Latest on MJJC

Question about Leaving Neverland

Victorious

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2022
Messages
1,031
Points
113
Now that it is evident it was a one-sided hit piece, isn't it time for journalist organizations to take back the awards it received and label it as non-journalism..? Regardless of MJ I mean, for the sake of real journalism and the credibility of documentaries in general?
 
Victorious said:
Now that it is evident it was a one-sided hit piece, isn't it time for journalist organizations to take back the awards it received and label it as non-journalism..? Regardless of MJ I mean, for the sake of real journalism and the credibility of documentaries in general?
Click to expand...
British film director Dan Reed provided an explanation as to why his 'Leaving Neverland' documentary should not be viewed as an one-sided documentary:

"Had Michael Jackson been alive, I would have of course sought to interview him, and had he given me one, I would have included it in the program. There's no doubt about that. But sadly he's dead, and I say sadly because I would have loved to have seen him brought to justice and taken to court. I included at some length [Michael] Jackson's protestations of innocence at the time of previous allegations, I included his lawyers' rebuttals of allegations, in multiple places in the ['Leaving Neverland'] documentary. Also, when Wade [Robson] came out with his charges in 2013, I included the reactions of fans, Michael's former lawyers commenting on Wade's new allegations, so the Jackson camp is well-represented in their rebuttals and denials" (Dan Reed, Awards Daily Interview, 2019)
 
mj_frenzy said:
British film director Dan Reed provided an explanation as to why his 'Leaving Neverland' documentary should not be viewed as an one-sided documentary:

"Had Michael Jackson been alive, I would have of course sought to interview him, and had he given me one, I would have included it in the program. There's no doubt about that. But sadly he's dead, and I say sadly because I would have loved to have seen him brought to justice and taken to court. I included at some length [Michael] Jackson's protestations of innocence at the time of previous allegations, I included his lawyers' rebuttals of allegations, in multiple places in the ['Leaving Neverland'] documentary. Also, when Wade [Robson] came out with his charges in 2013, I included the reactions of fans, Michael's former lawyers commenting on Wade's new allegations, so the Jackson camp is well-represented in their rebuttals and denials" (Dan Reed, Awards Daily Interview, 2019)
Click to expand...
He says a lot but the Jackson camp is very much not well-represented in comparison, so the media should take it's responsibility and dismiss it's journalistic worth
 
Galactus123 said:
I'm pretty sure a lot (if not most viewers) don't view it as that sadly.
Click to expand...
No but I am not talking about viewers. I am talking about the journalistic organizations; they should make up for their mistakes (and brand it one-sided)
 
Galactus123 said:
Most might believe the documentary too.
Click to expand...
They can privately believe what they want but journalists are supposed to be objective and critical about their line of work and their colleagues: imo it's time for the industry associations to label LN as one-sided and therefore reclaim any 'documentary' awards, for the sake of journalism.

Progressive insight by the media was also possible concerning Britney Spears

I have spoken :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top