Am I wrong about the public's reaction to Jacko?
It seems to me that everyone I've heard complain about the non-stop coverage of Michael Jackson's death -- either on the news, on talk radio, or in personal conversation -- has been white.
I don't bring this up to make claims of racism. I bring it up because I think the domestic media is missing a hugely important part of the Michael Jackson story: what his legacy, both good and bad, means specifically to black Americans. I obviously cannot speak to this personally, but would love to hear from someone who can.
In the first few days after his death, everyone seemed to be on the same page: Let's celebrate the man's music, load up our iPods and have fun. I was at the Better Than Ezra show two Saturdays ago at the House of Blues, and the overwhelmingly white crowd went nuts when the band played a bar or two of "Billie Jean." Later, we all danced to "Don't Stop 'Til You Get Enough" when the show was over.
But as the days go on, and the story gets stranger and, to some, more stale, a division among racial lines appears to be playing out. On one hand, you have white Congressman Peter King (R-NY) calling Jackson a "low-life" and a "pervert." On the other, you have the Rev. Al Sharpton urging people to gather tomorrow to show their love and support for the man.
On WGN, I've heard white host Nick Digilio say "I'm done with this story," and heard the white tandem of Boers and Bernstein crack jokes about him over on WSCR. On V103, I've heard black radio hosts open their hearts about how much Jackson meant to them.
On Facebook, I see lots of status updates from white friends who are tired of the story. (To be fair, I see plenty from white friends who aren't.) In public, I've seen black people of all ages wearing "Michael Jackson 1958-2009" T-shirts, many on Friday at the Taste of Chicago.
You can accuse me of generalizing, but I'm merely reporting what I myself have witnessed, and it seems to me that a lot of white people perhaps don't understand what Michael Jackson meant to the black community; I probably don't fully comprehend it, but at least I recognize that there is something larger at play here.
I wrote about Jackson's death the day it happened and don't have too much more to offer, but I will say that I think he is an incredibly important cultural and historical figure, not just for America but for the entire world. We will be talking about him and studying him and trying to figure out what really happened for the rest of our lives, like it or not. And we'll definitely still be listening to his music.
I could see how the coverage might get old for people who didn't like MJ's music (but who doesn't like MJ's music?), or for those who really believe all the pedophilia allegations and can't get past them, but can't they just turn off the TV if they're tired of it instead of trying to tell people they shouldn't care?
We are not idiots. We know that Michael Jackson is not a god, and that there are still wars and other things going on that are much more important, but this man and his music have been a huge part of our culture for decades, so it makes sense that his death will get attention for a few weeks.
On a semi-related note, can I just say that Chuck Goudie's column in the Herald today really annoyed me? It is the second of his since MJ's death that basically tries to say "Here are people whose deaths you should really care about, and you are a superficial boob if you care about Michael Jackson." The first, where he discussed Iraq soldiers with the last name of Jackson who have died in the line of duty, was timely, and it served as a warranted reality check. But today's focuses on a Chicago cop named Jackson who died like 30 years ago. If Goudie really thinks there are more important things to talk about than MJ, then why doesn't he write a column about those things? Instead of just rewriting an old column but with a LESS timely topic?
I really cannot stop with the MJ....listening to the music, watching TV coverage, reading about it, watching old interviews on YouTube. Just today, I got my Entertainment Weekly w/ MJ on the cover...there's actually 4 different covers, and I will probably go out and buy them all. I ordered 4 CD's from Amazon. Really, I am quite obsessed at the moment...and, except for the odd song or two on my shuffle, I haven't even listened to MJ in years!
Thankfully, I personally have not heard anyone complaining about the coverage yet. People have to realize what a big deal this is, and get used to it. I don't see it going away any time soon (nor do I want it to).