I was at a play that whole evening. Completely away from any electronic media. My phone was off, as is the protocol in a play. Not on silent mode, not turned on during intermissions. Why? Because I wanted to be fully in the play, not constantly leaving it to check in with the rest of the world.

There are people who want constant contact via Twitter and don’t care what they interrupt. But I don’t. As major as these deaths might be to some, in my own life they were minor, and could wait until I was ready to hear about them. My NYTimes e-mail alert led me later to an updated story that was factual. And that did not overplay the mystery of the doctor because they had empty airtime to fill, as the cable news people did.

I agree that Twitter has its place with breaking news, but if we give in to getting all our information as rumors, we won’t know anything.

It shocks me how many stories about MJ in the past have been totally incorrect (ie – bones of the elephant man, skin bleaching, his Elizabeth Taylor shrine, sleeping in a hyperbaric chamber… the list goes on and on). Not to mention all the people who were paid for news tips in 1993, who said they witnessed MJ molesting Macaulay Culkin or some other unfounded garbage that was proven untrue in the 2005 trial. Remember, TMZ accepts money for news tips. They also grant anonymity to their sources more than any mainstream news outlet could stomach. It’s easier to break news when you play by TMZ’s rules. TMZ’s “reporting” must be taken with a grain of salt, regardless of how much they say they substantiate claims.

As I write this, in the scramble for updates, some news outlets are suggesting MJ’s doctor was somehow complicit in the pop star’s death. It could be true BUT there’s no evidence of this yet. Let’s avoid unfairly damaging the reputation of a health professional. Slow down and don’t lose your heads!

I’m a journalist myself, and a Michael Jackson fan. I remember telling my boyfriend about 3 weeks ago — Michael Jackson stories online are wrong more often than right, and that’s shocking. It’s like the standard rules of reporting don’t apply to MJ. The worst was the 2005 child molestation trial. The news coverage left the impression that, despite a lack of evidence, he was probably guilty. In retrospect, most people familiar with the case admit the media messed up in 2005 — MJ was a naive, trusting, and disorganized star who was likely taken advantage of by a sketchy family with a history of dishonesty and latching onto celebrities. I exempt a few reporters, including the AP’s Linda Deutsch. (Jackson actually called Deutch after the ordeal to thank her for giving him fair coverage. She discusses it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0YfRDQ3-Xc.)

I respect the Times et al for having the self-restraint to verify claims of MJ’s death before posting the news online.

Remember — journalism hasn’t lost the respect of the public because we’re “slow” or post updates a few minutes late. We’ve lost their respect because we get things wrong and skim the surface.

And I agree — this wasn’t 9/11. Who cares if people found out a little late? It’s not going to bring MJ back. Now, it’s the media’s job to cover MJ’s passing responsibly, and hopefully get his story straight — for once.

Amanda Smith-Millar
Winchester, Canada

As you say, on breakers, at least two people should be in charge of placing finished electronic copy. I would take it one step further. They should have NOTHING to do with either the reporting or editing. They should be typesetters, nothing more.

Ah, yes, the arrogance of the new, improved, faster than fast, Twitter medium. We can contract all of our communications, overlook eloquence and context and fact, because this NEW medium is so, like, right now, like, it’s happening, like, this very moment, like, now!

The medium is the message. And Twitter is saying…?

This may have been true last year, but it’s certainly not the case now. The fact of the matter is that social networking is here to stay… as internet access continues to expand to the palms of the masses. Yes, traditional news outlets will still have niche markets, but the term “mass media” belongs to Twitter, and every innovation of SMS style updates that will come in its wake. It’s only a matter of time before Millennials replace older generations as the consumer powerhouse. And how many 20-somethings today do you think receive email alerts?

-Tim Nott