krayzie said:

Which is why, if there was a "special" award" ( that's quote, unquote ),
he would definitely deserve it.

I don't know if the article is real or not,but I think it's a shame that Michael can't just simply appear at one of these shows and be a presenter.Why does everything always have to be about him all the time? That's why many people assume this story is true....because he seems like he is obesessed with his own fame and accomplishments He has no problem going into the studio with many of the artists who win awards these days,yet he can't be bothered to attend the Grammys as a presenter?

Rodya24 said:

SoulAlive said:

It smells like arrogance in every sense of the word and unfortunately, it seems like a Michael Jackson move right here. I wish it could be about the music and nothing more but it'll never be that way.

SoulAlive said:

Personally, if I was turning 50 this year and a single father of three, I would have better things to do with my evenings than go to award shows to hand out tokens of appreciation.

In any case, Michael said many years ago, in his autobiography Moonwalker, that the reason he does not want to give awards or present award shows is that he knows he would be bad at it. I think he is right. A good presenter needs to be a good speaker, which Michael has time and again proven that he is not. When he's not performing in the normal sense, he is shy, awkward and tongue-tied.

Anyway, who would want to have an award presented to them by Michael Jackson? Especially with his current degree of reclusiveness, let's be honest, the next day the media would not be reporting 'and group X won this award for their brilliant performance', but 'Jacko showed up to present award'.

True; Prince is a good speaker which is why he makes a great presenter.

Regardless of whether this story is true or not, these are the types of ridiculous stories that MJ and his camp used to cook up back in the day to get attention, so THAT is why people don't bat an eyelash when something like this comes up.

guitarslinger44 said:

So because people know Jackson's camp used to make this stuff up, they now wholeheartedly believe it to be true? How does that work?

Cinnamon234 said:

I don't think that's fair either.

Axchi696 said:

Madge was the first winner of the Video Vanguard Award.

Annika said:

it's hypocrisy. you can't make up stories one moment and than cry foul the next when they take it upon themselves to make up stories.

ehuffnsd said:

Erm, as far as I can see, he hasn't said a word about it, let alone 'cried foul'. It's the fans who are crying foul, and, as one of those fans, I sure as hell cry foul when he makes this shit up himself, too.

I just think that the ease with which people accept such a glaringly flawed story as the undoubtable truth just because it's MJ and "he's a diva" (which he probably is, I'm not saying that), is moronic at best.

Annika said:

i can think of three times

Leave Me Alone
Tabolid Junkie
Privacy

and i believe Michael himself has said don't read the tabloids they aren't true or something like that a few times in interviews. he created the mess by shipping them the elephant man, hyberbaric chamber and Liz stories.
[Edited 2/22/08 10:37am]

ehuffnsd said:

She sure was.

ehuffnsd said:

Ah, sorry, I misinterpreted your post. I thought you meant crying foul over this particular incident.

Like I said before, I'm just as pissed when Michael makes the stories up as when the media do. I love Leave Me Alone, but I agree, he is very hypocritical in this respect.

However, that does not absolve people from believing an obviously misinformed article without question. In fact, his past manipulations should make such articles even less plausible, as their whole base is in that case flawed.

I remember the MTV awards a few years ago when MJ showed up and made an acceptance speech for a non existent award. MTV invited him to the show because it was the same day as MJ's birthday and they wanted to wish him a Happy Birthday, but MJ made an ass of himself, as usual.
No doubt the Grammys would have done much better ratings-wise if there had been a planned Thriller or MJ themed appearance. If they could announce in all the ads leading up to the show that "In honor of the 25th Anniversary of Thriller, The King of Pop will be making a special appearance", they may have snagged some Idol ratings. But in the end, the Grammys probably decided MJ wasn't worth all the trouble.
And we were stuck with Kanye West's big-ass ego instead.

maybe he's just gone and done a Barbara Streisand and can't possibly see himself on stage again.

Or maybe he is permanently traumatized by all of the "BAD" things he's suffered through as of late.

you'd think two years of therapy in Dubai would have cured most of his sorrow- (woulda worked for me)

but maybe it didn't and he's just as emotionally messed up as he was at 9 years old

it's not easy when the Kingdom turns against the King







.....

Timmy84 said:

I think that has more to do with a racial issue than a superstar ego- cause miss MADdonna had no business getting that award first when it was MJ that made MTV and vice versa

Annika said:

I think Michael would have really surprised people if he just came out and presented an award.No hype,no grand introduction,no "King Of Pop" nonsense....just come out there,smile,make a few funny comments,and then present an award.The audience would have went wild.He only goes to award shows when he's gonna win something,

Annika said:

The Post is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who also owns FOX News. We all know that's a bastion of truth and honesty, and I'm not even a Michael fan.

uPtoWnNY said:

U can say that again.

ehuffnsd said:

you forgot these type of incidents





to be honest i dont think many people pay attention to these articles nowdays

b3xy said:

I remember these photos especially the second one.

b3xy said:

he wrote this one himself

LightOfArt said:

there are various things with messages on them from michael which include something about burning the tabloids

b3xy said:

That'll be funny if one of the fans actually burned a tabloid in the middle of the street and if an officer happens to walk around, he/she may discover the burning and chase after him/her because of it.

Timmy84 said:

i have heard stories about fans burning tabloids outside the hotels and stuff back when he was encouraging it not sure about nowdays

I think there is some truth to this and im a die hard MJ fan.

Why would the Grammy's just drop the whole tribute when they were advertising it on commercials? Something happened that made them just say forget it

BabyBeMine said:

Yeah, something happened, but I bet you a million dollars it's not about what they said in that article. He has an ego, no doubt, but that article made it seem as though the Grammys dropped him because he demanded so much, IMO, I think they wanted Jackson to perform and he said no, so there was a mutual disagreement between both Jackson and NARAS. BTW, Grammy telecast 17.5 million viewers, not good at all
[Edited 2/22/08 19:03pm]

2blax2proud said:

I agree. I just think Mike turned them down.