The Truth Doesn’t Sell
Something I’ve been thinking about a lot lately is how media actually functions as a system, not just a collection of individual journalists or outlets.
Because once you understand that, a lot of patterns start to make a lot more sense.
News organizations are businesses first. And businesses respond to incentives.
That means clicks matter.
Engagement matters.
Shock value matters.
Controversy matters.
And unfortunately, what is most profitable and what is most accurate are not always the same thing. We’ve seen this too many times.
When I studied journalism (fairly recently), the core principles were very clear: verify information, provide context, rely on credible sources, and separate fact from opinion. Accuracy and ethics were supposed to come first.
But when it comes to Michael Jackson, those values are thrown out the window.
Instead of balanced reporting, what you often see is selective storytelling.
Framing.
Fabrication.
Sensational headlines.
Repeating the same narrative over and over until the public starts treating it as unquestionable fact.
Allegations get amplified.
Context gets buried.
Timelines get flattened.
Contradictions get ignored.
And once the media locks onto a profitable narrative, it becomes incredibly difficult to undo, even when new information complicates it.
That’s the part people don’t fully realise:
repetition shapes public perception more than truth does.
Especially in tabloid media.
Because tabloids are not built around nuance.
They’re built around attention.
The more shocking the headline, the more money it makes.
The more emotionally charged the story is, the more people click.
And the more a celebrity is turned into a spectacle, the longer the machine keeps running. Which is exactly why Michael became such an easy target for decades, and even still to this day.
The media mocked him.
Sensationalized him.
Called him “weird,” “strange,” and gave him degrading nicknames for entertainment value.
Paid former employees for fabricated stories.
Ran with allegations before facts.
And in many cases, treated accusation itself as proof.
To them, he wasn’t a human. He was a price tag. The more they dehumanized him, the more profitable he became.
And honestly? From a journalism standpoint, it’s embarrassing.
Because journalism is supposed to inform people, not emotionally manipulate them into a pre-decided narrative.
But when narrative becomes more profitable than truth, integrity becomes optional.
And I think that’s what changed my perspective on media as a whole. I’ve always understood how Michael was treated, but my changing perspective goes beyond him, it’s about the media system in general.
Because once you notice the framing, you can’t unsee it.
You start realizing how often the public is not being shown the full picture, just the version that sells best.
And when it comes to Michael, I genuinely believe the media played one of the biggest roles in shaping a public perception that many people accepted without ever looking deeper for themselves.
Not because the story was simple.
But because the narrative was profitable.