ETonline was the first media outlet to run the picture of Michael Jackson in the ambulance and OK! magazine actually spent $500,000 on Michael's "last" photo. The New York Posts asks, was it worth it?
Some staffers objected to owner Richard Desmond's decision to put the ghoulish picture on this week's cover -- and it looks like advertisers and readers may agree.
"Media buyers have canceled upcoming meetings to discuss rates. It's a disgrace. They've sunk to a new low." In addition, Sean Combs and Jay-Z are said to be so furious, "they're organizing a boycott," according to our source.
A rep for OK! said, "This is untrue."
Naturally the NY Post is going to inflate the backlash. Some people may be furious, but I'm not surprised by OK's cover choice at all. Trash is what keeps tabloid magazines successful.
The offensive pic is after the jump.
Share
7 Comments
Twitter
July 2nd, 2009 9:12 PM
So Macabre, so wrong and so gutter. Won't ever buy them again.
July 2nd, 2009 9:26 PM
While I feel that the mainstream U.S. press should publish pictures of soldiers killed in combat (to convey to the general public what warfare is like, of which has been a controversy for many years), it's still inappropriate for dying or dead Michael Jackson pictures to be published.
Why, and for what purpose?
As far as I'm concerned, tabloid news outlets like OK Magazine are seeking to profit off MJ's death. I'm not surprised either. It's morbid, sad and greedy.
I can't imagine what the Jackson family are feeling about these released pics right now...
July 3rd, 2009 1:13 PM
I understand that this picture is macabre. However it was posted all over the internet prior to OK magazine buying it. Does everyone plan on boycotting the internet?
July 3rd, 2009 3:39 PM
It's outrageous, it's dusgusting! That publications, the internet, and media for that matter, would do this to such a great man is unbelieveable. I'm outraged. Why can't Michael rest in peace and give his family some peace instead of having to see his "last moments" on the the cover of some crappy tabloid or all over the internet in this photo or anywhere else like this? Why not run pictures of him in progression from his early years until his rehearsal for the up coming tour, as a tribute to the man instead of this? This is just plain sick and morbid. I pity the people that work for this publication and any other media outlet, internet included, who ran this photo of Michael Jackson; it just proves that it's all about money.
July 3rd, 2009 6:52 PM
thas awsome
July 5th, 2009 3:22 PM
I was walking in Walmart today when I saw the photo I almost fainted right there and I used to purchase the magazine but not anymore. They have went too far.They're calling it a tribute but all it is a disgrace and they need to make a public apology to his family and friends. No human being should be posted like that.
July 14th, 2009 1:21 AM
Excuse me. I got the photo about 2 days after he died. And guess who published it? ET-Entertainment Tonight. So while it may seem that OK magazine is wrong, they are not the only ones that are publishing this photo, and as a matter of fact they were late in doing so.