I almost did a Michael Jackson tribute magazine (I know, but I'm a pro, you'd never have known I was at best ambivalent behind the keyboard!) having done them on Princess Diana and JFK Jr. in the past, so I'm quite interested in those that do come out. Newsweek (July 13, 2009) has him on its cover, but it's not a full issue. Interesting quote of the day:

"True, for a while he was the King of Pop—a term apparently originated by his friend Elizabeth Taylor—and he's the last we're ever likely to have. Before Michael Jackson came Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley, and the Beatles; after him has come absolutely no one, however brilliant or however popular, who couldn't be ignored by vast segments of an ever-more-fragmented audience. Not Kurt Cobain, not Puffy, not Mariah Carey, not Céline Dion, not Beyoncé, not Radiohead—not even Madonna, his closest competitor."—David Gates (with Raina Kelley)

I can go along with Sinatra, Presley, The Beatles and Michael Jackson as Kings, and the distinction about ignoring is an interesting commentary on the fragmentation of the market, but I think he's being a bit ungenerous to leave out Madonna with such certainty. And the list of other maybes is partly acceptable (Mariah is a good one, at least to consider and dismiss, but...Radiohead??? Puffy??? I'd put Britney Spears and Justin Timberlake in there as maybes and what about Prince?). Also, did Sinatra really captivate the entire world, every demographic, in the way Elvis and Michael Jackson did? Did The Beatles have saturation-level popularity in the black community?

In the same issue, Quincy Jones says:

"We achieved heights in the '80s that I can humbly say may never be reached again, and reshaped the music business forever."

Maybe...but humbly?

Time (July 2009) beats everyone to market with its special commemorative edition Michael Jackson 1958-2009.

John Cloud writes:

"He was brilliant, excessive, maudlin, tacky and possibly criminal, but you could never ignore him...News of this middle-aged man's sudden passing nearly broke the Web."

Not exactly the fan-friendly fare you'd want in a tribute magazine! But it's Time, so they can't fellate the memory of a figure like Jackson without risking their objective cred.

I liked Patti Austin's assessment, referring to Jacko's work ethic and manic energy and eating habits: "When you live like a hummingbird, you don't have a long life span." Poetic.

Most amazingly, they gathered from celebrities their favorite Jackson tunes, and among them are Nancy Reagan's choice of "Beat It" ("Who knows how many lives were saved thanks to Michael's inspirational message?" she notes with no trace of irony of his lending the song to her "Just Say No" campaign...) and Colin Powell's choice of "ABC" ("It was the early '70s, a time of war, a time of political turmoil, a time of the counter-culture and domestic unrest. They made us smile with their freshness and their cute 'fros.").

Those seeking to cash in are "ghouls" sez the News...which did a tribute edition this weekend.

Back to the less-than-complimentary: Time includes a segment on the "Jacko" years (1990-June 25, 2009) which asks, "When was it, exactly, that Michael Jackson completed the transition from merely eccentric to faintly creepy?" The writer, Richard Lacayo, decides it was just after Thriller hit, but says, "Trying to buy the bones of the Elephant Man? Idiosyncratic maybe, but not sinister." Oh, really? Not sinister? (Not even true, but even as an urban legend, it's sinister!)

The tribute ends with an ad to buy a $15.95 poster of their March 19, 1984, Andy Warhol-created cover of Michael Jackson.

Fascinating stuff, but I wonder if fans will resent having to buy tribute magazines that pull no punches?