Thank God I Don't Have Cable Today

I thought this morning, "Thank God I don't have cable anymore." I thought that because I know what is transpiring right now on nearly every channel. Tributes. Music videos. Incessant coverage of FF and MJ. Yes, MJ was especially inspiring to so many of us. I can't tell you how many times I watched the making of the Thriller video, or how many zippers my pants had in 1986, or why I actually thought it was cool to have a single, sparkly glove. But as inspiring and "iconic" as MJ was, we all know he was all too human as well. Tim Keller (via C.S. Lewis) talks about hell as a place where our narcissism grows without restraint. Citizens of hell will pour worth into idols to infinite levels, not unlike drug addicts. And that, most would agree, is hell. MJ seemed to have begun that process early. So why spend so much time reflecting on him?

Jonah Goldberg writes:

Sure, I liked the Jackson Five. I liked Thriller, too, when I was a teenager. Michael Jackson was an “icon” for me too.

But let’s pause for a moment on that word “icon.” It seemed the consensus adjective for the news networks. NBC ran a special on two “American Icons” – Fawcett and Jackson. Every cable network (including Fox, for the record) used the word “icon” to describe him as if this was some sort of safe harbor, a word everyone could agree on. “Love him or hate him,” the implied logic went, “he was an ‘icon.’”

Yes, well, maybe so. But that doesn’t let you off the hook. Even though the term sounds neutral, it isn’t. An icon, technically speaking, is a religious symbol deserving of reverence and adoration. The networks may not have intended to use the word that way, but they certainly showed an unseemly amount of reverence and adoration for the man.

I think part of it is the narcissism of our celebrity culture. Here was a guy so many of “us” read about in People magazine for so long. His passing, therefore, isn’t a loss in the sorrowful sense of the word, but in the selfish one. It’s a loss of an interesting subject, a creature to gossip about and to fill a few minutes on E or Entertainment Tonight.

He says well what I feel. For sure, Fox News' incessant coverage is not as much about him as it is them. And my fear is that dwelling on it along with them will lead to the same outcome for me.

Goldberg concludes:

If anything, Michael Jackson’s life, not his death, was tragic.

Every year at the Oscars they show a montage of people who died over the previous year. Invariably, the audience only applauds for the really famous people. This has always offended me. Not necessarily because the famous people don’t deserve praise but because it’s so clear that the audience is clapping for the fame. Michael Jackson had many accomplishments. But the press is sanctifying him because he was famous, deservedly so to be sure, but not because he was good. So much of the coverage seems to miss this fundamental point, as if being famous made him good.

I feel sympathy for Jackson’s family and friends who understandably mourn him. But I can't bring myself to mourn him any more than I mourn the random dead I read about in the paper everyday. Indeed, I confess to mourning him less.

Every channel says this is a sad day for America. I agree. But not for the same reasons.

I thought fondly about MJ and his impact on my early life for a few minutes yesterday. That is enough for me. I will be much happier going to a friend's memorial service today, dwelling on his life and how he made it his aim to trust on and point to Jesus. Much better than cable I say.