O’Reilly Wonders Why Blacks Are So Interested In Michael Jackson Coverage

Fox News conservative commentator Bill O’Reilly appeared a little puzzled as to why black Americans are so interested in coverage of Michael Jackson. Again, this illustrates O’Reilly’s lack of knowledge, lack of appreciation for and lack of respect for the so-called black community. O’Reilly miserably fails to appreciate that black people see more than skin color when they looked at Michael Jackson. Now, that is not to say that some people may not have been disappointed by some things Jackson did during his life, but that doesn’t mean they turned their backs on him. O’Reilly fails, also, to appreciate the huge impact that Jackson had on pop culture, the black community and on the world. Contrary to what O’Reilly may content, Michael Jackson was a trailblazer and was the first to cross over on such a large scale to appeal to people from all races, as an entertainer.

Were there a lot of black entertainers on MTV prior to Michael Jackson blowing up? Uh, no. Unlike O’Reilly, I am not going to get into one of these deals pitting black entertainers who came before Michael Jackson against Michael Jackson. There were some great male and female performers who helped set the stage for Michael Jackson, but what Jackson did for the entertainers of today is virtually immeasurable.

Excuse me, I digress a bit.

Here is what O’Reilly said citing the results of a Pew Research poll:

O’REILLY: Black Americans are much more engaged in watching this stuff than white Americans, even though Michael Jackson has white children – and he chose to have white children — and the face deal, don’t even want to get into … So what’s that racial thing all about?

Black people can appreciate him (and the impact he had on so many people through his abilities as an entertainer). The fact that he had white children and his skin mysteriously ligthened does not mean that black people can no longer appreciate him and his contributions any more than white people would appreciate him more because of that.

Are having white kids and lighter skin color disqualifying factors (in terms of black appreciation)?

Here is a Pew Research Poll that talks about interest in the deaths of celebrities. Note that Michael Jackson is not even at the top of the list.

Source: Pew Research Center

It seems some of us have forgotten the intense media coverage surrounding the 2008 death of television anchor Tim Russert. The death of Princess Diana and John F. Kennedy are off the charts. I had actually forgotten how intense media coverage was of the death of Steve Irwin.

Maybe we should not act as though the coverage of Michael Jackson’s death is somehow unprecedented or ridiculously out of the ordinary.

Sanford Got Himself In Scandal … Media Is An Easy Scapegoat

In reading an article on News Busters I read from a writer who is upset about coverage of the controversy surrounding Republican Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina. Now, the media coverage on this has been big (for a lot of reasons … reasons that have nothing to do with political parties). The writer, Rich Noyes, articulates a few controversial cases involving Democrats he asserts have not garnered as much coverage as Sanford’s crazy tales. But, the writer seems to have omitted a couple of things that caught my eye as I read over the story: (1) I saw no mention of how the media beat up and beat down former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards (and, actually, continues to go after him) and (2) I saw no mention of the affair controversy involving a Republican, Sen. John Ensign of Nevada (an affair that is not getting much coverage all things considered). The writer also seems to ignore that Gov. Sanford disappeared, few people seemed to know where he was, he is responsible for the people of South Carolina, there was dishonesty about his whereabouts, Republicans have portrayed themselves as the party of family values, he was missing around Father’s Day and … on and on it goes.

Here is the News Busters article:

In the week since South Carolina’s Republican Governor announced he had flown to Argentina to carry on an extra-marital affair, the broadcast morning and evening news shows have gone full bore on the scandal, cranking out 49 stories even in the midst of other major stories like Michael Jackson’s death and the continuing repression in Iran.

The morning after Sanford announced his affair, on the June 25 Good Morning America, longtime correspondent Sam Donaldson used the scandal to broadly charge Republicanswith being “sanctimonious. They thump the Bible. They condemn everyone else, and when they [act] human, they don’t have much credit in the bank for forgiveness.” Unlike when New York Democratic Governor Eliot Spitzer was caught consorting with a prostitute in March 2008, all three broadcast networks immediately identified Sanford’s party ID.

A number of top Democrats are enmeshed in embarrassment or facing allegations of wrongdoing, but the networks have far less interest in publicizing those cases.A rundown of ABC, CBS and NBC morning and evening coverage so far this year [ talks about Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), Rep. Pete Visclosky (D-IN), Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA) and Ex-Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA).]

I am not saying those are not scandals, but to imply bias seems off base.

Noyes’ headline: Heavy Coverage of Sanford’s Woes, But Where Are Democratic Scandals?

Noyes must have been asleep during the presidential primaries.

Ask John Edwards if his affair got far less interest.