third time trying to say this, stupid computer!!!

anyway, i saw on the news that mj has over 1000 songs to be released after his death. perhaps that will help with the financial problems and give the children some money as well. in addition it will give all of his fans something to look forward to and enjoy even in his absence... still not the same, but there is a small gift to be thankful for

Was there ever any doubt? I mean, how many black folks have Elvis and Beatles records in their collection? Some do but not a hell of a whole lot of them. And not to mention all the generations that got all into Michael Jackson that weren't even born yet when he was huge. Hell Michael Jackson became as well loved to those children as much as Barney and "Sesame Street".

I've never seen anything like it in my life. Michael Jackson's music was bought widespread by whites, blacks, hispanics, asians, and any other race out there as well as by children, teenagers, young adults, middle aged adults, and even a few senior citizens. Elvis and The Beatles were never that huge all the way across the board like Michael was.
.
.
.
[Edited 6/27/09 11:55am]

vainandy said:

Exactly...he crossed all color lines, religious affiliations, cultures...he appealed to children, adults, and senior citizens.

I was browsing through some of the youtube vids and I saw a comment from someone in Zimbabwe saying that the first English words they ever spoke were "Micheal Jackson."

TonyVanDam said:

no because 4,000 copies are a joke.

why on earth would a concern on who is the biggest be on the minds of his fans right now?


He's dead.. enjoy what he left.. his music.


Quit defending something you never gonna prove
[Edited 6/27/09 12:16pm]

graecophilos said:

no, no joke, re-read the text:

Initial reports of Jackson's album sales from Thursday alone indicate that one of his albums -- possibly "Number Ones" -- will easily fly to No. 1 on the chart next week. Last week, the set -- which also was his top-selling album of the week -- was at No. 20 on the Catalog chart with 4,000 sold.

To compare, last week's No. 1 on the Catalog chart was TobyMac's "Portable Sounds" with 9,000 copies sold. Sources say that at least one of Jackson's albums sold more than double that amount just on Thursday.

so before he died, number ones sold 4K. after his death, at least one of the albums - maybe number ones - sold over 9K, more than tobymac, just on one day.

carry on, tony van dam!

Coroner's officials said they released Jackson's body to his family late Friday night. The family is still trying to determine what kind of memorial to have for Jackson and when, and are debating between the idea of having a private ceremony or a grand celebration open to the public.

kibbles said:

oh, oky. but still not that much, to be honest. I still hope at least three of his albums will find their way into the us top ten.

Or will his old albums always be in teh catalogue charts?

is it possible that one of his singles will chart?

graecophilos said:

The only way it can get on the mainstream chart is if Sony reissues the single. If not, it will continue to be on the catalog charts.

I, personally, hope they can find a way to reissue songs like "One More Chance", "Unbreakable", "Cheater", "Fall Again", etc. Those songs are excellent and deserved to be hits.

why on earth would a concern on who is the biggest be on the minds of his fans right now?


He's dead.. enjoy what he left.. his music.


Quit defending something you never gonna prove
[Edited 6/27/09 12:16pm]

daPrettyman said:

mmmh.
If anythi, ony his biggies would chart, because that's what the people are gonna buy. Billie Jean, Thriller, I'l Be There...

I still jope for a completely new song.

graecophilos said:

graecophilos said:

Not necessarily. A lot of artists have had BIG hits after their passing with album tracks, "new" songs, etc. What would trip me out is if MJ broke some new sales records and sparked people to want to start buying albums and cds again. Not to mention making MTV and VH1 become MUSIC television again.

graecophilos said:

The only way it can get on the mainstream chart is if Sony reissues the single. If not, it will continue to be on the catalog charts.

I, personally, hope they can find a way to reissue songs like "One More Chance", "Unbreakable", "Cheater", "Fall Again", etc. Those songs are excellent and deserved to be hits.

Was there ever any doubt? I mean, how many black folks have Elvis and Beatles records in their collection? Some do but not a hell of a whole lot of them. And not to mention all the generations that got all into Michael Jackson that weren't even born yet when he was huge. Hell Michael Jackson became as well loved to those children as much as Barney and "Sesame Street".

I've never seen anything like it in my life. Michael Jackson's music was bought widespread by whites, blacks, hispanics, asians, and any other race out there as well as by children, teenagers, young adults, middle aged adults, and even a few senior citizens. Elvis and The Beatles were never that huge all the way across the board like Michael was.
.
.
.
[Edited 6/27/09 11:55am]

daPrettyman said:

singles CAN re-enter the Hot 100 if they gain enough points to boost them past the top 50 or top 40 (i can't remember which).

but i believe albums remain on the catalog chart.

vainandy said:

Exactly...he crossed all color lines, religious affiliations, cultures...he appealed to children, adults, and senior citizens.

I was browsing through some of the youtube vids and I saw a comment from someone in Zimbabwe saying that the first English words they ever spoke were "Micheal Jackson."

graecophilos said:

no, no joke, re-read the text:

Initial reports of Jackson's album sales from Thursday alone indicate that one of his albums -- possibly "Number Ones" -- will easily fly to No. 1 on the chart next week. Last week, the set -- which also was his top-selling album of the week -- was at No. 20 on the Catalog chart with 4,000 sold.

To compare, last week's No. 1 on the Catalog chart was TobyMac's "Portable Sounds" with 9,000 copies sold. Sources say that at least one of Jackson's albums sold more than double that amount just on Thursday.

so before he died, number ones sold 4K. after his death, at least one of the albums - maybe number ones - sold over 9K, more than tobymac, just on one day.

carry on, tony van dam!

It bothers me that I still can't believe he's gone but the song "Off the Wall" kinda lifts my spirit. And as much as people dogged him the Invincible album was great and it still is...

noimageatall said:

and Elvis,the Beatles are only popular among whites? No Asians do love them?

And let's not forget that in the 80s an artist had more tools to make him famous worldwide.

This whole Elvis/Beatles - Jackson comparism is idiotic.

You could only measure it, if the would have all had their succes at the same decade.

noimageatall said:

and Elvis,the Beatles are only popular among whites? No Asians do love them?

And let's not forget that in the 80s an artist had more tools to make him famous worldwide.

This whole Elvis/Beatles - Jackson comparism is idiotic.

You could only measure it, if the would have all had their succes at the same decade.

graecophilos said:

no, but vainandy makes a really good point.

in the main, whited-dominated mainstream media in america tends to assume that whatever whites buy is the only indicator of influence. or who they deem important must necessarily be important to everyone across the board. elvis and the beatles are seen as important influences in music, but mj, although just as well known, has been marginalized for at least the last 20 years in their eyes. the week that nirvana knocked mj off the billboard charts in 1991, white media (in this country at least) hailed it as a victory of some sort. the reintroduction of some white male hierarchy that mj has 'usurped', and now the proper social order had been restored.

but in spite of what they would have you believe, mj is the one that does/did cut across boarders. you can use that whole 'different era' excuse, but the fact is that in the here and now when when the beatles and elvis receive as much press and promotion using the same current technology that mj has/had at his disposal, i don't think the argument holds water. those performers still appeal to a more narrow audience now as they did back in 'their day' even though their ability to reach new audiences is facilitated by new technologies.

i doubt that many of these reporters at rolling stone, spin, etc. would have thought that the worldwide outpouring of grief for mj would rival that of presley, lennon or cobain because they don't see him as rivaling their white-male dominated view of things.

vainandy said:

That's wrong. In the 50s and 60s the boundaries between blacks and whites were much heavier than in the 80s and later on.

Also this whole race thing pisses me off, totally.

I can see when black folks are proud of someone like MJ, but I disrepsect when you dismiss white artists by claiming they were not able to attract both folks.

kibbles said:

Michael Jackson is BIGGER than Elvis & The Beatles!

End of.

graecophilos said:

no, but vainandy makes a really good point.

in the main, white-dominated mainstream media in america tends to assume that whatever whites buy is the only indicator of influence. or who they deem important must necessarily be important to everyone across the board. elvis and the beatles are seen as important influences in music (and they most defintely are), but mj, although just as well known, has been marginalized for at least the last 20 years in their eyes. the week that nirvana knocked mj off the billboard charts in 1991, white media (in this country at least) hailed it as a victory of some sort. the reintroduction of some white male hierarchy that mj had 'usurped', and now the proper social order had been restored.

but in spite of what they would have you believe, mj is the one that does/did cut across borders. you can use that whole 'different era' excuse, but the fact is that in the here and now when when the beatles and elvis receive as much press and promotion using the same current technology that mj has/had at his disposal, i don't think the argument holds water. those performers still appeal to a more narrow audience now as they did back in 'their day' even though their ability to reach new audiences is facilitated by new technologies.

i doubt that many of these reporters at rolling stone, spin, etc. would have thought that the worldwide outpouring of grief for mj would rival that of presley, lennon or cobain because they don't see him as rivaling their white-male dominated view of things.
[Edited 6/27/09 12:51pm]
[Edited 6/27/09 12:55pm]

TonyVanDam said:

I think the US is largely oblivious to Michael's international impact. Michael is huge in India... Bollywood wouldn't be what it is without Michael.