Katherine Jackson threw Michael under the bus...once again. KJ not only described her cash cow son as a junkie, but also as a demented guy who wasn't able to tie his shoe laces while, obviously, claiming he lied about his ever loving-jail-avoider-while-yesterday-he-was-gang-avoider dad.

KJ who constantly saved her other children's faces (remember when she prevented Michael from sueing Randy and even forced him to release a statement exonorating him from financial misbehavior?) and her husband's face attacked Michael in a ridiculous way.

Sure, the man was addicted to plastic surgery but why is his own mother saying that to the world? Why is his mother attacking his nose and telling stories about how addicted her son was to surgery? Why isn't KJ capable of defending him against those ridiculous drug accusations? Why is she telling the world he was an junkie?

I'm sick of this family. I'm waiting to read the rest of the interview and, boy, I won't be socked by anything.

[Edited 11/8/10 10:49am]

ViintageJunkiie said:

dag said:

I don´t know if I am allowed to post it if not I am sorry and please delete it, but this is no doubt Mickey and it sounds great.

OH WOW! I always thought this would have been a slow ballad .. Full version needs to go ahead and come on out. Most def Dangerous era

MOL said:

Katherine Jackson threw Michael under the bus...once again. KJ not only described her cash cow son as a junkie, but also as a demented guy who wasn't able to tie his shoe laces while, obviously, claiming he lied about his ever loving-jail-avoider-while-yesterday-he-was-gang-avoider dad.

KJ who constantly saved her other children's faces (remember when she prevented Michael from sueing Randy and even forced him to release a statement exonorating him from financial misbehavior?) and her husband's face attacked Michael in a ridiculous way.

Sure, the man was addicted to plastic surgery but why is his own mother saying that to the world? Why is his mother attacking his nose and telling stories about how addicted her son was to surgery? Why isn't KJ capable of defending him against those ridiculous drug accusations? Why is she telling the world he was an junkie?

I'm sick of this family. I'm waiting to read the rest of the interview and, boy, I won't be socked by anything.

Where did you read the interview?

She´s getting real personal!

aiden said:

UMMM.

It's MJ, get over it.

No offense, but you are deaf. Maybe besides some of the background vocals this is NOT Michael Jackson singing. Not in the least. There are too many things that are present in MJ's singing which just aren't present here. Also, I can't understand why the instrumentation is much louder than the vocalist. Did Teddy do that? In all of MJ's songs in his solo catalog, and even the demos, his vocals are always crystal clear. In this one the voice of the lead vocalist is overwhelmed by everything else. It's kind of frustrating.

For the sake of the album, the fans, consumers, and the man's legacy, Sony should take that song right off the album. It doesn't belong there. I really can't believe that they would do this. I simply REFUSE to buy a Michael Jackson album that contains a song where MJ isn't singing the lead vocals. Are you fucking kidding me?!

KISS MY ASS SONY.

The Jackson clan has been waging a bitter war against his estate and Sony since they found themselves excluded as executors. This is just another attempt to plant doubt (this time about the vocals on "Breaking News") and destroy the commerical potential of not just the new album, but every Michael project underway.

ViintageJunkiie said:

Swa said:

You also have to take into account his performance on the remake of Wanna Be Startin Somethin' remix with AKON. There are parts of that that made me think Michael was having difficulty singing and was mumbling and stumbling on words.

The truth will come out eventually. I'm happy to give the benefit of the doubt til then.

To my knowledge, the MJ verse on the remix with Akon was from an early demo of WBSS and was NOT new

Yep. You would be right.

novabrkr said:

What the fucking fuck. This is hilarious and depressing at the same time. It's clearly not him.

I know right? Hilarious and sad. smh

Identity said:

The Jackson clan has been waging a bitter war against his estate and Sony since they found themselves excluded as executors. This is just another attempt to plant doubt (this time about the vocals on "Breaking News") and destroy the commerical potential of not just the new album, but every Michael project underway.

I think the audio track shows there's more to this than money which it still could obviously be. Michael really was alone in this world.

By the way Frank Cascio and Teddy Riley are both some weird motherfuckers acting right now.

dag said:

MOL said:

Katherine Jackson threw Michael under the bus...once again. KJ not only described her cash cow son as a junkie, but also as a demented guy who wasn't able to tie his shoe laces while, obviously, claiming he lied about his ever loving-jail-avoider-while-yesterday-he-was-gang-avoider dad.

KJ who constantly saved her other children's faces (remember when she prevented Michael from sueing Randy and even forced him to release a statement exonorating him from financial misbehavior?) and her husband's face attacked Michael in a ridiculous way.

Sure, the man was addicted to plastic surgery but why is his own mother saying that to the world? Why is his mother attacking his nose and telling stories about how addicted her son was to surgery? Why isn't KJ capable of defending him against those ridiculous drug accusations? Why is she telling the world he was an junkie?

I'm sick of this family. I'm waiting to read the rest of the interview and, boy, I won't be socked by anything.

Where did you read the interview?

KOP forum.

WTF is this BS?

Fakery is afoot.

[Edited 11/8/10 11:10am]

[Edited 11/8/10 11:16am]

[Edited 11/8/10 11:16am]

[Edited 11/8/10 11:17am]

Identity said:

The Jackson clan has been waging a bitter war against his estate and Sony since they found themselves excluded as executors. This is just another attempt to plant doubt (this time about the vocals on "Breaking News") and destroy the commerical potential of not just the new album, but every Michael project underway.

i believe this is true.

i listened to the song. is it overproduced or overdubbed. yes. but what reason would sony or the executors have for singling out this song to perpetrate a fraud? there are other mj songs, dozens of them according to tommy mottola, which are in the sony vaults that have never been released. so why the need for an imposter?

this is a topical song, given what mj was going through at the end of his life so i can see the marketing strategy behind using it, but would they need to go to such lengths to bring in an 'imposter' over a marketing strategy if the song didn't already exist in some form? no. they would have simply selected another song to go with. it wasn't recorded in a professional studio therefore it probably had to go thru some enhancements which makes mj's voice sound different than it would otherwise.

if the subject had never been raised by certain family members (just like with TII - remember the whole 'that not michael, that a body double), nobody would be having this discussion and debate about whether it's mj.

[Edited 11/8/10 11:18am]

Timmy84 said:

By the way Frank Cascio and Teddy Riley are both some weird motherfuckers acting right now.

Yea, they better be watching their backs.

Betrayal is wrong.

sag10 said:

Timmy84 said:

By the way Frank Cascio and Teddy Riley are both some weird motherfuckers acting right now.

Yea, they better be watching their backs.

Betrayal is wrong.

Yeah especially if someone ACTUALLY DOES do an investigation with the vocals and try to determine whatever they did with it, which would be hard to prove since, if you believe Taryll, most of the potential evidence was "deleted".

kibbles said:

Identity said:

The Jackson clan has been waging a bitter war against his estate and Sony since they found themselves excluded as executors. This is just another attempt to plant doubt (this time about the vocals on "Breaking News") and destroy the commerical potential of not just the new album, but every Michael project underway.

i believe this is true.

i listened to the song. is it overproduced or overdubbed. yes. but what reason would sony or the executors have for singling out this song to perpetrate a fraud? there are other mj songs, dozens of them according to tommy mottola, which are in the sony vaults that have never been released. so why the need for an imposter?

this is a topical song, given what mj was going through at the end of his life so i can see the marketing strategy behind using it, but would they need to go to such lengths to bring in an 'imposter' over a marketing strategy if the song didn't already exist in some form? no. they would have simply selected another song to go with. it wasn't recorded in a professional studio therefore it probably had to go thru some enhancements which makes mj's voice sound different than it would otherwise.

if the subject had never been raised by certain family members (just like with TII - remember the whole 'that not michael, that a body double), nobody would be having this discussion and debate about whether it's mj.

[Edited 11/8/10 11:18am]

It's clear the Jacksons are trying everything to destroy any MJ project in the present and in the future. Remember Joe's line of thought: first, I'll harass you to profit off of your business, then, if after the huntings I'm not making money off of it, I'll destroy it. And people wonder why Michael was so damaged. Well, I ask something different: how was he so normal with such a demented, freaky and monstruous family.

On a side note: Katherine should have told the reason as to why Michael was "addicted to plastic surgery". It has something to do with the loving father.

Timmy84 said:

In one early review, entertainment reporter Ashante Infantry of the Toronto Star website thestar.com called it "a self-referential rehash that spotlights all that was wrong with Mike" and added that the new single's theme of persecution by the media "threatens to diminish the posthumous goodwill afforded the pop star."

That bitch can fuck off, but it is too obvious to anyone who is familiar with his works and vocals that it's not him. Someone can point out 2000 Watts, but even though MJ was singing a much lower register his voice still sounded like his. Everything he does when he sings...still sounds like him. Wtf he just tossed all those years of honing his vocal stylings & voice out the window for this song? I don't think it's even, humanely, possible. I don't even know why people are trying to make excuses for it claiming "Oh Mike hadn't changed his shit in years." lol-fucking NO.

Even MJ's demos sound richer than this, musically. There's a lot of shit missing from it that would, normally, be in a MJ song. Anyone who is arguing that it's him should feel ashamed of themselves and take some real time to listen to all of his later works. PROPERLY.

kibbles said:

Identity said:

The Jackson clan has been waging a bitter war against his estate and Sony since they found themselves excluded as executors. This is just another attempt to plant doubt (this time about the vocals on "Breaking News") and destroy the commerical potential of not just the new album, but every Michael project underway.

it believe this is true.

i listened to the song. is it overproduced or overdubbed. yes. but what reason would sony or the executors have for singling out this song to perpetrate a fraud? there are other mj songs, dozens of them according to tommy mottola, which are in the sony vaults that have never been released. so why the need for an imposter?

this is a topical song, given what mj was going through at the end of his life so i can see the marketing strategy behind using it, but would they need to go to such lengths to bring in an 'imposter' over a marketing strategy if the song didn't already exist in some form? no. they would have simply selected another song to go with. it wasn't recorded in a professional studio therefore it probably had to go thru some enhancements which makes mj's voice sound different than it would otherwise.

if the subject had never been raised by certain family members (just like with TII - remember the whole 'that not michael, that a body double), nobody would be having this discussion and debate about whether it's mj.

Alot of songs aren't owned by Sony &/or epic, some songs depending on who produced, aren't fully submitted until the album are in the final processes.

In this new age of doing business, Producers don't have to submit the master recording until it is set that their song is going to be used.

In essence... I wouldn't doubt if epic &/ or Sony know what's truly going on.

Professional studio or not, I can and pretty much anyone could tell that Mj has certain timbre and partials in his voice.

Breaking News in particular sounds like it was put through a filter to disguise the fact that two mikes were used.

The upper partials of mj's voice disappear during the beginning and return later...

I've been working with audio for a long time...

I dunno whats fully going on, but from what I can hear, something definitely is a foot.

And they are trying to hide the fact that

A. Mike used two different mikes, one that diminished his upper partials

B. Thats somebody else on the record...

SONY must have some dumb ass employees or something. They're still insisting it's him. Whatever.

Timmy84 said:

Michael Jackson’s children recall dad on 'Oprah' show

By TAMMY WEBBER
Associated Press

CHICAGO — Michael Jackson’s children and mother said on today’s episode of “The Oprah Winfrey Show” that they’re still learning to cope with his death a year and a half after the pop star overdosed on a powerful anesthetic.

Jackson’s oldest children, 13-year-old Prince and 12-year-old Paris, said they are adjusting well to private school, although their younger brother, Blanket, 8, is still home-schooled. The children have been living with grandmother Katherine Jackson, who is their guardian, since their father’s death in June 2009.

In the pretaped interview, Katherine Jackson said Blanket, whose given name is Prince Michael Jackson II, is shy but now wants to attend school next year, when he’ll be in fourth grade.

The children were taped in the Jackson’s backyard with several cousins and spoke about their memories of their father.

Prince, whose birth name is Michael Joseph Jackson Jr., said he and his father often walked the beach early in the morning drinking Coca-Cola and eating Skittles or Snickers. Paris said he took her to art museums and was “the best cook ever.”

Katherine Jackson said she wants to give the children as normal a childhood as possible, and is more lenient than her son was — including when he made the children wear veils in public.

Paris said the veils weren’t always comfortable but that they wore them so “when we went out without our dad nobody would really recognize us,” and she appreciated that he was trying to protect them.

“I think no one understands what a good father he was,” Paris said.

Katherine Jackson also told Winfrey that she believes her son was addicted to plastic surgery, and once even asked his surgeon to pretend that he’d operated on Jackson’s nose if he ever asked for another surgery. She said she was concerned that his nose kept getting smaller and that it looked “like a toothpick at one time.”

She said her son was insecure about his looks, and “one day made up his mind to get his nose done.”

Jackson’s father, Joe Jackson, also appeared in a brief interview with his wife and denied to Winfrey that he had beaten his children, as Michael Jackson had told Winfrey in a 1993 interview.

But when prodded by his wife, who said “you might as well admit it,” Joe Jackson acknowledged whipping them with a strap to keep them out of trouble.

Joe and Katherine Jackson also denied that they had ever filed for divorce, though Joe Jackson — who in an interview last year blamed his wife for their son’s death — said he thinks his wife “is too easy with people ... just like Michael.”

Michael Jackson physician Conrad Murray is charged with involuntary manslaughter for allegedly improperly administering a mixture of sedatives, including the anesthetic propofol, in an attempt to get the chronic insomniac to sleep. Murray has pleaded not guilty.

Last month, Jackson’s brother Randy complained about the interview in a series of posts on Twitter, saying he disagreed with his parents allowing the interview.

[Edited 11/8/10 11:16am]

[Edited 11/8/10 11:16am]

[Edited 11/8/10 11:17am]

Did she say that in front of the kids?

So...we have Sony releasing Breaking News online today, and the Jackson family & MJ3 saying its a fake. And then we have the big Jackson family + MJ3 interview on Oprah today as well. Coincidental timimg?

MOL said:

Katherine Jackson threw Michael under the bus...once again. KJ not only described her cash cow son as a junkie, but also as a demented guy who wasn't able to tie his shoe laces while, obviously, claiming he lied about his ever loving-jail-avoider-while-yesterday-he-was-gang-avoider dad.

KJ who constantly saved her other children's faces (remember when she prevented Michael from sueing Randy and even forced him to release a statement exonorating him from financial misbehavior?) and her husband's face attacked Michael in a ridiculous way.

Sure, the man was addicted to plastic surgery but why is his own mother saying that to the world? Why is his mother attacking his nose and telling stories about how addicted her son was to surgery? Why isn't KJ capable of defending him against those ridiculous drug accusations? Why is she telling the world he was an junkie?

I'm sick of this family. I'm waiting to read the rest of the interview and, boy, I won't be socked by anything.

[Edited 11/8/10 10:49am]

taj is busy tweeting about the cascios; do you think he will tweet about his grandma? how's that 'legacy protecting' working out for him?

katherine could have at least have tried to explain why mj - who was a beautiful man - felt he was so ugly and became 'addicted' to plastic surgery. but that type of discussion would require some self-reflective introspection that she either doesn't have or is trying to avoid. that cow oprah could have pressed her on this issue, but oprah can't see beyond her own preconceptions about mj so she's not going to point out what (to me) is the elephant in the room. mj didn't feel good about himself b/c of the messages he was receiving from those around him. he may have thought it was b/c he wasn't good looking, but it probably went much deeper than that. he didn't feel valued for himself, only what he could do for the family, and insted of 'pushing' back on these bastards, he internalized the sense of worthlessness and tried to make himself feel better though plastic surgery, you know what i mean?

as we pointed out in a previous post, how can her 'mj was an addict' discussion with that cow oprah be reconciled with her interview just a few months ago? as i said, coming soon to a courtroom near you...

EmbattledWarrior said:

kibbles said:

it believe this is true.

i listened to the song. is it overproduced or overdubbed. yes. but what reason would sony or the executors have for singling out this song to perpetrate a fraud? there are other mj songs, dozens of them according to tommy mottola, which are in the sony vaults that have never been released. so why the need for an imposter?

this is a topical song, given what mj was going through at the end of his life so i can see the marketing strategy behind using it, but would they need to go to such lengths to bring in an 'imposter' over a marketing strategy if the song didn't already exist in some form? no. they would have simply selected another song to go with. it wasn't recorded in a professional studio therefore it probably had to go thru some enhancements which makes mj's voice sound different than it would otherwise.

if the subject had never been raised by certain family members (just like with TII - remember the whole 'that not michael, that a body double), nobody would be having this discussion and debate about whether it's mj.

Alot of songs aren't owned by Sony &/or epic, some songs depending on who produced, aren't fully submitted until the album are in the final processes.

In this new age of doing business, Producers don't have to submit the master recording until it is set that their song is going to be used.

In essence... I wouldn't doubt if epic &/ or Sony know what's truly going on.

Professional studio or not, I can and pretty much anyone could tell that Mj has certain timbre and partials in his voice.

Breaking News in particular sounds like it was put through a filter to disguise the fact that two mikes were used.

The upper partials of mj's voice disappear during the beginning and return later...

I've been working with audio for a long time...

I dunno whats fully going on, but from what I can hear, something definitely is a foot.

And they are trying to hide the fact that

A. Mike used two different mikes, one that diminished his upper partials

B. Thats somebody else on the record...

They're trying to cover their tracks, which has not really been successful. If more outrage comes at them for this, they might yank it...hopefully. It just raises the suspicion that some songs on the album have been tampered with.

This reminds me of the Tammi Terrell-Valerie Simpson scandal. Valerie keeps insisting Tammi was singing on all the songs on her and Marvin Gaye's purported 1969 album, Easy, but others working at Motown didn't recognize the voice as Tammi's and Marvin said Valerie took over vocal duties on the album. Valerie put herself into a shaky corner on Unsung saying she did sing with Marvin but as a "vocal guide" for Tammi but further investigation puts Valerie's words in doubt. Plus we have to remember Tammi was seriously ill at this point due to her brain cancer. She was on her sixth or seventh operation when the album was recorded.

It's kinda what is going on here. Like some Michael vocals were used but another voice is leading most of the song and it looks like the lyrics were written by the Cascios while maybe the chorus was the only thing Michael added to it. It was like they couldn't finish it then and Michael probably had a falling out with the Cascios and the track remained unfinished so someone (maybe the Cascio family) added another man so it's purported to sound like Michael.

[Edited 11/8/10 11:36am]

dag said:

Timmy84 said:

Michael Jackson’s children recall dad on 'Oprah' show

By TAMMY WEBBER
Associated Press

CHICAGO — Michael Jackson’s children and mother said on today’s episode of “The Oprah Winfrey Show” that they’re still learning to cope with his death a year and a half after the pop star overdosed on a powerful anesthetic.

Jackson’s oldest children, 13-year-old Prince and 12-year-old Paris, said they are adjusting well to private school, although their younger brother, Blanket, 8, is still home-schooled. The children have been living with grandmother Katherine Jackson, who is their guardian, since their father’s death in June 2009.

In the pretaped interview, Katherine Jackson said Blanket, whose given name is Prince Michael Jackson II, is shy but now wants to attend school next year, when he’ll be in fourth grade.

The children were taped in the Jackson’s backyard with several cousins and spoke about their memories of their father.

Prince, whose birth name is Michael Joseph Jackson Jr., said he and his father often walked the beach early in the morning drinking Coca-Cola and eating Skittles or Snickers. Paris said he took her to art museums and was “the best cook ever.”

Katherine Jackson said she wants to give the children as normal a childhood as possible, and is more lenient than her son was — including when he made the children wear veils in public.

Paris said the veils weren’t always comfortable but that they wore them so “when we went out without our dad nobody would really recognize us,” and she appreciated that he was trying to protect them.

“I think no one understands what a good father he was,” Paris said.

Katherine Jackson also told Winfrey that she believes her son was addicted to plastic surgery, and once even asked his surgeon to pretend that he’d operated on Jackson’s nose if he ever asked for another surgery. She said she was concerned that his nose kept getting smaller and that it looked “like a toothpick at one time.”

She said her son was insecure about his looks, and “one day made up his mind to get his nose done.”

Jackson’s father, Joe Jackson, also appeared in a brief interview with his wife and denied to Winfrey that he had beaten his children, as Michael Jackson had told Winfrey in a 1993 interview.

But when prodded by his wife, who said “you might as well admit it,” Joe Jackson acknowledged whipping them with a strap to keep them out of trouble.

Joe and Katherine Jackson also denied that they had ever filed for divorce, though Joe Jackson — who in an interview last year blamed his wife for their son’s death — said he thinks his wife “is too easy with people ... just like Michael.”

Michael Jackson physician Conrad Murray is charged with involuntary manslaughter for allegedly improperly administering a mixture of sedatives, including the anesthetic propofol, in an attempt to get the chronic insomniac to sleep. Murray has pleaded not guilty.

Last month, Jackson’s brother Randy complained about the interview in a series of posts on Twitter, saying he disagreed with his parents allowing the interview.

[Edited 11/8/10 11:16am]

[Edited 11/8/10 11:16am]

[Edited 11/8/10 11:17am]

Did she say that in front of the kids?

No. According to another article I read, Michael's children weren't around to hear their grandma say that.

kibbles said:

MOL said:

Katherine Jackson threw Michael under the bus...once again. KJ not only described her cash cow son as a junkie, but also as a demented guy who wasn't able to tie his shoe laces while, obviously, claiming he lied about his ever loving-jail-avoider-while-yesterday-he-was-gang-avoider dad.

KJ who constantly saved her other children's faces (remember when she prevented Michael from sueing Randy and even forced him to release a statement exonorating him from financial misbehavior?) and her husband's face attacked Michael in a ridiculous way.

Sure, the man was addicted to plastic surgery but why is his own mother saying that to the world? Why is his mother attacking his nose and telling stories about how addicted her son was to surgery? Why isn't KJ capable of defending him against those ridiculous drug accusations? Why is she telling the world he was an junkie?

I'm sick of this family. I'm waiting to read the rest of the interview and, boy, I won't be socked by anything.

[Edited 11/8/10 10:49am]

taj is busy tweeting about the cascios; do you think he will tweet about his grandma? how's that 'legacy protecting' working out for him?

katherine could have at least have tried to explain why mj - who was a beautiful man - felt he was so ugly and became 'addicted' to plastic surgery. but that type of discussion would require some self-reflective introspection that she either doesn't have or is trying to avoid. that cow oprah could have pressed her on this issue, but oprah can't see beyond her own preconceptions about mj so she's not going to point out what (to me) is the elephant in the room. mj didn't feel good about himself b/c of the messages he was receiving from those around him. he may have thought it was b/c he wasn't good looking, but it probably went much deeper than that. he didn't feel valued for himself, only what he could do for the family, and insted of 'pushing' back on these bastards, he internalized the sense of worthlessness and tried to make himself feel better though plastic surgery, you know what i mean?

as we pointed out in a previous post, how can her 'mj was an addict' discussion with that cow oprah be reconciled with her interview just a few months ago? as i said, coming soon to a courtroom near you...

Yeah, you´re right on that.

BTW watching the tiny peace, Prince looks umcomfortable. Paris seems very confident and mature.

Timmy84 said:

dag said:

Did she say that in front of the kids?

No. According to another article I read, Michael's children weren't around to hear their grandma say that.

Still, they´re gonna see it one day.

dag said:

Timmy84 said:

No. According to another article I read, Michael's children weren't around to hear their grandma say that.

Still, they´re gonna see it one day.

Yep. And that's what sucks about it. Now I keep thinking "maybe they would've been better off with Diana Ross."

[Edited 11/8/10 11:38am]

dag said:

Timmy84 said:

Michael Jackson’s children recall dad on 'Oprah' show

By TAMMY WEBBER
Associated Press

CHICAGO — Michael Jackson’s children and mother said on today’s episode of “The Oprah Winfrey Show” that they’re still learning to cope with his death a year and a half after the pop star overdosed on a powerful anesthetic.

Jackson’s oldest children, 13-year-old Prince and 12-year-old Paris, said they are adjusting well to private school, although their younger brother, Blanket, 8, is still home-schooled. The children have been living with grandmother Katherine Jackson, who is their guardian, since their father’s death in June 2009.

In the pretaped interview, Katherine Jackson said Blanket, whose given name is Prince Michael Jackson II, is shy but now wants to attend school next year, when he’ll be in fourth grade.

The children were taped in the Jackson’s backyard with several cousins and spoke about their memories of their father.

Prince, whose birth name is Michael Joseph Jackson Jr., said he and his father often walked the beach early in the morning drinking Coca-Cola and eating Skittles or Snickers. Paris said he took her to art museums and was “the best cook ever.”

Katherine Jackson said she wants to give the children as normal a childhood as possible, and is more lenient than her son was — including when he made the children wear veils in public.

Paris said the veils weren’t always comfortable but that they wore them so “when we went out without our dad nobody would really recognize us,” and she appreciated that he was trying to protect them.

“I think no one understands what a good father he was,” Paris said.

Katherine Jackson also told Winfrey that she believes her son was addicted to plastic surgery, and once even asked his surgeon to pretend that he’d operated on Jackson’s nose if he ever asked for another surgery. She said she was concerned that his nose kept getting smaller and that it looked “like a toothpick at one time.”

She said her son was insecure about his looks, and “one day made up his mind to get his nose done.”

Jackson’s father, Joe Jackson, also appeared in a brief interview with his wife and denied to Winfrey that he had beaten his children, as Michael Jackson had told Winfrey in a 1993 interview.

But when prodded by his wife, who said “you might as well admit it,” Joe Jackson acknowledged whipping them with a strap to keep them out of trouble.

Joe and Katherine Jackson also denied that they had ever filed for divorce, though Joe Jackson — who in an interview last year blamed his wife for their son’s death — said he thinks his wife “is too easy with people ... just like Michael.”

Michael Jackson physician Conrad Murray is charged with involuntary manslaughter for allegedly improperly administering a mixture of sedatives, including the anesthetic propofol, in an attempt to get the chronic insomniac to sleep. Murray has pleaded not guilty.

Last month, Jackson’s brother Randy complained about the interview in a series of posts on Twitter, saying he disagreed with his parents allowing the interview.

[Edited 11/8/10 11:16am]

[Edited 11/8/10 11:16am]

[Edited 11/8/10 11:17am]

Did she say that in front of the kids?

A few years back she said exactly what he did. Now she doesn't know.

On dateline a few months ago she said he has always been himself around her and she has heard prescription drug talk from others but had never seen it for herself and never had reasons to believe it. Now she didn't believe him when he said he wasn't using.

I thought this was about setting the record straight. Well I guess it did in tabloid dreams history. I find it so funny that they will scream and shout over not having their songs on an album but paint him as a drug addicted, surgery addicted lying man. Does this interview even talk about his goodness other than what the kids are saying? I was against the kids being interviewed but it seems they are the only saving grace.