Latest on MJJC

Sony telling retailers to refer to MJ as self proclaimed and Ja**o

So....the whole thing only occurred in Australia. The MJ Cast is an Australian team/podcast. The blurb (allegedly) came through Sony Music Australia and only made it to two websites, which are audio/visual chains in Australia; these are J.B. Hi-Fi and Sanity. The apology and retraction and correction came from the General Manager of Sony Music Australia.

I truly think and I have said all along, that it was just a horrible and sloppy mistake, made by some underling who writes the copy/blurb/reviews for websites. This kind of thing is outsourced - people write copy for websites as a job and they do it from home. They cut and paste, because they're lazy and they don't really care about the content that they're putting in. People higher up, don't fact check, or provide the quality assurance that MJ fans, in particular, expect. I don't think it's this huge Sony conspiracy that some people make it out to be.

On another forum, a member was saying that this particular blurb reads exactly like some of the horrible reviews that were written about Invincible, back in the day. She said the "Michael" review on Tidal was awful, too and was a straight copy from All Music. Some of the reviews that we find on MOV-Music on Vinyl are written by the same guy who writes the All Music blurbs/reviews.

His name is Stephen Thomas Erlewine. For an eye-opener, check out his reviews of all of Michael's albums here:

https://www.allmusic.com/album/dangerous-mw0000674875

Here's an extract that hit me in the eye, from his review on (my favourite album) "Dangerous". What the actual hell?

"No, it's not perfect -- it has a terrible cover, a couple of slow spots, and suffers from CD-era ailments of the early '90s, such as its overly long running time and its deadening Q Sound production, which sounds like somebody forgot to take the Surround Sound button off."
 
I'd really want to see this full email/tweet whatever for myself.. IF this is not out of context, this would really be upsetting
 
This just sound like one jack@$$ employee who wanted to pull some mess. I do not think a whole Sony company would have done this. Who are selling this to? MJ fans. Do you think for one minute as business they would do something like this overall? I think that employee needs to be fired.
 
If sony knew the racist connotations of the name they labelled him (*****/jacco) then they certainly wouldn't make that mistake.

Michael was a well read man, he knew the connotations of the word, that's why he said "I'm not A *****", instead of saying "I'm not *****"
I'm just disappointed they could make this mistake against their highest earning and most important artist. Thankfully they didn't make this mistake in a hugely publicised press release
 
To be fair I think this is just a mistake. A co-worker who did the text and no one checked it before it went out unfortunately.

Glad to se SONY takes is serious and seem truely sorry and has changed it.

No big deal, no more to say - moving on...
 
It's cringeworthy the MJ_c_ast guys have nothing better to do than warmongering against a juristic person, consisting of thousands of individual people whom they don't even know but trying to make it look like "those evil people" all hate MJ.

That's what's wrong with our society. Not the poor person who was given the small task and messed up because he probably has another hundred other tasks that needed to be done and most likely has not much knowledge and interest about the task's background. Life is not all guns and roses, you know.
 
Korgnex said:
Not the poor person who was given the small task and messed up because he probably has another hundred other tasks that needed to be done and most likely has not much knowledge and interest about the task's background.
Click to expand...

Thats a lot of supposing and probablys!

Buy let's be clear, this isn't the poster of a local village fete, this is Sony Music Entertainment, this is a worldwide release and this is the King of Pop. Putting some part time clueless intern in charge of this (as you make out) without quality checking their work, is a blunder no matter what way you spin it.
 
Korgnex said:
It's cringeworthy the MJ_c_ast guys have nothing better to do than warmongering against a juristic person, consisting of thousands of individual people whom they don't even know but trying to make it look like "those evil people" all hate MJ.

That's what's wrong with our society. Not the poor person who was given the small task and messed up because he probably has another hundred other tasks that needed to be done and most likely has not much knowledge and interest about the task's background. Life is not all guns and roses, you know.
Click to expand...

Those guys work tirelessly to promote and preserve Michael's legacy the way it should be done.

That copy likely went through multiple levels of approval before being sent out to retailers. It's really not hard to promote one of your legacy artists in a respectful and non-offensive way. It actually requires some effort to take that task and turn it into what happened here, which was disrespectful, inaccurate, and just plain stupid. If you work for a company, you represent that company and you are part of a machine that seeks to promote products and make money. There is no reason for this to be any different just because Michael Jackson's name is on the product. A lack of knowledge and interest is not an excuse. THAT is cringeworthy.
 
How the hell can Sony make such a blunder? Your biggest artist who clearly despised that ***** name. How the hell is Sony not aware of that? I'm pretty sure it wasn't a genuine mistake, but a deliberate act by a Sony employee who clearly hates MJ. I feel sorry for MJ knowing that he had to work with people that didn't like him.
 
Nite Line said:
How the hell can Sony make such a blunder? Your biggest artist who clearly despised that ***** name. How the hell is Sony not aware of that? I'm pretty sure it wasn't a genuine mistake, but a deliberate act by a Sony employee who clearly hates MJ. I feel sorry for MJ knowing that he had to work with people that didn't like him.
Click to expand...

Honestly some people on this site behave like they are Sony employees themselves. Michael hated Sony. This was clear as day. He risked his career in 2002 to say so. He wore a BULLET-PROOF VEST for christ sake when protesting them. And, it wasn't just MJ throwing his toys out of the pram either. US/UK fan magazines like King! used to always mention how Sony simply failed to promote HIStory's singles. TDCAU wasn't even sent to radio after Sony kept delaying the release! Was Earth Song even released as a single in the US?


This sort of thing makes for a terrifying read: https://themichaeljacksonacademiaproject.wordpress.com/category/the-michael-jackson-estate/
 
dam2040 said:
Honestly some people on this site behave like they are Sony employees themselves. Michael hated Sony. This was clear as day. He risked his career in 2002 to say so. He wore a BULLET-PROOF VEST for christ sake when protesting them. And, it wasn't just MJ throwing his toys out of the pram either. US/UK fan magazines like King! used to always mention how Sony simply failed to promote HIStory's singles. TDCAU wasn't even sent to radio after Sony kept delaying the release! Was Earth Song even released as a single in the US?


This sort of thing makes for a terrifying read: https://themichaeljacksonacademiaproject.wordpress.com/category/the-michael-jackson-estate/
Click to expand...

He didn't risk his career in 2002. It was already in tatters thanks to MJ's own behaviour and the fact that the Vince album was a mess.
MJ probably wore a bullet proof vest because of the many, many threats to his life received after the Chandler allegations. I doubt it had anything to do with a fear of Sony trying to bump him off. He was on an open top bus in London and very exposed.

No Earth Song was not released in the USA, which was a shame and very strange considering how popular it was - MJ's biggest selling single in the UK, #1 for 6 weeks etc!
I never knew TDCAU was not sent to radio in the USA. I had the USA Import CD Singles so I knew it had been released as a single there. Was the promotion ruined by the irrational criticism of the supposedly "anti-semetic" lyrics? Anybody listening to the song knew exactly what MJ was saying but USA companies are way too sensitive about stuff like that.
 
MJTruth said:
He didn't risk his career in 2002. It was already in tatters thanks to MJ's own behaviour and the fact that the Vince album was a mess.
MJ probably wore a bullet proof vest because of the many, many threats to his life received after the Chandler allegations. I doubt it had anything to do with a fear of Sony trying to bump him off. He was on an open top bus in London and very exposed.

No Earth Song was not released in the USA, which was a shame and very strange considering how popular it was - MJ's biggest selling single in the UK, #1 for 6 weeks etc!
I never knew TDCAU was not sent to radio in the USA. I had the USA Import CD Singles so I knew it had been released as a single there. Was the promotion ruined by the irrational criticism of the supposedly "anti-semetic" lyrics? Anybody listening to the song knew exactly what MJ was saying but USA companies are way too sensitive about stuff like that.
Click to expand...

Openly protesting the company you work for and calling the head a racist is not risking your career? It was a move very few celebrities would make, if any. Michael wore a bulletproof vest while protesting Sony. Did he wear one elsewhere?
 
There's simply no excuse, or defending this. If a teenage intern wrote this like some are claiming, it should be double checked. Fact is, Sony have shown great disrespect to Michael once again.

I mean look at the bio to this:


''Filmed on location at one of five sold-out shows at Wembley Stadium in London, Michael Jackson's "Another Part of Me" short film captures the King of Pop on the Guinness World Record-breaking Bad World Tour''

Now that's more like it!
 
dam2040 said:
Honestly some people on this site behave like they are Sony employees themselves. Michael hated Sony. This was clear as day. He risked his career in 2002 to say so. He wore a BULLET-PROOF VEST for christ sake when protesting them. And, it wasn't just MJ throwing his toys out of the pram either. US/UK fan magazines like King! used to always mention how Sony simply failed to promote HIStory's singles. TDCAU wasn't even sent to radio after Sony kept delaying the release! Was Earth Song even released as a single in the US?


This sort of thing makes for a terrifying read: https://themichaeljacksonacademiaproject.wordpress.com/category/the-michael-jackson-estate/
Click to expand...

I love how you're ignoring how controversial TDCAU was and are then surprised Sony didn't make it a single. The focus on other markets was a choice as MJ was not as popular in the US at that time.
 
SmoothGangsta said:
I love how you're ignoring how controversial TDCAU was and are then surprised Sony didn't make it a single. The focus on other markets was a choice as MJ was not as popular in the US at that time.
Click to expand...

It reached number 30 with record/radio companies refusing to play it. There was a market for it. The numbers don't lie. MJ was not popular during the HIStory era? The man broke Billboard chart records!? What?
 
dam2040 said:
It reached number 30 with record/radio companies refusing to play it. There was a market for it. The numbers don't lie. MJ was not popular during the HIStory era? The man broke Billboard chart records!? What?
Click to expand...

Right, it was still a big controversy. Did I say he wasn't popular during the HIStory era? I really feel like you're just seeing what you want.
 
SmoothGangsta said:
Right, it was still a big controversy. Did I say he wasn't popular during the HIStory era? I really feel like you're just seeing what you want.
Click to expand...

"MJ was not as popular in the US at that time"

Reaching number 30 without any radio companies playing etc. is very popular. Breaking billboard singles records twice, is very popular. I think this misconception no-one wanted to listen to MJ in the 1990's in America is wrong. Sony did MJ a dis-service and it created the narrative.
 
I think it was MJ’s own decision to focus more on the international markets than the US market in the 90s. He didn’t even tour the US during the Dangerous and History tours. I despise Sony but I don’t blame them for the lack of promotion in the US. I think it was MJ’s own decision.
 
dam2040 said:
"MJ was not as popular in the US at that time"

Reaching number 30 without any radio companies playing etc. is very popular. Breaking billboard singles records twice, is very popular. I think this misconception no-one wanted to listen to MJ in the 1990's in America is wrong. Sony did MJ a dis-service and it created the narrative.
Click to expand...

You just quoted what I said and yet still went on misunderstand it.
 
Nite Line;4227650 said:
I think it was MJ’s own decision to focus more on the international markets than the US market in the 90s. He didn’t even tour the US during the Dangerous and History tours. I despise Sony but I don’t blame them for the lack of promotion in the US. I think it was MJ’s own decision.
Click to expand...

It was his decision.
 
SmoothGangsta said:
You just quoted what I said and yet still went on misunderstand it.
Click to expand...

Please explain then how MJ wasn't 'as popular in the US' during this time although he broke chart records and still performed very well even with Sony not releasing his singles properly..
 
dam2040 said:
Please explain then how MJ wasn't 'as popular in the US' during this time although he broke chart records and still performed very well even with Sony not releasing his singles properly..
Click to expand...

He was more popular in general elsewhere. I didn't say he wasn't popular in the US.
 
Last edited:
MJ decided to leave Sony in the early 2000 when he asked from them his masters (of his previous albums) to revert back to him.

The reason was that he wanted to market his albums (previous & upcoming ones) with his own label that he was about to create without having to share profits with Sony.

Tommy Mottola refused that particular MJ’s demand & it was then when that battle (between MJ & Sony) began.

Also, MJ knew already that he was no longer high on Sony’s priority list after the release of his ‘Blood On The Dance Floor’ album.

But, MJ’s way of fighting against Sony during that period (using publicly inappropriate words against Mottola, protesting on that double-decker bus in London, etc) was simply inexcusable & immature on his part.

To say that he risked his career with that erratic behavior is, in my opinion, not an overstatement.
 
mj_frenzy;4227705 said:
MJ decided to leave Sony in the early 2000 when he asked from them his masters (of his previous albums) to revert back to him.

The reason was that he wanted to market his albums (previous & upcoming ones) with his own label that he was about to create without having to share profits with Sony.

Tommy Mottola refused that particular MJ’s demand & it was then when that battle (between MJ & Sony) began.

Also, MJ knew already that he was no longer high on Sony’s priority list after the release of his ‘Blood On The Dance Floor’ album.

But, MJ’s way of fighting against Sony during that period (using publicly inappropriate words against Mottola, protesting on that double-decker bus in London, etc) was simply inexcusable & immature on his part.

To say that he risked his career with that erratic behavior is, in my opinion, not an overstatement.
Click to expand...

Well said and I completely agree. When I saw all of it unfolding, in real time, I wondered, then, what the hell he was thinking and I literally thought that he was losing his mind. There was quite a bit of wrong-doing, on both sides. Even though I don't care about Sony as an entity, I have never completely blamed the company for what went down....it was mostly Tommy Mottola and his management style and Michael definitely had a hand in it, as well. That time in his life seemed to be especially erratic, in terms of his own decision-making and the way he handled issues, as they happened.
 
dam2040 said:
There's simply no excuse, or defending this.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is defending it, as such. Some are just saying it's not the big deal that many fans are trying to make out of it. Like.....it was pushed, in some parts of the fan community as a massive international incident and part of a huge Sony conspiracy to disrespect Michael, which I personally think is way over the top. It was a sloppy, insensitive, cringeworthy review/blurb that made it to a tiny corner of the online market, in one tiny corner of the world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top