One of the consequences of this is, unfortunately, that this outstanding journalist has become the focus of confused individuals (so-called “haters”) who are targeting Mr. Thomson precisely because he is not biased, is successful and is making a difference in how Michael Jackson is perceived in the public domain.

Rather than give publicity to the various means in which Thomson is being attacked, let us instead look at how we can support Thomson and help him to continue the important and necessary work he is doing.

Visit this article by Thomson at the Huffington Post:
“One of the Most Shameful Episodes In Journalistic History” / June 10, 2010

You have probably already read it, but that’s okay. We’re not asking you to re-read it, but to do something very simple and easy:

SHARE + TWEET + EMAIL

At the beginning of the article, there is a “share this story” box with icons to let you easily share the article on Twitter, Facebook, and via email. Please click all three of these social media links. That’s how easy it is to show your support!

Why are these three clicks important? Even though the comments are closed, clicking these three social media links sends a direct, recorded notification to the Huffington Post that Charles Thomson’s work is read, appreciated and in demand. When you click those three links, you send a physical and perceptual message to the fantastic Huffington Post editorial team that Thomson brings their site traffic and approval. Every site owner wants that—wouldn’t you?

Send that message today and keep sending it. There is no limit on how many times you click it and you can tell your friends to join in too. We would like to get the Twitter and Facebook clicks up to thousands more.

When people talk about how social media changes things, this is what they mean.

Thank you.

It’s natural to want to immediately visit the TMZ website to leave a comment on the article—anything to tell managing editor Harvin Levin, his writers, and whoever else may be reading the article the TRUTH behind the lies. We are sensitive when it comes to Michael; we are defensive when we see a tabloid spinning an inconsequential event into something that appears to be a “scandal” worthy of the public’s attention.

Websites like TMZ make money by enticing people to click on their articles and then share the links with their friends. Every time you go back to the website, it’s another click. The more traffic TMZ gets, the more valuable they are to advertisers—who will then in turn pay TMZ more money to place ads on their website.

Michael doesn’t need anyone wasting their time on TMZ defending him. What his legacy and his family and children deserve is for media outlets to stop riding their names and defacing Michael’s name for cheap hits and revenue—regardless of how damaging and inaccurate those stories are. The people leaving hate-filled comments on TMZ aren’t going to care if we show up to defend him or not. Let them waste their time. We have better, more important things to do.

• Don’t click on any links to their website.
• Don’t share any links to their website.
• Don’t comment on any articles on their website.
• If you follow their posts with an RSS reader (like Google Reader), delete the feed.
• If you’ve liked their page on Facebook, unlike it.
• If you follow them on Twitter, unfollow them.

Worried that we won’t know if a similarly damaging article appears on TMZ in the future? Don’t be. We have five individuals assigned to monitor the site for any new posts—three people from MJ fan groups on Facebook, and two on Twitter: @MJNEWSALERTS and @mjsarmy1.

Charles Thomson has written a wonderful article debunking the TMZ post, ensuring that the truth behind the lie is easy for people to find and understand.

You need not ever visit the TMZ website again. Stop letting them use you. Tabloid websites LOVE Michael Jackson fans because we care and we are passionate, so we’re more likely to come back again and again to defend Michael.

If you feel you must contact TMZ to register your voice, please do so offline via private mail or telephone:

8033 Sunset Blvd, Suite 875
Los Angeles, CA 90046
Phone: (818) 972-8000 / Fax: (818) 972-8050

Please note that both Michael Jackson’s Estate and the Guardian ad Litem for his children have already been contacted regarding the story that appeared on TMZ last week. It is not necessary to continue to contact them about this matter.

Journalist Charles Thomson has written a well-researched, non-sensational, and fully rational article debunking the implications raised by TMZ’s “scoop”. Go here to read it.

An excerpt:

Once you strip TMZ’s scoop of its inaccuracy and hyperbole, here’s what you’re left with; in 2008, Michael Jackson took his son to a dentist, who told Jackson that his son required a two-hour-long surgical procedure and would need to be anesthetized. Jackson asked the dentist to hire a licensed anesthesiologist. The dentist complied. The boy was sedated under the correct circumstances and monitored by a professional throughout his surgery. In other words, Jackson behaved like any other parent, allowing his child to undergo necessary medical treatment but first ensuring that it was to be done properly.

By wrongly accusing Jackson of ‘pushing’ and ‘cajoling’ the dentist into conducting a ‘risky medical treatment’, TMZ implies that the dentist’s care was somehow substandard or dangerous. This is untrue. Dr Tadrissi did not stand accused of endangering his patients, giving substandard care or any other form of incompetence. He simply allowed a licensed anesthesiologist to sedate a patient in his clinic without the correct permit.

Go here to read the rest of the article.

Thank you, Mr. Thomson!

While we think it’s important to know what the actual content of the post is, we don’t want to encourage you to visit the TMZ website (remember, every click you make means increased ad revenue for them!), so we’ve reproduced the article here—including a screen capture:

MJ Pushed Dr. To Improperly Give Son Anesthesia
1/13/2011 1:00 AM PST by TMZ Staff

TMZ has learned … Michael Jackson subjected one of his children to the same risky medical treatment that eventually killed him.

Sources tell TMZ … Michael cajoled a Las Vegas dentist into performing a procedure on Blanket in July, 2008, that involved putting the boy under anesthesia for 2 hours in a dental office that did not have the necessary permit for anesthesia.

TMZ has obtained internal documents from the Nevada Board of Dental Examiners, which detail Michael Jackson’s interactions with Dr. Mark Tadrissi. According to the documents, Tadrissi told Michael he couldn’t perform the procedure on Blanket because he lacked the permit.

According to the Board’s investigator, Michael didn’t want to hear about permits and told the doctor, “Have an anesthesiologist do whatever type of sedation required.”

Tadrissi capitulated and performed the 2 hour procedure on Blanket … who was 6 years old at the time. An anesthesiologist had Blanket sedated the entire time.

Now here’s where it gets mysterious. The Board — which learned of Tadrissi’s actions after Michael died — initiated a disciplinary action against Tadrissi for allowing Blanket to be anesthetized in his office. The Board also went after Dr. Tadrissi for allowing Michael to receive Propofol in his office, without the proper permit.

Dr. Tadrissi struck a deal with the Board in 2010 in which he was sanctioned. In a draft of the report, the Board based the sanctions on his treatment of both Blanket and Michael. But in the final version of the report Blanket was taken completely out — there is no mention of the boy or his treatment.

One source connected with the investigation tells TMZ … pressure was put on the Board to omit Blanket from the report, and when the final version was issued, the discipline was based solely on Michael’s treatment.

What is this article really telling us? Well, let’s look at the crux of the story as if we’re talking about any parent and child, not Michael Jackson and his son…

TRUTH:
• A 6-year-old boy needed a 2-hour dental procedure performed on him that required anesthesia.
• The dentist lacked a permit to perform procedures under anesthesia.
• The boy’s father asked the dentist to hire an anesthesiologist (i.e., a doctor licensed to administer anesthesia) to do the sedation.
• The dentist agreed to hire a licensed anesthesiologist, and who then did the sedation on the 6-year-old boy.

In other words, the father acted like any parent with a young child in need of a lengthy dental procedure. Receiving anesthesia for dental care is NOT unusual, even in young children. It is completely normal to want your child to be anesthetized during a 2-hour long procedure, which—if personal experience with dental work is any indication—is likely to be painful. Furthermore, the use of Propofol in dental surgery is extremely common.

Curious about why anesthesia would be used on a young child visiting this dentist? Take a look at these Frequently Asked Questions About General Anesthesia, as provided by The American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry.

An excerpt:

When a child (or a person of any age with a disability) needs extensive dental treatment, general anesthesia is an accepted standard of care. This standard is supported by the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, the American Dental Association, the American Medical Association, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

The reason a complaint was filed against the dentist wasn’t because of anything the father did wrong—it’s because the dentist didn’t have the right permit to allow the licensed anesthesiologist to administer the anesthetic in his office. Think back to the last time you (or your child) received anesthesia at the dentist: Did you check up on all the intricacies of the dentist’s permits regarding the use of an anesthesiologist in his or her office? I’m guessing you didn’t.

SPIN:
What does TMZ want you to take away from their sensationalized report? Well, that’s simple: They want you (and everyone else who reads their article…and everyone who reads every other article based on their article…and so on) to believe that Michael Jackson was such a horrible father and such a delusional junkie that he forced a doctor to put his son to sleep with the very same drug that wound up killing his dad. And if Michael Jackson is that irresponsible and horrible, how can we believe that he didn’t force another doctor to give him an overdose in June 2009? And really, how can we believe that Michael Jackson just didn’t kill himself, since he obviously didn’t care about his kids?

That’s the subtext! That’s what TMZ and the rest of the tabloid media want you to believe. Why? Because it’s “shocking”, it’s scandalous, it involves a very famous person with a lot of public interest, and, above all, because it will get lots of people—including Michael Jackson fans—to click on their site, leave comments, send the link to other people, and ultimately increase TMZ’s value to advertisers.

The media makes a lot of money off of stories about Michael Jackson. It doesn’t matter whether the story is negative or positive, fact or fiction; the public still eats it up. We saw it in 1982, we saw it in 1987, 1993, 2003, 2005, 2009…and on and on and on. As long as the interest is there, the media will provide a story, even if they have to invent it.

We’re in the midst of a period of time between the preliminary hearings and the trial of the doctor accused of involuntary manslaughter in the death of Michael Jackson. It’s a slow time, news-wise. You’re going to see a lot of trash and nonsense and noise coming out so the media can continue filling their pockets while they wait for the trial to start. Be aware.

The best way to take action against tabloid sites like TMZ is with INACTION.

• Don’t click on any links to their website.
• Don’t share any links to their website.
• Don’t comment on any articles on their website.
• If you follow their posts with an RSS reader (like Google Reader), delete the feed.
• If you’ve liked their page on Facebook, unlike it.
• If you follow them on Twitter, unfollow them.

Every click, every link, and every follower makes TMZ a more valuable company in the eyes of advertisers, and that’s where the money lies. Exercise your voice of opposition be refusing to give TMZ a single additional click.

Steve Koonin – President, Turner Entertainment Networks
Marc Juris – Executive Vice President & General Manager
Darren Campo – Senior Vice President of Programming, Production & Development
truTV
600 Third Avenue, 2nd Floor
New York, NY 10016

Dear Sirs,

It has come to my attention that investigative journalist Diane Dimond has been assigned by truTV (formerly Court TV) to act as a commentator on the preliminary trial hearings in the case of The People vs. Dr. Conrad Murray. As you are likely aware, Dr. Murray has been charged with involuntary manslaughter in the 2009 death of Michael Jackson.

From 2003 until 2005, Court TV employed Dimond as an anchor and correspondent assigned to cover Jackson’s trial in which he faced molestation charges. Her coverage was widely criticized at the time for being heavily biased, pro-prosecution, and entirely nonobjective. Dimond’s history covering Jackson dates back to her days with the tabloid show Hard Copy in the early ’90s when unsubstantiated claims were made against Jackson—coverage for which she similarly criticized to the point of being accused of interfering with the investigation. She has also written a book about Michael Jackson consisting in large part of speculation, rumor, hearsay, and outright lies about the trial in 2005 that culminated in his acquittal on all charges against him.

Diane Dimond has made a lot of money off of the trials, tribulations, and, ultimately, the death of Michael Jackson. She has a vested interested in sensationalized coverage, and cannot be trusted as an unbiased source for fair, accurate journalism in any matter associated with the man. Her interest is in promoting herself as a “Jackson expert” at any cost, whether that means reporting fact, speculation, or total fabrications.

In fact, in August 2005—following the reading of a “not guilty” verdict on all ten charges levied against Jackson—Dimond’s entire investigative unit at Court TV was dismantled, and her contract was terminated. This was a wise decision on the part of Court TV, who had invested enormous sums of money in exhaustive coverage of Jackson’s trial, much of it spent perpetuating the “guilty before proven innocent”-style reporting that Dimond brought to the network.

Now, under its new name, truTV has brought Dimond back to once again as a commentator on a court case involving Michael Jackson. This action is a slap in the face to your viewers, who have come to expect coverage of current events that is as your name implies: True.

Please remove Diane Dimond as a commentator on any Jackson-related matters. There are a lot of eyes on this trial, and your audience deserves better.

Sincerely,

Filthy Tabloid Trash

On Being a “Nonpartisan” Fan
By A.D., owner, FilthyTabloidTrash.com
January 8, 2011

As we move further into the process of Dr. Conrad Murray’s manslaughter trial, it is becoming more important than ever that the supporters, fans, friends and family of Michael Jackson put aside what may divide us and instead focus on standing united.

I’ve been a Michael Jackson fan for almost 30 years, and a Michael Jackson supporter for 17 of those years. Semantics, sure, but I make a personal distinction between the two—the former applies to the excitement I feel over Michael’s body of work and power as an performing artist (okay, and how cute he is and how I want to get married and start a llama farm together—in other words, the way I felt when I was 9 years old), and the latter has more to do with the way I began to identify myself in late 1993…when things suddenly got very, very serious. I support Michael Jackson. I am his fan, yes, but I also feel a responsibility to stand by him—in life, and now in death.

Before Michael died, I shied away from other supporters. Until the Internet gained widespread popularity, there would have been little chance that I’d encounter another fan, anyway—at least not after the early ’90s. No, being a fan and supporter of MJ was a lonely, defensive and angry existence, one fraught with pointless arguments and little time spent actually listening to his music. Although I did spend a good deal of time as an observer of the discussions of others’ (also known as being a “lurker”) on message boards and the like during the trial in 2005, it really wasn’t until June 2009 that I feel compelled to interact with other fans online.

Michael’s death hit me a lot harder than I ever could have imagined it would, and I found a lot of solace in talking about my feelings with others who understood how I was feeling, whether they’d been a fan for 40 years or 5 days. Within a few months, though, the inevitable fractures and divisions and cliques began to form, and I started to feel uncomfortable. I’m no stranger to Internet politics or to that special brand of nastiness that’s so easy for people to slip into when they’re anonymous, but that doesn’t mean that I want to be a part of it.

And so, I remain “nonpartisan” in my support of Michael Jackson.

It doesn’t matter to me whether or not his children are genetically related to him. It’s an argument not worth having. He was their father in every way that matters, and that’s the end of the discussion. No matter how many Mark Lester-types take a paycheck and a camera flash in exchange for salacious insinuation, Prince, Paris and Blanket will always be Michael’s children. I refuse to play Internet-geneticist or side-by-side-photo DNA analyst. No matter what the biological facts are, my reaction is always the same: More than anything else in the world, I’m just glad that Michael got to be a father. The end.

I don’t care how much plastic surgery Michael had or didn’t have. The last time I checked, his face was his to do with as he pleased. As he said himself, “Plastic surgery wasn’t invented for Michael Jackson”. There are far more important things to worry about. Michael was a beautiful man, inside and out, right up until the very end. No one else ever looked like him as a child, as a young adult, or as a 50-year-old man. Michael was Michael.

Buy it or don’t buy it, but don’t bully people who feel differently than you do about the new album, Michael. I didn’t buy it and I have no plans to (I haven’t even heard any of the songs on it), but that’s not because I’m taking part in some kind of grand boycott. I just have no need for it. I’m not worried about preserving Michael’s musical legacy—he took care of that himself decades ago—and I honestly just don’t want to be disappointed or let down. I’m already able to listen to years and years worth of incredible music that Michael toiled over and labored to make absolutely perfect. That’s all I need. Dayenu. That said, if another fan wants to buy the album and loves the songs and gets something positive out if it, I’m not about to accuse them of being a bad person or of violating Michael in some way. There’s a long, long road ahead of us that will be paved with Michael Jackson-branded albums, video games, clothing, amusement parks…who knows what. I have to accept that, because I can’t fight it. I find peace in the knowledge that Michael can still bring people happiness in new ways, even if it’s just the idea of his presence rather than his actual work.

I’ve accepted the fact that I’ll never know everything. From the internal dynamics of the Jackson family to the history of Michael’s use and abuse of prescription drugs; from the details of Michael’s relationships with women to the intricacies of his business dealings, there are always going to be aspects of history that I can never fully be privvy to. I have to be okay with that. As much as I think it’s unfair for the media to fill in the blanks with speculation, it’s also a mistake for fans to try to piece together a storyline to fit an imagined reality…and then to argue against those who have reached a different conclusion. It’s very easy to do that without even realizing it, but it’s unfair to Michael to assume we know more than we do.

That’s what I mean when I say I’m a “nonpartisan” supporter of Michael Jackson. I’m on Michael’s side. We all are. At the end of the day, we all want the same things: Justice to be brought to those directly responsible for Michael’s death; a wonderful, happy childhood and brilliant, productive future for Michael’s children; a media culture that recognizes the value of privacy and the need for ethical, fair reporting; and a sustained cultural legacy that fully recognizes the achievements of Michael Jackson as a father, a humanitarian, an African-American, a leader, a role model, a singer, a dancer…and as the greatest entertainer the world will ever know.

Take a step back the next time you feel compelled to argue about an unknown detail with another supporter, friend, or family member of Michael’s. Don’t point a finger out of a need to make yourself feel better, or to make them feel badly. All you’ll accomplish is a widening of the divide, and more anger directed at all the wrong people. We’re all angry and upset and sad that Michael is no longer with us, but we need to direct those emotions toward causes that can actually affect change and bring about real justice for Michael.

L.O.V.E. Pass it on.

Trials & Tribulations is a private-owned, unpaid, fully-independent and volunteer-run blog which provides on-site coverage of criminal trials. They are covering The People vs. Dr. Conrad Murray, including the preliminary hearings.

Please visit and bookmark their QUICK LINKS page for access to all preliminary hearing coverage as it is updated. Highly recommended.

Perhaps ET has decided there isn’t enough public interest in this phase of the trial. Perhaps they just took the night off. More than likely, Dimond will be back again soon.

Let’s keep an eye out…

UPDATE, Jan 6th: Diane Dimond was absent from Entertainment Tonight again this evening. There was NO coverage of the preliminary hearings.

UPDATE, Jan 7th: Yet again, Diane Dimond was absent from this evening’s broadcast of Entertainment Tonight. They seem to have made the decision to simply not cover the preliminary hearings—a bizarre decision, given that they did have coverage (featuring Dimond) on Tuesday night.

What gives, ET?

Above is a video of Diane Dimond on Entertainment Tonight in 2009. Is this who we want providing coverage of an ongoing news event? As of January 4th, she is doing just that—ET has brought her back on board to cover the preliminary hearings in the People vs. Dr. Conrad Murray case.

18 months after Michael Jackson’s death, millions of his fans are appalled that tabloid journalist Diane Dimond—who, along with Santa Barbara DA Tom Sneddon, led a witch hunt against the performer in 2005—is still riding on Jackson’s name to earn a living.

We are saddened that Entertainment Tonight has given such a divisive individual a platform as a supposed “Michael Jackson expert”. Her bias and conflict of interest in regard to any matters concerning Michael Jackson are abundantly apparent.

Diane Dimond has no business covering someone she worked all these years to destroy. Since 1993, Dimond has built her career on the back of Michael Jackson, knowing that the more incendiary, the more shocking the “news” she reports, the more people will watch—and the more famous (and more wealthy) she will become. Diane Dimond has a “broadcast now and research later” approach to reporting, preferring to offer vague references to “sources” as disclaimers for what inevitably turns out later to have been nothing more than vile speculation. She knows that viewers have a short attention span and are more likely to listen to tabloid trash than to truthful, unbiased journalism.

We are now coming together to request that Entertainment Tonight remove Diane Dimond from ALL Michael Jackson related coverage, specifically the preliminary hearing and the upcoming manslaughter trial. Her well-documented bias against Jackson and ET’s callous decision to hire her AFTER his death is a slap in the face of viewers and an insult to the memory of the performer.

We will start by tweeting the producers and on-air personalities (see contacts below) and emailing them at et.newsdesk@cbsparamount.com to request that Diane Dimond be removed from all MJ coverage duties.

At the same time, we will encourage fans to switch to Access Hollywood, ET’s main competitor. Fans may remember that Michael Jackson gave his last TV interview to Billy Bush of Access Hollywood from Ireland.

We are hoping we will get a immediate response and this will not have to escalate to contacting the advertisers of Entertainment Tonight. Michael Jackson’s millions of fans are steadfast and determined to protect and defend his legacy.

“Michael Jackson Dead at 50 – MJ and Me” / Diane Dimond, June 28, 2009
“Wacko Fans Love to Hate the Media” / Helen Kennedy, Daily News, June 3, 2005
“To Some, Jackson Trial Is Another Shot at TV” / John M. Broder, New York Times, April 2, 2005

When contacting anyone at CBS or Entertainment Tonight, please remain civil in your approach. Inform them that you will not be watching ET unless Diane Dimond is removed from all assignments to cover Michael Jackson. Hostility and attacks are counterproductive.

MAIL:
Leslie Moonves, President & CEO, CBS
Glenn Geller, Senior VP, Current Programming, CBS
CBS Entertainment
51 West 52nd Street
New York, New York 10019

PHONE:
Linda Bell Blue, ET Executive Producer
(212) 975-4321 (**Ask to be transferred to Ms. Bell Blue’s voicemail, where you can leave a message**)

TWITTER:
Primary account / @ETonlineAlert
Mark Steines, ET Co-anchor / @MarkSteines
Linda Bell Blue, ET Executive Producer / @ExecProdLinda
Sharlette Hambrick, ET Senior Producer / @ETProdSharlette
Bonnie Tiegel, ET Senior Producer / @ETSrProdBonnie

FACEBOOK: Facebook.com/EntertainmentTonight

EMAIL: et.newsdesk@cbsparamount.com

Many thanks to MJ4JUSTICE and @UNITED4MJLEGACY for spearheading this campaign and providing background information.

“I’m sorry that the defense is going to have to bash Michael Jackson to try and divert attention from their guilty client, but the reality is he was a nice, kind, decent individual. He wanted to change the world in a positive way through music and art and love and kindness, and unfortunately I think the defense is going to try and attack his character, and hopefully it will not work.” —Tom Mesereau

Thank you, Tom, for speaking out in ways that others do not dare to. Sadly, you are right: This is about to become a trial pitting Michael’s character against the reckless and fatal actions of his doctor.