In an incredibly mean-spirited and insensitive editorial piece printed in the Signal, Jeanine Skowronski, editor-in-chief, told us her viewpoint of the legend that is Michael Jackson. To quickly summarize, Skowronski stated that the king of pop's interview conducted by Martin Bashir showed Jackson as "all-around crazy" and chided Bashir's slanted narration with a cutesy throwaway line ("bad journalist!")
Well guess what. Michael had his time to speak (Michael Jackson, Take Two: The Interview they Wouldn't Show You) and not only do we see that Mr. Jackson's original comments were largely taken out of context, we see what kind of interviewer Bashir really is.
Skowronski predicted that "nothing he does will paint him in a more favorable light." She couldn't have been more wrong. In the second special, we see how Bashir invaded Jackson's personal life and, like a wolf in sheeps clothing, pounced on the gloved one as soon as he got what he wanted. For example, in the original interview, Bashir described Jackson's sleepovers with sick children as \"disturbing\", while in the outtakes, we hear Bashir say that when he sees the way MJ cares for children, he wants to cry. Bad journalist indeed.
By lying and backstabbing one of the easiest targets in the entertainment world, Martin Bashir has proven himself not only a repulsive reporter, but a repulsive human as well.
Whether Michael Jackson is mentally unstable or not is up for debate. But I ask you, Ms. Skowronski, if he is "crazy", as you say, is it funny to exploit him? If another mentally handicapped person were to be deceived and maligned on a worldwide broadcast, would we still have such a lack of respect for them? Of course not.
I think it's time for those in the media to rethink just what is happening here, before Michael Jackson does "fly away" from Earth forever with his blood on their hands.
Curt Gentile
