To wonder why the still play Michael Jackson songs?

[stellenbosch]

What with the #metoo movement and so many actors, entertainers, directors, singers and comedians being (rightly in most cases) shutdown, why do they still play Michael Jackson songs on the radio?

I automatically turn it over. Why does he get a free pass? Because he's dead? I thought though all the allegations were proven? I don't get it?

OP....what are you actually saying here??

He doesn't get a free pass, he had his name dragged threw the mud and ultimately the stress of all this led to his drug addiction and killed him.

His songs are, for the most part, awesome.

(Except Earth Song, but we can forgive him that as he wrote Thriller, Beat It etc etc etc)

OP, he was found not guilty by a court of law. There is nothing since to prove otherwise.

I wouldn't go round making such a disgusting allegation about a person just because you can't be arsed spending a couple of weeks reading through court evidence.

He wasn’t guilty, that’s why.

Are we now in a world where people lives must be trashed forever, even when nothing is proven?
Call me old fashioned, but I thought we still had courts and due process to determine guilt, rather than social media.

MJ was found innocent in a court of law.

So was Woody Allen.

(And yes, I think both of them have been unjustly vilified).

I’m not a fan of his music, but was unaware he was guilty of any thing other than being a weirdo.

This thread should go I think

Someone being a criminal does not mean you shouldn't enjoy their music or films anymore. It doesn't mean you like the actual person or agree with their behaviour!

YABU

PS woody allen gives me the creeps as did Kevin Spacey but no one can / should deny they were good at their jobs.

I think heat stroke has gotten to the OP.

Because it’s extremely good music! Yes he was very mixed up and weird and almost certainly a paedophile. But he had his history to deal with (listen to today’s radio 4s last word on his father).

He was still a musical genius and I think it would be terrible to lose those wonderful songs.

I wondered this recently.

I think because he passed away and his music was so influential to culture that it hasn't been put aside.

He was found not guilty in court, there was at least one settlement but it wasn't an admission of guilt, so as he has passed, I think it's just been left at that.

If you have some time, the documentary movie "This is it" about the preparation for the tour just before he died is really worth a watch. IT's on netflix where I am. I was never a fan of his music, I didn't really like any of it when I was younger and only decided it was actually pretty good after he died. The film is really interesting, he is incredibly bizarre, but in a really charming way. Unusual man to say the least! Film is a good one, I didn't fancy it at all but came across it and it actually is really worth a watch.

Next time you wonder do some actual thinking before sending it into cyberspace.

I never believed he was guilty. Don't know why, it just didn't sit right. He had lots of child friends - like Macauley Kulkin - who said it wasn't true. He's dead now, they could do an expose if they wanted to.

He was a victim all his life, I think.

Er because he was never proven guilty of anything and he was unbelievably talented. I’m not a fan at all but why on earth should his music not be played?

Woody Allen hasn't been to court. It was decided that the child's mental health would not stand up to being dragged through a court procedure.

I t ' s the same with Halifax using The Wizard Of Oz in their adverts, given how everyone knows how appaulingly Judy Garland was treated during filming.

I think using it is in poor taste.

But I guess it's all hearsay.

I wouldn't know either way what he was or wasn't - wouldn't miss the music if it were banned, don't know or care much about him ... BUT

i can't get my head around people thinking he quite probably was a child abuser but that his music should still be played even so because it's good !

To me that's odd

Agree with RunMummy.

How do I report a thread?

I can never believe that bloody Eric Gill is still lauded. He sexually abused everyone in his family, down to and including the dog.

I'm certain to be in a minority here but I make a distinction between a person's talents and what type of person they're purported to be. Examples of this would be these:

Gary Glitter - was a brilliant musician regardless of the foul man he is.
Enid Blyton - reportedly an awful mother yet a woman who made children all over the world happy with her books.
Rolf Harris - I remember his art programmes with joy and his actions with real sadness.
Clark Gable - a heartthrob actor who apparently was guilty of a 'hit and run' covered up by MGM so an all-round tosspot in my book.

There are lots of very dodgy people out there but, if they're in the public eye, any 'good' they ever did in their lives will be overshadowed by their misdeeds. I'm not sure that's got much of a point really. What is the point of that? Do we ever 'forgive' the transgressions of anybody? If not, what's the point of keeping them around at all... and if that's the case - make sure we get them all, every husband, father, brother that's out there, currently undetected yet guilty of similar or the same.

I've wondered this for a while. We don't have much of a sense of justice, I think.

How many people came out in support of Roman Polanski in the past! Its only now views are changing but expect his films will still get shown.