Gunsnhalen said:

Stymie said:

I'm amazed by the dumb shit argued about on the org. It's like watching a bunch of children.

Grown men and women get in heated debates about MJ and The Beatles. Like it really fucking matters this is like a high school popularity contest.

The ageism again? There is no special way "grown" people or children are supposed to act.

[Edited 3/26/14 10:10am]

MickyDolenz said:

Gunsnhalen said:

Grown men and women get in heated debates about MJ and The Beatles. Like it really fucking matters this is like a high school popularity contest.

The ageism again? There is no special way "grown" people or children are supposed to act.

Your opinion.

MickyDolenz said:

Gunsnhalen said:

Grown men and women get in heated debates about MJ and The Beatles. Like it really fucking matters this is like a high school popularity contest.

The ageism again? There is no special way "grown" people or children are supposed to act.

[Edited 3/26/14 10:10am]

Yes there is. I expect children to lost their tempers and throw hissy fits but I expect grown ups to be able to discuss issues without lowering themselves to petty name-calling.

Unless this topic is going to be judged by record sales, everyone's thoughts on here are opinion.

Gunsnhalen said:

Stymie said:

I'm amazed by the dumb shit argued about on the org. It's like watching a bunch of children.

Grown men and women get in heated debates about MJ and The Beatles. Like it really fucking matters this is like a high school popularity contest.

I agree.

Stymie said:

MickyDolenz said:

The ageism again? There is no special way "grown" people or children are supposed to act.

[Edited 3/26/14 10:10am]

Yes there is. I expect children to lost their tempers and throw hissy fits but I expect grown ups to be able to discuss issues without lowering themselves to petty name-calling.

Unless this topic is going to be judged by record sales, everyone's thoughts on here are opinion.

We're also racists if we don't agree

Gunsnhalen said:

Stymie said:

Yes there is. I expect children to lost their tempers and throw hissy fits but I expect grown ups to be able to discuss issues without lowering themselves to petty name-calling.

Unless this topic is going to be judged by record sales, everyone's thoughts on here are opinion.

We're also racists if we don't agree

Another reason this forum can't be taken seriously.

^Its not the forum per sec, its some members.

Stymie said:

MickyDolenz said:

The ageism again? There is no special way "grown" people or children are supposed to act.

[Edited 3/26/14 10:10am]

Yes there is. I expect children to lost their tempers and throw hissy fits but I expect grown ups to be able to discuss issues without lowering themselves to petty name-calling.

Unless this topic is going to be judged by record sales, everyone's thoughts on here are opinion.

I don't recall any name calling except the poster talking about race. Other than saying James Brown was more popular than Elvis in Africa, I made no comment about who's more popular, only about people saying that The Beatles & Elvis are not popular with kids and that Elvis was not popular with the R&B audience, which can be looked up, so it's not an opinion.

.

It is not a fact that adults and children are supposed to act a certain way. It's what people think because that is taught. That's why people make rules and laws to control behavior. Like in the US the drinking age is 21 and in some other places there is no age limit. So according to the US, drinking is an adult activity. If there were no rules & laws and there was anarchy, most people are going to do what they want. Society says women and men are supposed to act and look a certain way and if they don't, then they're wrong. There are people like the Wodaabe, in which the men wear makeup to attract women, but in most places it's the opposite. According to a lot of places, men wearing makeup are androgynous or drag queens and homosexual. Women are not supposed to have hairy legs.

MickyDolenz said:

Stymie said:

Yes there is. I expect children to lost their tempers and throw hissy fits but I expect grown ups to be able to discuss issues without lowering themselves to petty name-calling.

Unless this topic is going to be judged by record sales, everyone's thoughts on here are opinion.

I don't recall any name calling except the poster talking about race. Other than saying James Brown was more popular than Elvis in Africa, I made no comment about who's more popular, only about people saying that The Beatles & Elvis are not popular with kids and that Elvis was not popular with the R&B audience, which can be looked up, so it's not an opinion.

.

It is not a fact that adults and children are supposed to act a certain way. It's what people think because that is taught. That's why people make rules and laws to control behavior. Like in the US the drinking age is 21 and in some other places there is no age limit. So according to the US, drinking is an adult activity. If there were no rules & laws and there was anarchy, most people are going to do what they want. Society says women and men are supposed to act and look a certain way and if they don't, then they're wrong. There are people like the Wodaabe, in which the men wear makeup to attract women, but in most places it's the opposite. According to a lot of places, men wearing makeup are androgynous or drag queens and homosexual. Women are not supposed to have hairy legs.

I take my statement back about the petty namecalling but leave my statement about the disagreeing. You and I differ on what is "fact" on how adults are to act.

i think the black community is often discounted when subjects like an artist popularity comes up.

lowkey said:

i think the black community is often discounted when subjects like an artist popularity comes up.

I don't think race has anything to do with this topic.

"You gotta remember something, the minute I started breaking the all-time record in record sales—I broke Elvis’s records, I broke the Beatles’ records—the minute [they] became the all-time best selling albums in the history of the Guinness Book of World Records, overnight they called me a freak, they called me a homosexual, they called me a child molester, they said I tried to bleach my skin. They did everything to try to turn the public against me. This is all a complete conspiracy, you have to know that" - Michael Jackson

JoeBala said:

To me this is turning out to be who did what and who did this + throw in race and mess up this friendly thread. They were all popular period. There is no proof who is more popular + who cares just enjoy the MUSIC!

Threads like these always get derailed, so I still stanby of what I said earlier.

Militant said:

they called me a homosexual - Michael Jackson

Some people were saying this years before Thriller. There was a rumor in the mid-1970's that Mike was going to get a sex change and marry Clifton Davis the actor. There was a similar rumor about James Brown in the 1960s, that he was supposed to be marrying Bobby Byrd. Mike turned down a part in A Chrous Line in the late 1970s partly because of these rumors.

“If I do it, people will link me with the part. Because of my voice, some people already think I’m that way – homo. Though I’m actually not at all.” ~ MJ 1979

MickyDolenz said:

Militant said:

Some people were saying this years before Thriller. There was a rumor in the mid-1970's that Mike was going to get a sex change and marry Clifton Davis the actor. There was a similar rumor about James Brown in the 1960s, that he was supposed to be marrying Bobby Byrd. Mike turned down a part in A Chrous Line in the late 1970s partly because of these rumors.

“If I do it, people will link me with the part. Because of my voice, some people already think I’m that way – homo. Though I’m actually not at all.” ~ MJ 1979

How come Prince didn't get that treatment? The press sort of turn on Prince at the we are the world incident. But Prince was warned beforehand by his manager not to do what he did.

What I am about to say isn't actually easy for me because I am a huge MJ fan. But here goes... the issue with MJ blaming the press for his image is that he planted articles about himself in the tabloids about things like buying the Elephant Man bones and sleeping in hyperbaric chambers. He played the press better than maybe any other entertainer in history but then reacted in shock when it came back to bite him.

Like Elvis, MJ found himself in a world where he truly thought he could do what ever he wanted because those around him and the press let him. And like Elvis it led to ruin and tragedy.

As far as the press being unfair to him maybe someone should check how the press treated Elvis for most of his career. Sadly, they weren't really kind to him until he was steadfastly marching on the road to ruin via Las Vegas and over 1000 tour stops in the course of about years.

It seems to me that this discussion didn't really get childish until people showed up and started calling other people childish.

My students are currently writing essays about people from pop culture who changed the world and are fast learning that fame is a very complicated issue especially when you put it into the context of when and where it happens.

Bono did a poem that was discussed in a thread about year ago with the line "Elvis ate America ate him."

I think it is true for MJ as well.

Just in case anyone missed it, I have not once chimed in with an answer about who was most famous, and certainly have not spoken about any one artist in anyway that detracts from any other artist.

To me, that is when any of the threads at this forum break down when someone has to tear down one artist to prop up another. Let each artist stand on their own merits.

Nicely said kalelvisj. Like I said earlier when he did his charity work he tended to pat himself on the back and called press conferences to just about everything he did. I like others here dig MJ, but truth said he was basically his own Col Tom Parker. Sure Elvis and Beatles were no saints, but they never bragged. Spread the music in the end that's all that we have from these truly gifted artistS.

MickyDolenz said:

JoeBala said:

Nicely said kalelvisj. Like I said earlier when he did his charity work he tended to pat himself on the back and called press conferences to just about everything he did. I like others here dig MJ, but truth said he was basically his own Col Tom Parker. Sure Elvis and Beatles were no saints, but they never bragged. Spread the music in the end that's all that we have from these truly gifted artistS.

That is not true at all. He was actually the opposite.

***

I also think it is misinformed to compare the way he died to Elvis because they did not pass away the same way.

Lastly, I agree with the point that MJ issued those two stories himself (Elephant Man Bones/ Chamber) and it back fired. However, as far as the other controversies related to his sexual orientation, skin disorder, life style etc, etc and etc those things should not be blamed on HIM because he did not plant every single story that was made about him like some here are implying. Also, while I am not making an excuse for MJ for this, most celebrities plant stories (positive or negative) about themselves ALL THE TIME. So I do not understand why people are making it seem like MJ was/is the only celebrity that did that. Most of the negative press, gossip and controversies that were created by the media and tabloids about MJ were created out of jealousy and because the media wanted to see him fall. I do not think MJ was perfect either but I just think it is hilarious how this board always blames MJ for everything negative or bad that happened to him in his life. I don't see the point of this board discussing MJ related topics because they can not be objective when it comes to him.

mjscarousal said:

JoeBala said:

Nicely said kalelvisj. Like I said earlier when he did his charity work he tended to pat himself on the back and called press conferences to just about everything he did. I like others here dig MJ, but truth said he was basically his own Col Tom Parker. Sure Elvis and Beatles were no saints, but they never bragged. Spread the music in the end that's all that we have from these truly gifted artistS.

That is not true at all. He was actually the opposite.

***

I also think it is misinformed to compare the way he died to Elvis because they did not pass away the same way.

Lastly, I agree with the point that MJ issued those two stories himself (Elephant Man Bones/ Chamber) and it back fired. However, as far as the other controversies related to his sexual orientation, skin disorder, life style etc, etc and etc those things should not be blamed on HIM because he did not plant every single story that was made about him like some here are implying. Also, while I am not making an excuse for MJ for this, most celebrities plant stories (positive or negative) about themselves ALL THE TIME. So I do not understand why people are making it seem like MJ was/is the only celebrity that did that. Most of the negative press, gossip and controversies that were created by the media and tabloids about MJ were created out of jealousy and because the media wanted to see him fall. I do not think MJ was perfect either but I just think it is hilarious how this board always blames MJ for everything negative or bad that happened to him in his life. I don't see the point of this board discussing MJ related topics because they can not be objective when it comes to him.

The same can be said about (some of) his fans here.

I wan to clarify something about what I wrote about MJ and his relationship with the press. I don't think he is responsible for everything the press said to him but the early post had a quote of him saying race was the motivating factor in how the press treated him. It is that idea that I think is questionable. He fostered an image of weirdness in the press that went beyond the elephant man and hyperbaric chambers and then when some of the truths of his private life came out he said the only reason was his race. He couldn't own that even innoscent sleep overs with children were odd for a man his age.

As far as similarities about his Elvis' death, I think there are a lot more similarities than differences: excessive lifestyles, surrounded by aids and doctors who wouldn't say no, dying far too young and addicted to prescription drugs. With Elvis, if Dr Nick hadn't given him the meds he wanted he would have found someone who would, with Michael if Dr Murray didn't give him the drugs he wanted, he would have found someone who would.

But to put this at least a little back on topic, this thread is about fame and one thing is for sure their fame ultimately played a major role in killing Elvis and Michael. The members of the Beatles never had to carry the fame all "alone" and I think that helped them survive the time when their fame was most fervent.

Stymie said:

I'm amazed by the dumb shit argued about on the org. It's like watching a bunch of children.

By the way, popularity with the three of them depends on that artist's generation. So Joe Bala and kalelvisj were right. Other than that, it's just opinion.

kalelvisj said:

I wan to clarify something about what I wrote about MJ and his relationship with the press. I don't think he is responsible for everything the press said to him but the early post had a quote of him saying race was the motivating factor in how the press treated him. It is that idea that I think is questionable. He fostered an image of weirdness in the press that went beyond the elephant man and hyperbaric chambers and then when some of the truths of his private life came out he said the only reason was his race. He couldn't own that even innoscent sleep overs with children were odd for a man his age.

As far as similarities about his Elvis' death, I think there are a lot more similarities than differences: excessive lifestyles, surrounded by aids and doctors who wouldn't say no, dying far too young and addicted to prescription drugs. With Elvis, if Dr Nick hadn't given him the meds he wanted he would have found someone who would, with Michael if Dr Murray didn't give him the drugs he wanted, he would have found someone who would.

But to put this at least a little back on topic, this thread is about fame and one thing is for sure their fame ultimately played a major role in killing Elvis and Michael. The members of the Beatles never had to carry the fame all "alone" and I think that helped them survive the time when their fame was most fervent.

This is all subjective and you are pushing your own perspectives and opinions on who you think he was as a "person". You are still indirectly blaming him for the way the media treated him and not taking into consideration the childhood he had, the way his father treated him, the way he felt about himself, he performed since he was 5... so it would be easy to say "HE fostered all those things" instead of looking at it from his perspective. ONCE AGAIN, it is already proven MJ did plant some stories himself. However, blaming him for how the media treated him and everything that happened to him is not fair either.

Maybe from HIS perspective he did not see anything wrong with sleeping with the children he was helping. I know that still does not make it ethical...... but it is not good to be judgemental either especially if he never had a childhood and was obviously trying to compensate for it.

There is nothing similiar between the deaths of MJ and Elvis and I will just leave it at that.

Stymie said:

lowkey said:

i think the black community is often discounted when subjects like an artist popularity comes up.

I don't think race has anything to do with this topic.

ummm, except that there are black ppl in the world and as i stated in response to the OP, blk ppl (en masse) were not/are not checking for The Beatles or Elvis. yes all were popular, lots of geographical and generational barriers, but i again, say worldwide, its gonna be Mike.

mjscarousal said:

kalelvisj said:

I wan to clarify something about what I wrote about MJ and his relationship with the press. I don't think he is responsible for everything the press said to him but the early post had a quote of him saying race was the motivating factor in how the press treated him. It is that idea that I think is questionable. He fostered an image of weirdness in the press that went beyond the elephant man and hyperbaric chambers and then when some of the truths of his private life came out he said the only reason was his race. He couldn't own that even innoscent sleep overs with children were odd for a man his age.

As far as similarities about his Elvis' death, I think there are a lot more similarities than differences: excessive lifestyles, surrounded by aids and doctors who wouldn't say no, dying far too young and addicted to prescription drugs. With Elvis, if Dr Nick hadn't given him the meds he wanted he would have found someone who would, with Michael if Dr Murray didn't give him the drugs he wanted, he would have found someone who would.

But to put this at least a little back on topic, this thread is about fame and one thing is for sure their fame ultimately played a major role in killing Elvis and Michael. The members of the Beatles never had to carry the fame all "alone" and I think that helped them survive the time when their fame was most fervent.

This is all subjective and you are pushing your own perspectives and opinions on who you think he was as a "person". You are still indirectly blaming him for the way the media treated him and not taking into consideration the childhood he had, the way his father treated him, the way he felt about himself, he performed since he was 5... so it would be easy to say "HE fostered all those things" instead of looking at it from his perspective. ONCE AGAIN, it is already proven MJ did plant some stories himself. However, blaming him for how the media treated him and everything that happened to him is not fair either.

Maybe from HIS perspective he did not see anything wrong with sleeping with the children he was helping. I know that still does not make it ethical...... but it is not good to be judgemental either especially if he never had a childhood and was obviously trying to compensate for it.

There is nothing similiar between the deaths of MJ and Elvis and I will just leave it at that.

I certainly don't have any ill will towards Michael Jackson and have always been a huge fan and I never said the way the press treated him was fair, I just said that he was an expert at using the press in his favor but when his personal life came under the microscopre the weird image he had fostered bit him in the ass. Like many people on this board, Michael's music is a huge part of my life.

Still, that said, when you strive to become the most famous person in the world and play the press the way Michael did, you risk a backlash. I am not saying he deserved it but it is the nature of the beast.

As far as there being no similarities between the death of Elvis and Michael, we will have to agree to disagree but I am curious about which similarity that I point out in their deaths you find no comparison in because I don't think there is anything inaccurate in what I detailed that isn't pretty much a matter or record with both.

datdude said:

Stymie said:

I don't think race has anything to do with this topic.

ummm, except that there are black ppl in the world and as i stated in response to the OP, blk ppl (en masse) were not/are not checking for The Beatles or Elvis. yes all were popular, lots of geographical and generational barriers, but i again, say worldwide, its gonna be Mike.

Except that I know people of all race and religious backgrounds that like Elvis and the Beatles. And more importantly, when they were new on the scene (especially true for Elvis) the black audience of the time really embraced them. One only needs to look at the charts from the 50's to gauge Elvis' popularity with the African American audience.

As far as the current audience, it might be true, but I think many of the same people (regardless of race) who wouldn't like Elvis or the Beatles might not like other musicians from that time regardless of the artists race. I think it might be more a generational issue than a race issue. For instance, Certainly, when I bring up key figures from the 50's I get the same blank looks back from my college students whether I am mentioning Elvis or Chuck Berry or Little Richard or Jerry Lee Lewis.

kalelvisj said:

I certainly don't have any ill will towards Michael Jackson and have always been a huge fan and I never said the way the press treated him was fair, I just said that he was an expert at using the press in his favor but when his personal life came under the microscopre the weird image he had fostered bit him in the ass. Like many people on this board, Michael's music is a huge part of my life.

I never once denied the stories that people insisted he planted himself. However, your last post seemed really judgemental. Alot of the way he acted and his interests was how he sincerely was as a person and not because he was trying to manipulate an image for EVERYTHING he did.

For instance in your last post, you insisted that HE should have known the backlash he would have received by openingly insisting that he sleeps in the bed with children. You implied that was something that he brought on his self. That was judgemental because maybe to HIM he might not have thought there was nothing wrong with that based on HIS experiences. It is easy for YOU to say what he should or should not have known based on YOUR experiences.

You have a right to your opinion but just don't be jugemental. It is clear you think MJ manipulated the press in everything he did and was. I disagree with that. I recognize that he did to an extent but I am not going to sit up here and insist that his entire image and behavior was manipulated in EVERYTHING he did.

Still, that said, when you strive to become the most famous person in the world and play the press the way Michael did, you risk a backlash. I am not saying he deserved it but it is the nature of the beast.

You're doing it again lol. I don't think he strived to be "the most famous". I think he strived to be the "greatest entertainer" in the world.

As far as there being no similarities between the death of Elvis and Michael, we will have to agree to disagree but I am curious about which similarity that I point out in their deaths you find no comparison in because I don't think there is anything inaccurate in what I detailed that isn't pretty much a matter or record with both.

Which is why I said I will leave it at that because I do not feel like going back in forth on that topic. If you think they are similiar, so be it. I don't. There is nothing similiar about the way they passed away and I would advised you to research your information instead of relying on your own assumptions, gossip or propaganda.

mjscarousal said:

kalelvisj said:

I certainly don't have any ill will towards Michael Jackson and have always been a huge fan and I never said the way the press treated him was fair, I just said that he was an expert at using the press in his favor but when his personal life came under the microscopre the weird image he had fostered bit him in the ass. Like many people on this board, Michael's music is a huge part of my life.

I never once denied the stories that people insisted he planted himself. However, your last post seemed really judgemental. Alot of the way he acted and his interests was how he sincerely was as a person and not because he was trying to manipulate an image for EVERYTHING he did.

For instance in your last post, you insisted that HE should have known the backlash he would have received by openingly insisting that he sleeps in the bed with children. You implied that was something that he brought on his self. That was judgemental because maybe to HIM he might not have thought there was nothing wrong with that based on HIS experiences. It is easy for YOU to say what he should or should not have known based on YOUR experiences.

You have a right to your opinion but just don't be jugemental. It is clear you think MJ manipulated the press in everything he did and was. I disagree with that. I recognize that he did to an extent but I am not going to sit up here and insist that his entire image and behavior was manipulated in EVERYTHING he did.

You're doing it again lol. I don't think he strived to be "the most famous". I think he strived to be the "greatest entertainer" in the world.

As far as there being no similarities between the death of Elvis and Michael, we will have to agree to disagree but I am curious about which similarity that I point out in their deaths you find no comparison in because I don't think there is anything inaccurate in what I detailed that isn't pretty much a matter or record with both.

Which is why I said I will leave it at that because I do not feel like going back in forth on that topic. If you think they are similiar, so be it. I don't. There is nothing similiar about the way they passed away and I would advised you to research your information instead of relying on your own assumptions, gossip or propaganda.

Fair enough but I never said he manipulated the press in everything he did, just that he played the press like few people before him (if any) and that he played a role in the image the press and general public had of him. I think you are reading some "absolutes' into what I am writing that are not intended I think you are also reading in some negative judgement of MJ that I do not have.

He was a wonderful, complicated person who was deeply shaped by his early fame and family life. His death was a tragedy and the truth of tragedy is that the hubris of the person always plays a role in their own fate.

As far as me relying on gossip or propaganda, I didn't. I spend a lot of time researching topics before I post (except for the name your favorite songs type threads). There are countless interviews with people who were close to Michael that talk about his deep rooted ambition to be more than a great entertainer but to also be the biggest thing ever and he achieved it. All I have been saying is that he achieved it at a very high and tragic cost.

On a side note, I love the Sly Stone quote.

I think Michael had more popularity than the Beatles or Elvis. I have researched the careers of these artists and Michael embodied more MASS appeal than either the Beatles or Elvis. There is no other artist in HISTORY who has had the overall COMPLETE appeal and popularity as Michael did or CONTINUES to have. Michael appealed to EVERY demographic, ethnic group,race, and age group on a GLOBAL scale. I have read some post in this thread that the Beatles and Elvis had some hits on the R&B charts. That is true. However, NEITHER had the COMPLETE success that Michael did on basicalyl ALL charts, g in a huge way.

I also see that some are bringing up things about Michael that have NOTHING to do with his popularity. Even with all of the stuff thrown on Michael by the media, his POPULARITY never really waivered. I have never seen the type of MEDIA manipulation and conspiracy to bring ANY artist down, and that includes Elvis and the Beatles, as I witnessed with Michael. The media and OTHERS did everything in their power to diminish Michael's accomplishments AND power and he still remained popular.

Michael's popularity was even more evident before his murder. This man had no new album or single to promote and was still constantly maligned by gosssip, innuendo and false rumors. However, he still SOLD OUT 50 shows in one city. Let's be honest, I don't know of any artist who could or has done this. I have no doubt that he would have sold out ALL OVER THE WORLD if he had not been murdered. That's just how great his popularity was.

FTR, for those who posted that Michael bragged and called press conferences for every humanitarian causes he did, that is NOT TRUE. Of course, Michael promoted some of his cause, just like EVERY OTHER artist does. However, the media reported on a LOT of these things and there were NO PRESS CONFERENCES called by Michael. What I find interesting is that the people who said that Michael bragged on his philantrophy and humanitarism have no idea that there are amny, MANY things that Michael supported and gave his money to that he didn't make public. Another thing is that Michael did NOT plant all of the rumors about him in the press. I remember reading that he had it out with Frank Dileo about some of the rumors that Frank planted in the media( ELephant Man's bones, hyberbaric chamber, etc.) Btw, I am not sayimg that Michael didn't use the media to his advantage. Of course, that is not exclusive to Michael, EVERY artist uses the media to promote. However, that did not give the media a reason to totally manipulate and lie as they did when he was alive. I have been around for a awhile and I KNOW that the media has never done ANYONE as they did Michael.

I really should not address this other crap, but I can't sit silently by and let others post things that are not true. When Michael was murdered, the coroner's report said that there were NO DRUGS found in Michael's body, EXCEPT what the murderer, Conrad Murray, INJECTED into him. I don't know about any of you, the ones who want so badly for Michael to be an "addict";however, I don't know of any real "addict" who doesn't have drugs in his/her system. Elvis had drugs in his system, so did Whtney and other famous celebrites who died from drugs. I guess a coroner's report can be accepted for everyone ELSE, just not Michael Jackson. Of course, this is the way it was with EVERYTHING that he had to go through. Accept the bullcrap from rumors and innuendo, but don't accept the FACTS. Btw, the medications that were found in Michael's medicine cabinet, were almost full. Most had only a few tablets used from the bottles. Hell, if anyone came into a lot of our homes and saw medicine bottle, would we be considered "addicts" just because we were taking medications for medical reasons. I still haven't seen any proof of these "addict" stories when these medications weren't found in his system. All it takes is a little COMMON SENSE. Conrad Murray was giving Michael Propofol for insomnia, not to get high. Michael trusted a HEART doctor to put him to sleep, and that so-called doctor didn't know what the fuck he was doing. You can bet your life that IF Murray had been honest and told Michael that he didn't know what he was doing, Michael would not have entrusted his life to this CARDIOLOGIST. I want to emphasize CARDIOLOGIST, because thought that this type of doctor would be the one to trust with his LIFE. Notice that he didn't use a General Practioner. These are just some of the things that SOME people want to conveniently ignore.

Finally, I am going to reiterate my position that I think that Michael was/is more popular than either the Beatles or Elvis, because his popularity basically lasted from the time that he was a CHILD and that popularity increased to a staggering proportion that no one else in the history of music has done before or since. While Michael was alive, that popularity had lasted an amazing 40+ years and would have continued. This popularity was still ongoing, even with no new album or singles. Michael's music and catalogue was still OUTSELLING his contemporaries and even some of the current stars. Michael's death only intensified and increased that popularity. I think that his popularity and influence will continue for many years to come; because SADLY the media had to wait until he died in order to focus on his brillant works of musci, instead of the tabloid crap.

SORRY ABOUT THE FORMAT. IT DIDN'T LOOK THIS WAY WHEN I TYPED IT!!

[Edited 3/29/14 9:47am]

[Edited 3/29/14 9:50am]

[Edited 3/29/14 10:39am]