Randall Sullivan's book "Untouchable"

[HIStory]

Has Randall "cry babe" Sullivan got NYT in his speed dial



For Michael Jackson Bio, Trying to Even the Score
By DAVID STREITFELD


People voiced their displeasure with “Untouchable: The Strange Life and Tragic Death of Michael Jackson” and its author, Randall Sullivan, with one-star reviews on Amazon.
When Randall Sullivan published his biography of Michael Jackson in November, he said he thought the singer was innocent of child molesting but he could not be absolutely positive. He said that after surgeries and more surgeries, little was left of Mr. Jackson’s nose besides his nostrils. He argued that despite two marriages, Mr. Jackson was probably a virgin when he died.

None of this went over well with Mr. Jackson’s fans, who voiced their displeasure with attacks on “Untouchable: The Strange Life and Tragic Death of Michael Jackson” and its author, a longtime contributor to Rolling Stone. Their primary weapon: one-star reviews on Amazon.

Since my article about their campaign appeared in The New York Times on Monday, dozens of people who were apparently outraged by what they saw the fans doing went to Amazon and wrote five-star reviews as a sort of riposte. There are now 142 five-star reviews, up from two dozen a few weeks ago, and 132 one-star reviews, up from about 100.

But the battle is merely joined. After the article appeared, Michael Jackson’s Rapid Response Team to Media Attacks asked via Twitter that people continue to post comments on Amazon. Many of the newly posted positive reviews have critical comments.

The positive reviews are no more believable in their praise than the negative reviews were in their criticism. By this point, the truth about the value of “Untouchable” — not to mention the truth about Mr. Jackson’s virginity and nose — is buried underneath all these competing claims, which must count as a victory for the book’s opponents. As a result, don’t be surprised if “star bombing,” as it’s been called, keeps on happening.

Amazon has tried to make reviewers more accountable by adding several tools where people can evaluate reviews. But this incident proved that those tools are open to their own manipulation. Take, for instance, an excerpt from this review: “Randall Sullivan is fake, my uncle best friend use to work for the Rolling Stones company and known Randy and the jacksons for years, He use people and lie to them to get ahead and he is not born again.”

That is not a review, that is semi-coherent slander. But Amazon, which said it reviewed all the reviews of “Untouchable,” did not see anything wrong with it, and 53 Jackson fans voted it a “helpful” review, which in theory pushed it to a more prominent position on the page. Apply those votes to dozens of critical reviews and it’s relatively simple for a handful of people to create an apparently massive surge of disapproval.
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/25/for-michael-jackson-bio-evening-the-score/

Just another lame attempt to keep the book in the headlines. They won't be able to write too many articles about it before their readers get bored of the topic...

 

[la_cienega]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

Was it just posted or has it been up for hours already?

I'm incredibly confused as to how this is a story. This kind of thing happens in many book sections.

I was curious about Pippa Middleton's book because it had been slated in the press, and the review section has people upset with the monarchy leaving reviews - I mean, this is the kind of thing that goes on everywhere. Why are MJ fans being singled out all of a sudden? Why is this man so determined to make this book work?

He clearly seems really emotionally invested in trying to get this book supported by people. Why? This isn't journalism, it's advertising.

 

[HIStory]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

The article's date is today. I agree, this happens many times on Amazon, so why to single out this book and MJ fans? Aren't there enough problems in the world for the NY Times to report about? Well, the question was rethoric. I think we all suspect the answer.

I can imagine he's also financially invested, not just emotionally. He worked on this book for three years. He's got a massive media campaign behind him. Even with connections the campaign was probably not cheap. But yeah, also emotionally. He's had a couple of books already but maybe expected this to be his big break. Well, fail. He better goes back to report about "miracles".

 

[la_cienega]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

But why is this journalist so bothered on his behalf?

Just hatred for MJ and his fans?

That's what a lot of this seems to be - that MJ fans need to be "told."

But I could also believe there is a connection between this journalist and Sullivan, or Grove Press. Because he sounds angry on Sullivan's half, and that doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[HIStory]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

But why is this journalist so bothered on his behalf?

Just hatred for MJ and his fans?

That's what a lot of this seems to be - that MJ fans need to be "told."

But I could also believe there is a connection between this journalist and Sullivan, or Grove Press. Because he sounds angry on Sullivan's half, and that doesn't make any sense to me.

Yes, I think he probably has some kind of connection with Sullivan.

 

[Bubs]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

+ he has written about fake reviews earlier. Just a 1 sample: http://www.reputation-communication...line-consumer-reviews-attract-f-t-c-scrutiny/

He seems to be some sort of book reporter, so it is either personal interest from his side, or he might be friend with Cry Babe Sullivan.

 

[jamba]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

+ he has written about fake reviews earlier. Just a 1 sample: http://www.reputation-communication...line-consumer-reviews-attract-f-t-c-scrutiny/

He seems to be some sort of book reporter, so it is either personal interest from his side, or he might be friend with Cry Babe Sullivan.

"Cry Babe Sullivan." I LOVE it!!! Maybe we should send him a hankie. And a message:" This is for you, dear wittle Randy. Don't let those mean MJ fans hurt your sensitive feelings. Now Mommy will make you a nice martini and read a chapter from your book outloud."

 

[la_cienega]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

"Cry Babe Sullivan." I LOVE it!!! Maybe we should send him a hankie. And a message:" This is for you, dear wittle Randy. Don't let those mean MJ fans hurt your sensitive feelings. Now Mommie will make you a nice martini and read a chapter from your book outloud. Nightie night."

He would send that off to the police and claim it was a death threat.

 

[jamba]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

He would send that off to the police and claim it was a death threat.

True LOL. --or maybe he would contact more media friends to defend him against those big bad wolves, the MJ fans. "Are you threatened yet?"

 

[jamba]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

There are some good comments on the Telegraph article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...ets-should-look-at-the-man-in-the-mirror.html

Re Streitfeld, yes, when he says he want to 'even the score'--that's not the purpose of a review site. First, he lumps all negative reviews into one basket, then he unleashes hateful comments defending Cry Babe, and he has NO PROBLEM WITH THAT?????? He is INSANE.

 

[Bubs]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

To be honest, I don't see David Streitfeld's latest piece to be attack on fans. I see it as an observation of his side, of what is going on and he is not writing badly neither Michael nor his fans.
I think more likely he has issues as to how Amazon review thingy works thus the daily updates
I checked his other pieces what he has written, and I was in the middle of this piece "On Amazon, Cooking Up Friendly Reviews"
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/author/david-streitfeld/ , when NYT decided I have used my 10 free visits in their site so I couldn't finish it. But by looking at what he has written previously, it doesn't seem that he is hell bent over Randall "Cry Babe" Sullivan's bad reviews, he might be more upset that Amazon review is not fair and can be used by people with ulterior motives, such as fans and author paying people to write positive reviews.

I'n not totally sure that DS is good guy and non-biased, and it is totally possible that Cry Babe's team sent him a "voucher", if he writes something BOUT "do-not-touch-this-book".

 

[MIST]

I´m afraid that the book gets to much attention now and more people will buy it.

 

[Bubs]

I´m afraid that the book gets to much attention now and more people will buy it.

Ask some of you friends that are not MJ fans are they going to buy it.
I'm 100% sure they say: "No I'm not going to buy it", or they say: "what are you talking about, Sullivan who and what book?"

 

[HIStory]

I´m afraid that the book gets to much attention now and more people will buy it.

Don't worry, despite of all the efforts of Sullivan's marketing team it's not selling well.

 

[marebear]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

This book is a flop. I think it's pathetic how hard they are trying to sell this book. It's not the new york best seller he was hoping for. This should be a lesson to anyone else thinking about writing a crappy book about Michael. The fans won't support it. Michael is gone and it was bad enough the crap he had to deal with and the crap that was said about him when he was here. I won't stand for it anymore. I think Jermaine's book probably did better than this guy. Here is a newsflash to these "journalists", write about Michael in a respectful and fair way and then maybe fans will be interested. Otherwise shut the hell up.

 

[jamba]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

To be honest, I don't see David Streitfeld's latest piece to be attack on fans. I see it as an observation of his side, of what is going on and he is not writing badly neither Michael nor his fans.
I think more likely he has issues as to how Amazon review thingy works thus the daily updates
I checked his other pieces what he has written, and I was in the middle of this piece "On Amazon, Cooking Up Friendly Reviews"
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/author/david-streitfeld/ , when NYT decided I have used my 10 free visits in their site so I couldn't finish it. But by looking at what he has written previously, it doesn't seem that he is hell bent over Randall "Cry Babe" Sullivan's bad reviews, he might be more upset that Amazon review is not fair and can be used by people with ulterior motives, such as fans and author paying people to write positive reviews.

I'n not totally sure that DS is good guy and non-biased, and it is totally possible that Cry Babe's team sent him a "voucher", if he writes something BOUT "do-not-touch-this-book".

Bubs, I really disagree with you that he is not singling out MJ fans to criticize--does he quote from any of the ridiculous 5 star reviews that are abusive to fans and MJ and that state openly they haven't read the book? No, he thinks what they're doing is ok, it is even good, b/c they are evening the score. He quotes from negative reviews to show how they are not fair, but doesn't do the same for the 5 star ones. He IS picking on MJ fans. And look at the result.

Here is what a recent reviewer says: "Any one or two star review are from fans who hold MJ up as some sort of messiah, and can't bear to hear anything remotely negative and possibly true." This what S. is setting up in people's heads--that all negative reviews are the result of crazed fans worshipping their messiah. BS!

That's how I see it anyway.

 

[la_cienega]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

I recommend fans "thank" this review:

http://www.amazon.com/review/R2H0Y36J072SDE/ref=cm_cr_pr_viewpnt#R2H0Y36J072SDE

 

[Snow White luvs Peter Pan]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

What you told me about Deborah being passive-aggressive, I discovered it myself today. She's supposedly all nice, polite but she can be nastier. This status of her is where it bagan the problem...

I know that some people continue to leave this page and that's okay. It seems the more I try to put truth out there, the more people become upset. But I am not here to please anyone. Just to honor God with what I am doing, and to let the truth shine out about Michael. As I shared with all of you previously I felt this page had accomplished it's purpose quite a while ago and I took it down. I only brought it back up to share what Mr. Mesereau at the time asked me to share with the fan base, and to then try to take on the task of bringing clarity to the very ugly situations going on. But things just seem to get more and more out of control and it's like trying to fight a losing battle. So at the end of the day today, I will remove this page and it will not be brought up again until the interviews take place, which will include a very important interview with David Nordahl.

Me: "Probably many fans are leaving the page because they aren't happy you're promoting that book by reintroducing it all over again. I thought the multiple reviews on amazon were enough to all of us to realize how worthless it is. Why would I or other people waste the time to read a book full of lies? How could fans give attention to Sullivan knowing he wrote innuendos Michael isn't innocent of that crime? That's why many of us aren't happy."

DK: "Annabel, I understand fans not being happy with the book. Please understand that I am NOT promoting the book! Not in any way, shape or form. Personally, I don't like the book so far. But as I have stated, the fans ASKED me to do the interview with Sullivan so they could ask their questions directly. If they want to leave the page on those grounds, then that is up to each person. Mr. Mesereau supports this book and it was Mr. Mesereau who asked me to share his own personal thoughts about the situation with the fans (these were not my thoughts, but Mr. Mesereau's). I am reading the book because I felt it necessary to know the truth about what is in it by reading it myself if I was to interview the author and Mr. Mesereau as fans requested, and so far there are things I DO NOT like and I can see why fans are upset. I am trying to bring clarity to this situation. I did not ask for this. I was contacted about it first by Mr. Mesereau to share his thoughts with the fan base on what he felt was a campaign against the book. Then I was contacted and asked to do an interview with the author and I asked fans if they wanted this interview and would want to ask questions of him directly as many fans stated they wish they could confront him directly. Then fans asked me to interview Mr. Mesereau as well. I contacted Mr. Nordahl to ask him to do an interview because I felt he could bring further truth and clarity to all of this. I am not sure how I can get anyone to understand this. I have explained this several times." (However, I received an inbox from a fan Deborah blocked telling me NO ONE ASK HER TO DO THE INTERVIEWS, NOR READING THE BOOK, SHE APPOINTED HERSELF because she needs the attention.)
Me: "Ok, you're not promoting the book but you'll give him a platform to justify himself. I don't get why some fans ask you to interview him, I think it's a waste of time unless you ask him where the hell all those bunch of lies came from. About the reviews I'm referring to the Katrina or similar ones on amazon which were quite helpful to realize that book is a complete waste of time and money." (I didn't know what the girl told me at that moment)

DK: "Annabel, how do you know what is going to be in my interview and how I am going to conduct it? This is what gets tiring. Everybody assumes that this or that will happen before I have even gone forward with it. My interviews have always been professional. Why don't all of you who want to spend time continually assuming and complaining and bitching about this go ahead and take all of this burden that has been placed on me and do it yourselves. Create your own sites, seek your own truth and put up with all of the crap and lies and assumptions I have for the past 4 years and see how you like it. I'm sorry, I don't mean to sound nasty, but I am tired of the assumptions." Even though she "didn't mean" to sound nasty, she was indeed.

Me: "You should had started what you're doing in November when that crap book was just out. Doing it right now is reintroducing it all over again and it's misdated and it looks like platform to RS."

DK: "Annabel, I already stated what I was going to do....about several HUNDRED times! I don't know if you have not been on this page or what, but I have stated the whole story as soon as Mr. Mesereau contacted me about this in Nov/Dec. I don't know how you missed it. Again, the problem here is, you are making assumptions without fact. I have already done that and what has been shared here recently is due to other things going on that are all tied into this."

Me: "I NEVER USED "MUST" in my previous comment. I didn't tell you want to do."

DK: "Annabel, I'm done with talking with you about this ? You are missing the point entirely."

Then one of her sheep began to attack telling me I should be greatful to Debbie for seeking the truth for Michael, that I should be ashamed of myself for bashing her (when did I bash her) and spreading my venom. I tried to post the link instead but I'm using my iPod, when I paste it, it didn't appear what it should appear...

Before she blocks me, I decided to expose her because she'll use me as one of her examples of "crazy, angry fans" who are mad at her for "seeking the truth".

 

[PaceMioDolceCuore]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

It's very simple. Everyone can do as they please. Just as anyone of us who publicly put something out there will need to live with the echo. Any author, any blogger, everyone.

To expect everyone to hail you for everything you put out there is frankly way too much to ask and unrealistic.

You need to follow your own conscience, integrity and do what you consider to be the right thing. Getting defensive isn't gonna get you anywhere.
What you put out there will have an echo. Actions have reactions and nobody is asking anyone to martyr themselves, period. Martyr yourself on your own account.

Remember the Oprah interview? It took all that he had in him to not start crying when saying that he has dignity and pride about who he is. (concerning the vitiligo) That tells me absolutely everything I need to know about defamatory actions and words. Treat others as you would like to be treated yourself and if somebody defames you, tells horrible lies about you - what you want your friends to sit there say, well, my friend, lemme see. Let me ask another friend of yours if you xyz.
Please. Common sense and your heart should already dictate you what to do and what not to do. So simple.

Taking responsibility for your own actions is something we all have to do. You really can't break it down any further.
But I am absolutely not okay when disagreements on something being ethical are being turned into personal martyrdom and a stance of 'your disagreeing is hindering my mission to get the truth out.' Michael needs neither pity, not martyrs in his name. Just a bunch of people who actually live out what they consider Michael to stand for.

 

[Memefan]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

I recommend fans "thank" this review:

http://www.amazon.com/review/R2H0Y36J072SDE/ref=cm_cr_pr_viewpnt#R2H0Y36J072SDE

I couldn't bring myself to thank this review, because it promotes Cascio's hit job. IMO, Cascio isn't better than Sullivan just because he wrote ?mJ wasn't a pedophile. They are both leeches trying to make money ff MJ's death....so I'll pass on this one.

 

[jamba]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

I'd like to say that Streitfeld is upset Amazon didn't remove that comment about the guy's uncle etc., but he doesn't complain that people are using the most HATEFUL words against Michael in particular and the fans. The references to the accusations are all over, including one person claiming with certainty that Michael was "a child ra. . . t." I hate to bring it up b/c it is hurtful to hear these words (sorry) but let's be real about what Amazon is not doing to clean up offensive reviews. Streitfeld calls the uncle comment semi-slander but says NOT A SINGLE WORD about these horrible attacks on MJ and his fans by the very bogus reviews he instigated. I hate him to death. And the NYT and Amazon too. And Sullivan.Ok I'll stop.

 

[ivy]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

My interviews have always been professional. Why don't all of you who want to spend time continually assuming and complaining and bitching about this go ahead and take all of this burden that has been placed on me and do it yourselves. Create your own sites, seek your own truth and put up with all of the crap and lies and assumptions I have for the past 4 years and see how you like it.

see this is the part that I have a major problem with. No one put a gun to her head to open a page and to maintain it, no one forced her to do the interviews. It's quite idiotic to complain about a "burden" that she voluntarily put herself into.

For example during the Murray trial many people volunteered to translate the testimony. Was it a burden? Yes it was but you didn't see any of them to complain about the burden or try to get people thankful to them. They undertook the burden because they wanted to do it. and they braved through it without complaints or the need for thank you's.

Also a lot of people have done a lot of things in the name of Michael. There are a lot of websites, fan groups , bloggers, individuals who spend their time, effort and money in attempts for Michael legacy. A lot of them do receive hate too. So she is not that special - not that she can realize it.

Honestly I would prefer for her to do whatever she's going to do without this much complaining and never ending "I'm closing my group / I'm leaving" "oh wait I'm back" circle. Or if it is that much "burdensome" she can close it for good and call it a day. It's highly annoying.

In other words : if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen

 

[Snow White luvs Peter Pan]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

It seems she does all those rants to get more attention for her and her pages. I quoted exactly what she told me and what I told her, I didn't change a word yet she told in her last post she was receiving disrespectful comments for the interviews, she offered herself to do such things and like ivy said no one is putting a gun in her mouth to do it. Does stating valid criticisms made me disrespectful or nasty? I don't think I insulted her. She has lost for me the credibility she had by doing these rants...

 

[HIStory]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

I'd like to say that Streitfeld is upset Amazon didn't remove that comment about the guy's uncle etc., but he doesn't complain that people are using the most HATEFUL words against Michael in particular and the fans. The references to the accusations are all over, including one person claiming with certainty that Michael was "a child ra. . . t." I hate to bring it up b/c it is hurtful to hear these words (sorry) but let's be real about what Amazon is not doing to clean up offensive reviews. Streitfeld calls the uncle comment semi-slander but says NOT A SINGLE WORD about these horrible attacks on MJ and his fans by the very bogus reviews he instigated. I hate him to death. And the NYT and Amazon too. And Sullivan.Ok I'll stop.

Not only many of the Sullivan supporting "reviews" are slanderous to Michael but also Sullivan's book. But the media was always OK with the slander of Michael. They immediately start to whine though when they are given a taste of their own medicine just a little bit.

 

[Bubs]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

^^^ I was thinking about that yesterday.
I wonder how Randall "Cry Babe" Sullivan feels now?
Michael was bullied and ridiculed in the media at least 20 years of his life by people like him. All sort of thing was written about him, his work was disregarded as failure (after Thriller), and his personal life was put under the microscope and twisted. Now Cry Babe is receiving tiny of the same medicine than Michael did, and what happens? This gossipmonger starts crying wolf, he can dish it out but he can't take it.

 

[Bubs]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

Btw, Ivy posted a new post here http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...EG-Trial-date-delayed-to-April-2-2013/page230 post 3440

Didn't Cry babe claim something that he got some info from coroner to support his nose claim?
If Katherine & co didn't get anything from coroner, there is no chance cry babe could have gotten any medical info regarding Michael from coroner.

 

[Bubs]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

Joe Vogel (@JoeVogel1)
Posted Friday 25th January 2013 from Twitlonger

I didn't review Sullivan's book for Amazon, but here's what I wrote in email to someone who asked me about it:

I read all 700-something pages of the Sullivan book. It had some interesting parts and actually covered the 2005 trial quite well (thanks in large part to Mesereau). But overall, it's not a very good book and offers little new insight on MJ. As far as bios go, I think Taraborrelli's is actually much better. I don't know why Sullivan didn't just stick to the final four years (instead he tries to make it a comprehensive life story by flashing back to earlier moments in MJ's career that have been covered before and better). He didn't scrutinize his sources at all. Some are good, some are terrible. In terms of his personal interviews, he relied heavily on unreliable figures. I also got the sense that Sullivan really dislikes and distrusts black people. You'll have to tell me what you think when you read it. But he is very harsh on MJ's family and civil rights leaders like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. He basically dismisses MJ's entire creative output after Thriller with a few sentences. It doesn't appear that he conducted one interview with MJ's creative collaborators. As you note, the nose stuff is ridiculous. The book does give some sense of the foul dust swirling around MJ in those final years and how abandoned he felt. But overall, it doesn't really penetrate much beyond superficialities and amateur pathologizing.

 

[HIStory]

Joe Vogel (@JoeVogel1)
Posted Friday 25th January 2013 from Twitlonger

I didn't review Sullivan's book for Amazon, but here's what I wrote in email to someone who asked me about it:

I read all 700-something pages of the Sullivan book. It had some interesting parts and actually covered the 2005 trial quite well (thanks in large part to Mesereau). But overall, it's not a very good book and offers little new insight on MJ. As far as bios go, I think Taraborrelli's is actually much better. I don't know why Sullivan didn't just stick to the final four years (instead he tries to make it a comprehensive life story by flashing back to earlier moments in MJ's career that have been covered before and better). He didn't scrutinize his sources at all. Some are good, some are terrible. In terms of his personal interviews, he relied heavily on unreliable figures. I also got the sense that Sullivan really dislikes and distrusts black people. You'll have to tell me what you think when you read it. But he is very harsh on MJ's family and civil rights leaders like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. He basically dismisses MJ's entire creative output after Thriller with a few sentences. It doesn't appear that he conducted one interview with MJ's creative collaborators. As you note, the nose stuff is ridiculous. The book does give some sense of the foul dust swirling around MJ in those final years and how abandoned he felt. But overall, it doesn't really penetrate much beyond superficialities and amateur pathologizing.

It's interesting that Joe says that because it's not the first time people get that feeling from Sullivan's work. Earlier he wrote a book about 2 Pac and The Notorious B.I.G. Here are two reviews from the Goodreads website:

As a fan of both Tupac and Biggie, I was very interested in learning more about what really went down. Former Officer Poole seems to think he has the answers so I was eager to learn what he knows so I could draw my own conclusions. Mostly, I was very disappointed - especially by the author's extreme bias. For example, on page 14 of the hardcover version, Sullivan notes that "[In the early 1960s], as now, black males committed a hugely disproportionate amount of crime in Los Angeles and across the country." WHAT? I can't even believe that went to print. Question: do black males commit a disproportionate amount of crime in this country or are they accused and convicted disproportionately? At the very least, if you're gonna make such outrageous comments, back it up. With no statistical data, I consider Sullivan's comment to be hearsay. Then, just a few pages later, on page 18, Sullivan gets a little diatribe going about how the LAPD hiring process has become less stringent over time, noting that "liberals had successfully argued that [baring applicants with juvenile records] limited the number of blacks and Hispanics who could join the LAPD." I'm not even 20 pages into the book, and my reading of the author is that he really doesn't like minorities or "liberals," whatever the latter term means to him because he sure doesn't define anything. Yet I decided to take these and similar comments with a grain of salt and press forward with the book.

I do think that Sullivan's style is extremely readable and engaging. I also like the way he attempted to provide background on the LAPD history, the history of the Crips and the Bloods, etc. If you're not likely to be critical going into this book, it's not bad for escapism. Unless you were living in a plastic bubble when these events took place, I doubt that you'll be blown away by the overall picture Sullivan paints.

If one-tenth of what's written in these pages is true, Biggie and Tupac were just as despicable as Suge Knight, the LAPD, the affiliated gangs, the attorneys and just about everyone else who graced the pages of the book. And that made me really sad because it's hard for me to listen to the music the same way. Tupac and Biggie were not innocent; they were just greedy [...] who courted violence successfully. Truthfully, none of the stuff about the LAPD or any of the other authority figures surprised me. Money and testosterone--bad combination. Lest you think I'm a man-hater, the women in this book are appalling, too. I hate to say it but Tupac and Biggie were victims of their own making.

http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/146345381

Sullivan comes across like Oliver Stone in JFK, making every possible connection he can and tying it all into a central—and intentionally vague—thesis of "There Is A Conspiracy!" Some of the items stick, I'm sure, but for all of Sullivan's shots leveled at the LA media (principally The Los Angeles Times) for being predisposed to dismissing a conspiracy angle, he's no better, just working from the flip side of that coin. Sullivan also comes across as a strangely prejudicial narrator, injecting his personal politics not overtly but at that just-beneath-the-surface level of a slightly off Vietnam veteran talking about the war. There may not be any actual racial slurs tossed or anything you can pinpoint as being obviously racist, but the tone and phrasing leaves no doubt what the opinion really is. It's evidenced even in the way Sullivan throws in disgusted asides about how white cops can't follow the evidence if it looks like it might lead to anyone black being accused of a heinous crime. The subtext of reverse racism is obvious and highly distasteful coming from the author of the book. If these kinds of accusations are pertinent to the material, a truly neutral journalist would let them come in quotations from sources.

I'm really rather torn about this book. On one hand, it's a fascinating look at a set of cases that will probably always be linked together, it's a wonderful conspiracy tale and an incredibly interesting, if frightening, look at a particular time in Los Angeles' history. On the other hand, the book is clumsily written and lacks a lot of journalistic integrity which makes it feel salacious. I suppose that may just come with the territory for conspiracy books (another example is Jim Marrs's Crossfire about the JFK assassination, which has the same grudging appeal to a reader like me), but one wishes there were somehow a more studious examination of the subjects out there.

http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/307907082


(I wish though that people would stop referring to Taraborelli's book as a recommendable biography. His book is just as harmful (and full of innuendo, half-truth and lies) as Sullivan's. Or even more harmful because even some fans seem to think it's credible."

 

[la_cienega]

Re: Randall Sullivan's new book "Untouchable"

Joe Vogel (@JoeVogel1)
Posted Friday 25th January 2013 from Twitlonger

I didn't review Sullivan's book for Amazon, but here's what I wrote in email to someone who asked me about it:

I read all 700-something pages of the Sullivan book. It had some interesting parts and actually covered the 2005 trial quite well (thanks in large part to Mesereau). But overall, it's not a very good book and offers little new insight on MJ. As far as bios go, I think Taraborrelli's is actually much better. I don't know why Sullivan didn't just stick to the final four years (instead he tries to make it a comprehensive life story by flashing back to earlier moments in MJ's career that have been covered before and better). He didn't scrutinize his sources at all. Some are good, some are terrible. In terms of his personal interviews, he relied heavily on unreliable figures. I also got the sense that Sullivan really dislikes and distrusts black people. You'll have to tell me what you think when you read it. But he is very harsh on MJ's family and civil rights leaders like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. He basically dismisses MJ's entire creative output after Thriller with a few sentences. It doesn't appear that he conducted one interview with MJ's creative collaborators. As you note, the nose stuff is ridiculous. The book does give some sense of the foul dust swirling around MJ in those final years and how abandoned he felt. But overall, it doesn't really penetrate much beyond superficialities and amateur pathologizing.

The book had a very odd racial tone to it.

I just kept thinking, "This is a white male straight rich journalist. He really has no idea about racial matters, why is he speaking about them?"

Respect posted about how this odd racial bias comes through on his previous book... and a bias against liberals? LOL wut.

Then when he quoted the article about how "white" children would feel growing up in a big black household - boom, that was it for me. That article was disgusting to me when I first read it, and still is, and that Sullivan could feel that article had some kind of a point... really messed up.

It'll piss Sullivan and rich white people like him off so much when Paris will grow up and repeat again, "I'm black and I'm proud of it", the way she said 2 years ago.

 

[Victory22]

Can we all please let this book die?

Victory, I'm so sorry about what Deborah did to you. Until now I had no problem with her or the site, and even enjoyed some of the interviews she had conducted in the past. Although I did feel at times she's using Michael to promote her religious beliefs...
Now, I can't believe she would do that to another fan or even support such a poorly researched book that is trashy and unflattering to Michael.

Thank you so much. As I said before this has been a very difficult time for us because I’ve worked so hard to build my page and we have accomplished a lot of good things for MJ there. We have our secret group up and running as of last night and we named it Michael Jackson Rapid Response Team Underground. We plan to use the large public page as a decoy and a recruitment page. From now on we will only use it for educating people as to who the real Michael Jackson is.