Should celebrity news be reported?

[ShyGuyInChicago]

Is such a thing really important enough to be reported? Is it relevant in people's lives?

I had news networks in mind. I also thought about an article I read about a soldier saying that when Michael Jackson died he got far too much new coverage and he feels that what people in the military do is far more important. I also read news articles on the Internet of families of killed soldiers being angry that their loved ones got very little new coverage in favor of Jackson. I also watch a network called HLN which is a sister network of CNN and one one of the shows Prime News which I am a fan of on Facebook has had comments complaining over their reporting of celebrity news saying that HLN is becoming like TMZ. Prime News has a mix of normal news stories and celebrity news that is fairly balanced in my humble opinion. I also read one comment of someone complaining saying that several people have gone missing and if the celebrity news was not reported then those people would have coverage that could have helped find them. I read another comment of person complaining of the coverage of Bret Michaels' brain hemorrhage saying that there are non-famous people who had worse injuries and never get an news coverage .

[Amnesiac]

While I can understand the argument that the news should be about what it's supposed to be about — the NEWS — saying that Michael Jackson's death shouldn't have been covered so much isn't really right. Jackson, love him or not, was one of the biggest cultural icons of the 20th century, he has had a massive impact on music as a whole. To deny covering his death for something that occurs regularly, military deaths, is a bit silly.

America's news companies feed off of interesting, but not necessarily important stories. It seems that partially state-run news organizations such as the BBC and Australian Broadcasting Corporation actually focus on news instead of hot topics.

[ShyGuyInChicago]

http://www.gmsplace.com/?p=2047

A SOLDIER’S VIEW OF MJ’S DEATH……..

This is written by a young man serving his third tour of duty in Iraq.
Thought you might find his take on the Michael Jackson news interesting.
…………………………………………………………………………..

Okay, I need to rant.

I was just watching the news, and I caught part of a report on Michael Jackson . As we all know, Jackson died the other day. He was an entertainer who performed for decades. He made millions, he spent millions, and he did a lot of things that make him a villian to many people. I understand that his death would affect a lot of people, and I respect those people who mourn his death, but that isn’t the point of my rant.

Why is it that when ONE man dies, the whole of America loses their minds with grief. When a man dies whose only contribution to the country was to ENTERTAIN people, the Amercian people find the need to flock to a memorial in Hollywood , and even Congress sees the need to hold a “moment of silence” for his passing?

Am I missing something here? ONE man dies, and all of a sudden he’s a freaking martyr because he entertained us for a few decades? What about all those SOLDIERS who have died to give us freedom? All those Soldiers who, knowing that they would be asked to fight in a war, still raised their hands and swore to defend the Constitution and the United States of America . Where is their moment of silence? Where are the people flocking to their graves or memorials and mourning over them because they made the ultimate sacrifice? Why is it when a Soldier dies, there are more people saying “good riddence,” and “thank God for IEDs?” When did this country become so calloused to the sacrifice of GOOD MEN and WOMEN, that they can arbitrarily blow off their deaths, and instead, throw themselves into mourning for a “Pop Icon?”

I think that if they are going to hold a moment of silence IN CONGRESS for Michael Jackson, they need to hold a moment of silence for every service member killed in Iraq and Afghanistan . They need to PUBLICLY recognize every life that has been lost so that the American people can live their callous little lives in the luxury and freedom that WE, those that are living and those that have gone on, have provided for them. But, wait, that would take too much time, because there have been so many willing to make that sacrifice. After all, we will never make millions of dollars. We will never star in movies, or write hit songs that the world will listen too. We only shed our blood, sweat and tears so that people can enjoy what they have.

Sorry if I have offended, but I needed to say it. Remember these five words the next time you think of someone who is serving in the military;

“So that others may live…”

[DarkHorses]

^ I agree with that completely. It's wrong that celebrities get all the recognition just for being famous. There are people dying for our country and people suffering through a lot more tragedies than celebrities do, but those stories are never covered. I think that celebrity deaths are important, but not any more important than the deaths and sufferings of every day people. You hear a lot more about celebrities than you do about soldiers and regular people, and it gets to be annoying after awhile.

[Amnesiac]

http://www.gmsplace.com/?p=2047

Being a soldier doesn't make you some hero that everyone should bow down to, first of all. I can understand these men and women do a lot for the United States, but it would be BETTER if they would be humble about it.

Secondly, there are moments of silence in thousands of schools across the nation for these kinds of things. There is an unimaginable amount of support for soldiers. They are held in high praise year round, respected every day, they have charities for them and communities and businesses rain benefits on them.

When, again, one of the most successful and highly acclaimed superstars EVER dies, you have to pay attention to it. It's a historic event. Soldiers should be worrying more about protecting the United States instead of getting attention from it.

[Jess]

you have a point, I'm not a big fan of any celebrity really, but the news aren't as important, maybe celebrity deaths, but otherwise no

[Sage]

http://www.gmsplace.com/?p=2047

Someone sounds jealous.

[Nexus]

Secondly, there are moments of silence in thousands of schools across the nation for these kinds of things. There is an unimaginable amount of support for soldiers. They are held in high praise year round, respected every day, they have charities for them and communities and businesses rain benefits on them.

Now if only we can provide some stable healthcare for our troops, we'll be all set to go.

When, again, one of the most successful and highly acclaimed superstars EVER dies, you have to pay attention to it. It's a historic event. Soldiers should be worrying more about protecting the United States instead of getting attention from it.

And that's supposed to take precedence over a war hero .. why? Surely it's going to generate more media hype inevitably, but should we really be putting forth our own appraisals on who deserves the spotlight?

Michael Jackson received more attention post death than he had in years, but yet here we are, expectant of military families to be understanding of the media's value on what should be reported and what shouldn't be.

You have a right to feel how you do, sure, but it isn't something you can even begin to wrap your mind around without being in that position of putting your life on the line and in return being shafted by the news outlets.

[INFERNO]

In general, celebrities do get massive amounts of news coverage reported about them and most (or even all) of the time it's petty nonsense, such as "Person is now dating other person!!", "Person got a brand new hair style!!", "Person helped out a homeless person", "Person told a cashier to go fuck themselves with a 10-foot pole", etc... . It's nothing amazing and I agree, knowing that a celebrity got a haircut, may be pregnant or bought some laxatives because they were so constipated from a big party, isn't something that I consider important in my life. It does clog up much of the more important news, such as a doctor finding a break-through, political issues or certain acts a person did. I say the last one by such actions as murders where the murderer is on the loose in the local area or someone did a heroic act as good samaritan, such as tackle and disarm 2 bandits that eluded a police chase.

If I could run the world, I'd have the celebrity news limited much more than it is now. I wouldn't completely eliminate it as much as I dislike it because the society seems to feed on it. People seem interested when a celebrity simply lost 10 pounds and that sells, which makes money and businesses. I would limit it though so news of important events can be known of easier. Personally though, I find it annoying and a waste of paper when I go to a store and at the cashier, all I see are celebrity news tabloids with a few others not about that crammed in one small area. The actual shows, such as TMZ annoy the hell out of me and why people are so concerned over petty crap that celebrities have. I don't see the importance of it and the thing I hate the most is when their is such news in news channels/papers not meant to have it or delaying general local news for one celebrity news event. If I could run the world, this wouldn't happen at all.

[Sage]

So long as there is a demand for such things, such things will be reported. I can only wish that people would focus more on their own lives and not those of the rich and famous.

[Amnesiac]

Now if only we can provide some stable healthcare for our troops, we'll be all set to go.


And that's supposed to take precedence over a war hero .. why? Surely it's going to generate more media hype inevitably, but should we really be putting forth our own appraisals on who deserves the spotlight?

Michael Jackson received more attention post death than he had in years, but yet here we are, expectant of military families to be understanding of the media's value on what should be reported and what shouldn't be.

You have a right to feel how you do, sure, but it isn't something you can even begin to wrap your mind around without being in that position of putting your life on the line and in return being shafted by the news outlets.

I wouldn't expect news organizations to report on the death of every soldier and do an hour-long interview with every family. When you enlist in the military, you are doing an honorable service to your nation. Soldiers are constantly rewarded, and sometimes the more heroic soldiers are covered by news outlets. That doesn't mean every soldier has to be an attention whore and say "I fought in x war, I should be on TV!" That's not what you're in the military for. Soldiers like this ranting man in the OP's post need to focus on what's really at hand — the war — and not worry about getting national attention. It's a great thing being in the army, fighting in your country, and you will be rewarded in some way, but you don't have to complain about it. Just be humble.

The news networks in America are all shit anyway, they report on the most irrelevant or biased topics and have terrible international news coverage. If you want a network that covers the war and dead soldiers, make a channel for it: the Military Network.

Besides, it's not "news" when someone signs up for a job where there's a high chance of dying... and then dies. It's sad, yes. That doesn't mean all 4,000 families of Iraq War soldiers should be interviewed because their children died doing a job where death is extremely common.

[Nexus]

Then I guess Joe Jackson should have been more focused on his son's career when he was still alive rather than exploiting his death out of the ass postmortem.

Military families receive a meager $50,000 after finding out that their loved ones are killed in the war. That, coupled with the fact that half of 'em don't agree with the war to begin with gives them plenty of reason to be put off by the media's priorities.

That's all it really is anyways -- who takes offense to the blustering showcase the media puts on and who doesn't. But they certainly have the right to shake their head at TV in disgust.