it was both.

"If his surprisingly normal-seeming children loved him, the logic goes, could he really have been such a dark and bizarre human being?"

Yes. There is ample evidence of people (serial killers, etc) who treat their family well while acting psychopathically deranged towards the rest of society. Anyway, is there any evidence she was coerced or is this all idle speculation on Salon's part in order to generate more hits with yet another MJ story? If they coerced her, its horrible, but it doesn't seem like there is any evidence of that. Also, how does this help Katherine Jackson's custody battle in any way to begin with? Salon has no right to critique the rest of the media for milking this MJ thing since its clear you guys are too.

Gee, who is exploiting her more -- the family, or the journalist who uses the situation to stir up fake controversy and cynically blog about it to generate page views. If you really cared about the little girl being exploited, you all would stop writing about her!

If you watch what happened leading up to Paris' statement, it's clear that was not planned. She wasn't pressured by the family to do that--nobody expected her to speak, and they weren't prepared for her to do so. I find it shocking that anyone would say that allowing a daughter to speak at her own father's funeral is somehow exploitative.

Michael Jackson is buried, and now the media should move on. His family's behavior is their concern. Any legal problems related to his estate and behavior are none of our business unless and until a public declaration of some kind is made.

Shouldn't a truly loving family know better than to spotlight the grief of an 11 year old who has just lost a parent?

Why don't you worry about how you and your family memorialize your loved ones, and just shut the fuck up about how everyone else decides to remember their own loved ones?

I had my own doubts as well but I have decided to table whatever reservations I may have and accept the moment for what it was: a grief-stricken child publicly mourning her deceased parent. If I witness any future public outbursts from any of the children, complete with a gaggle of Jacksons in the background giving stage directions, I reserve the right to revisit the issue (and my mixed feelings), but at this point, any overly critical analysis of Paris' behavior at her father's memorial speaks more poorly of the critic than it expresses anything concerning Paris and her extended family.

It would have been 100% impossible for the 11-year-old girl to spontaneously decide to honor her father, and not have someone wonder aloud if it were orchestrated. The author's on the wrong road here.

Maybe she wanted to say a public goodbye to her father, since everybody else was. Regardless of how you feel about MJ or the family, all kids should be allowed to say goodbye to their dead parents without it being scrutinized.

Exploitation: The act of using something (i.e. another human being) meanly or unfairly for one's own benefit.

The main question to consider here I think, is whether Jackson's daughter appeared onstage and spoke willingly, or if she was goaded/threatened/cajoled.

And even if she did, are we prepared to grant a 12-year old girl, even one who is related to a celebrity, the legal and moral right to make her own decisions in the matter?

In a way, Michael's legacy, just like any celebrity's, is one of exploitation. He/she performs for an audience; another party is benefiting; and the participant may or may not be receiving a net benefit from the transaction. In the long run, the party with the money and the power always comes out with the best end of the deal.

That is all, class. Discuss.

Salon has no right to critique the rest of the media for milking this MJ thing since its clear you guys are too.

Salon has almost completed its metamorphosis to People Magazine. Judy Berman is capable of writing better than this, but if the editors are intellectual lightweights, one can hardly blame the employees for following suit.

Clearly whoever wanted to speak was taking a turn, and if you were watching, surely you noticed the long pause while they figured out who wanted to go next, the confusion, everybody then moving around so she could be in the front, and the lowering of the mike. No, it wasn't orchestrated. And yes, she should have been allowed to speak since that's what she wanted.

At lest this is better than the Double X post talking about Janet urging her to 'speak up' as if that was an instruction to Paris to speak, rather than what it really was, just encouraging her to be louder. That accusation was total bullshit.

But in relation to one of my earlier posts, I noticed that it was indeed Aunt Janet's arms she hid in, not her grandmothers.

Give 'em to Aunt Janet!

did anyone other than me notice that blanket, michael's youngest child, hair was dyed from platinum blond to brown? in the few pics we have seen of him, he is blonde...why did they dye his hair for the memorial service?

... but does Salon have to do it, too?

I don't think Paris' comments were planned, and even if they were--she seemed more than willing to stand up there and speak, and who on earth am I to make judgments about an 11-year-old girl's obvious grief.

No matter what the setup was, if any, it was a poignant moment, and I won't over-analyze it beyond tyat.

It clearly seemed stage managed to me. She didn't tug on someone's arm and ask to speak ... even if it was arranged in advance, when the time came she was CLEARLY being coerced by Janet to actually take the microphone. The whole spectacle seemed less a memorial to Jackson, and more a stage managed concert designed specifically to rehabilitate his image, and give a global stage for a few hand picked performers to showcase their talents on. Even before the Paris incident, I was seeing an event as opposed to a memorial ... Paris' comments sealed it for me.