Home > Essays > All

Sunday 27 May 2012

Michael Jackson Notebook

01 July 2009

The news cycle of a dead celebrity is a curious thing.

96 hours later

By day five I am starting to feel like Keeley Hawes from Ashes to Ashes — stuck in an Eighties time warp and struggling to make sense of both worlds. If I can emerge from LA without a nose job I will consider it an assignment well done. For decades the toxic mixture of all things Jackson and all things Hollywood have left most of us shrugging our shoulders, not sure what to believe. Fact in this town is not really a hard currency. As I write, we still don’t know how he died, what was in his will, how he changed colour, or indeed why he could only think up one name — Prince — for both his sons.

It will be no different after his death. His was a particularly grim tale, I can’t help thinking — one to scare the children. A truly talented but desperately unhappy man surrounded by people too afraid — or too greedy — to tell him he’d turned into a freak. And yet, in this age of DIY celebrity and five-hour YouTube fame, his was a celebrity of longevity. He is mourned from Hollywood to Helmand province, danced to in the prisons of the Philippines and Twittered about by Britain’s politicians. Perhaps we just have an undying nostalgia for real superstars. Yes, even those who want their bodies to be preserved forever in a moonwalk pose.

Emily Maitlis is a presenter on Newsnight and BBC News 24.

Previous page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4

More articles from: Emily Maitlis | this section

Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (12)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

JohnAnt

July 2nd, 2009 6:08pm Report this comment

Why three main features in the 'Spectator' on the death of a pop star?
If you're trying to lure in the sensation-hungry celeb-addicts (as the cover implies) won't they be a bit disappointed by the writing of e.g. Charles Moore, Paul Johnson, Lloyd Evans, Michael Tanner, Robin Holloway, Melissa Kite, Matthew Parris, Fraser Nelson, James Forsyth, Rod Liddle and Susan Hill?
Just wondering what d'Ancona's playing at. But don't mind us, we're just ex-subscribers.

Gil

July 2nd, 2009 6:49pm Report this comment

Is no one going to say the obvious about this piece? Incredible isn't it?

Who, on earth, could find something of merit here?

JohnAnt

July 2nd, 2009 10:04pm Report this comment

Sorry, make that four features, not three.
What next, five articles on Ronaldo?
Or is this Ageing Hippies R Us Week?

Mitford

July 3rd, 2009 5:38pm Report this comment

This is such a boring issue. Dull Daily Mail worthy Political Scandals pull out telling no one anything they did not already know and other eyelid closers like this. We want insight into important home and world affairs not this

robert

July 3rd, 2009 7:29pm Report this comment

Great to see the return of the "thinking man's airhead". Whatever happened to nancy dell'Olio?

I Have a Tin Ear

July 4th, 2009 12:41am Report this comment

Repulsive, insensitive, tasteless, crass. And seriously over-promoted. Poor Newsnight.

Ruth

July 4th, 2009 8:15am Report this comment

I liked this article and thought it gave observations that I wouldn't otherwise have. I don't watch TV news so this gives a great picture. If you don't want to read about Michael Jackson don't read the article. Simples!

Mark Rowley

July 4th, 2009 8:54pm Report this comment

WTF is this all about? For God's sake, most Spectator readers couldn't care less about Michael Jackson. The only value of the piece is unintended, insofar as it raises the question as to why the BBC sees fit to waste licence payers' money sending Emily Maitlis and others to Los Angeles to 'cover' this grotesque modern day fable.

Jon B

July 5th, 2009 8:40pm Report this comment

Hey, a free trip to LA at taxpayers expense to overshadow the good BBC reporters already there, plus an extra bung for a tasteless, inconsequential and dumbed down blog. Nice little earner Emily - to echo a comment above - poor Newsnight.

Rupert Fotherington-Smythe

July 6th, 2009 6:24pm Report this comment

Terrible shame 'n' all that, but who gives a monkeys? And why send her (and others) out there on licence-tax money? What could she report being in situ that she couldn't reasonably report/recycle from London?

David Short

July 7th, 2009 5:38pm Report this comment

I wonder if this is quite the right time for a highly paid BBC presenter airing the news that the Beeb sends out to California at enormous expense a crew to report on the death of a faded American pop star with a dodgy reputation?

Did they do this for John Lennon, who at least was British?

Vikki

July 16th, 2009 5:43pm Report this comment

Well I love Emily's articles, even you lot don't seem to. I'm sure she can't control what she's being told to cover and no one asks you to read it if you don't like it.

Post comment