my recollections of Jackson have to do with allegations of child abuse and him dangling his son over the ledge of a balcony. Does this mean that I can't appreciate the magnitude of Jackson's passing? Maybe, maybe not. But I am also more objective for that reason.

The extensive and seemingly endless coverage of Jackson's death for some reason has preempted most or all other news on reputable news stations such as CNN, MSNBC, and FOX News. We are no longer privy to the details of the Iranian protests or what is likely to happen in the light of South Carolina Governor Sanford's recent admission of an affair. In other words, news of things that are of national and worldwide importance has stalled or stopped entirely in favor of reports of the death of a musician.

The passing of any person is unfortunate, and the passing of a person that affected so many lives is certainly something to be mourned. However, real news should take precedence over news of a musician's death.

Let me use a comparison in order to prove my point. Pope John Paul II's death was covered extensively for a reason. The policies of the Catholic church are determined largely by the Pope, and Pope John Paul II was beloved around the world. He served as Pope for almost 27 years, and served to improve relations between the Catholic church and many other religious sects around the world. The Pope's death could have worldwide social and political implications.

Michael Jackson was a revolutionary artist that redefined many aspects of the music industry. However, his career was largely over by the time of his death, and his comeback concerts would never be. The most attention Jackson received in recent years was for allegations of child molestation. His death affects very little in the world beyond the lives of his children and family members.

Am I saying that Jackson's death was insignificant or doesn't matter? No. Jackson was prolific in his career and his music affected the lives of many. But his death is not going to change the world, and should not be given 24/7 coverage on all of the major news networks. Let his family and fans mourn, but let's get back to more significant and relevant stories that merit coverage.

Published by Steven Moneyworth

I am studying Chemistry at the University of Pittsburgh and plan on attending medical school after college. Follow me on Twitter at @acsamzolin.  View profile

1 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Pattie Byrd6/27/2009

    I agree that too much coverage is given sole topics way too often, but let's face it, it's a ratings game. Because of your statements, I realize that you were not around when Elvis died, and there was basically only one main news network that led off with it that night and the news people are determined not to let that happen again. Additionally, I think some of the things you mentioned are carried over a longer period and so people don't feel like they're missing very much until the next report. I'm not saying it's right. It's just the flow of money. Good article.

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.