Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

A pertinent question at this point - did TMZ really scoop everyone on Michael Jackson's death?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-26-09 09:44 PM
Original message
A pertinent question at this point - did TMZ really scoop everyone on Michael Jackson's death?
I'm being serious. It seems like this band of paparazzis scooped both Jackson's hospitalization and his death. If this is true, it could give these jokers a whole new level of respectability, which I don't think bodes well for American journalism as a whole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bigwillq Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-26-09 09:47 PM
Response to Original message
1. TMZ can run the risk of taking more chances
About reporting events. The networks and cable are more cautious. It looks as though they did "scoop" them about the initial incident, but as far as the death part is concerned, I think the networks and cable were waiting for complete, and full, verification that he died before making an announcement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-26-09 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. True, but I wonder about a "Drudge" effect
At a time when I think stalkerazzis should be socially minimized, especially after their behavior on the night Princess Diana died, this could embolden them to take even more chances.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-26-09 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. It might. But Drudge is wrong more than he's right. The Republicans use Drudge
to shape a story, more than to break it. For instance, when Hillary Clinton co-sponsored a flag bill, Drudge jumped out with a headline "Clinton supports bill banning flag burning." Obviously, just about the opposite was the case, but he shaped how the story was reported. He did the same thing to (and others) on Iraq, reporting twisted interpretations to make people think she was flip-flopping or supporting something she didn't. It worked so well that some people here parroted his headlines without reading the story.

So no one cares that Drudge is wrong most of the time. They use him to shape the angle, and if the story then turns out unreliable, the major media just ignores it. If it turns out true, or close to true, they pick up Drudge's spin on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-26-09 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. That's what I'm afraid of
TMZ got lucky. Just like The National Enquirer and Matt Drudge got lucky. I can only hope that they don't let it go to their heads. But they probaly will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-26-09 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Yeah, that's probably true. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-26-09 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. It's the Walter Payton syndrome, or the James Brady syndrome.
Both men were reported dead by all the media outlets, who then had to retract the reports. They try to avoid those situations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-26-09 09:49 PM
Response to Original message
2. You know how it works. They all had the same story, but were waiting for confirmation.
TMZ didn't care if they got it wrong, so they went with the rumor, and it was true. You could tell when the story broke that the media thought it was bad, but they could only report what they had confirmation of. Same as when the NY Post scooped everyone on Natasha Richardson, though I think they did have someone at the hospital or in the family giving them info.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThirdWorldJohn Donating Member (525 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-26-09 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
5. Somebody probably called and negotiated a payoff for the "scoop."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-26-09 09:58 PM
Response to Original message
7. This was at Michael Jackson's residence in Los Angeles.
I'd expect them to have someone there before the ambulance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pdxmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-26-09 10:12 PM
Response to Original message
9. Didn't TMZ have Heath Ledger's death before the MSM, too? I think
when it comes to the celebrity news, TMZ has had several scoops on the networks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tangerine LaBamba Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-26-09 10:15 PM
Response to Original message
10. TMZ pays really, really big bucks........
and that's why they get the scoops.

They have snitches everywhere, I hear............
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-27-09 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
12. TMZ is owned by Barry "I'm a Lawyer" Levin. They take a great deal of
pride in first, scooping the opposition, and second, getting it right. They did both--a stark contrast from that "Perez Hilton" character, who suggested the whole thing was a publicity stunt for the upcoming tour.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 12:57 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC