tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post3346503383687643124..comments2024-03-18T17:01:07.165-07:00Comments on The Provocateur: Voyeurism, Celebrity, and Our Michael Jackson Obsessionmike volpehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02999118519606254362noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-77559351935433133192009-07-08T07:20:26.537-07:002009-07-08T07:20:26.537-07:00Careful. Allowing posts like the
ones I just read...Careful. Allowing posts like the<br />ones I just read could get you arrested for racism. The blacks<br />aren't going to like thisAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-30592228470793161942009-07-08T00:19:00.118-07:002009-07-08T00:19:00.118-07:00i love sinatra and i'm a big fan of him and li...i love sinatra and i'm a big fan of him and like "anonymous" said i own a cd of frank and i lissen to him every they but michael damn i don't have one,i'm sorry for michael because he has some nice songs like Billy jean,smouth criminal,beat it but frank was way to high he got the chance to sing for president of USA(JFK) in brazil 175.000 people went to his concert to see him...but yea nowadays people make money from publicity and he was a good hit for them...and all the way for michael jackson frank sinatra was a star:) http://www.trilulilu.ro/beugen2001/76cb98a04590ce(this is a video when michael met frank). All the respect for bouth of them and thanks for theyr musicEuu™https://www.blogger.com/profile/14320547498875810723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-3256375011580074862009-06-29T06:40:25.280-07:002009-06-29T06:40:25.280-07:00Are you serious? Sinatra's career lasted longe...Are you serious? Sinatra's career lasted longer, much longer, than Jackson's life. Jackson's career peaked and essentially ended by the end of the 80's. Sinatra was still singing into his 80's. <br /><br />Even at their peaks, Sinatra was much better. I don't know how you measure better but it is awfully peculiar.mike volpehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02999118519606254362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3098264341625381422.post-21503915734878585042009-06-29T06:16:14.935-07:002009-06-29T06:16:14.935-07:00Sinatra was a legend, and he'll always go down...Sinatra was a legend, and he'll always go down as one of the greats. Compared to Michael ...yes, Sinatra was a better singer (in his particular genre of music), he was definitely the better actor (although the 'I didn't molest little kids' testimony Michael gave was not too bad ...for a lie), and he was far better rounded.<br /><br /><br />However, Michael was by far the greater entertainer if you compare both men at their peaks, Michael also had a far wider reach, and a deeper depth of reach (in his heyday, Michael could move crowds with a gesture). I appreciate Sinatra, and have his music in my car right now (CD) ...while I do not own any recording of Michael Jackson ....but it is clearly apparent who is the greater entertainer. <br /><br /><br />Sure, there are many places where Sinatra is considered greater than Michael as an entertainer ...in much the same way that in Jakarta or Melbourne or Lagos there are local acts who are considered greater than more international acts, and obviously there is a taste-bias element (e.g. a rock music fan will consider that genre superior to country music, while a country music fan will consider rock to be simply unadulterated noise). Thus, one has to look at things on the aggregate.<br /><br /><br />On the aggregate, Michael Jackson may not have been as good an actor as Sinatra, but he is by FAR the greater (not necessarily 'better' since that is subjective to taste-bias, but definitely greater) entertainer.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com