as mentioned earlier, the Express took a different moral position on Diana, saying they would never consider publishing the pictures of the dying Diana that were allegedly touted around. They do seem to have an inconsistent moral compass.
I've just done what feels like an essay on the Boycott OK Facebook group including that very subject. All the outrage and agreements following the paparazzi involvement and pictures surrounding Diana's death have been forgotten and it's not only the magazines that are condoning and encouraging this sort of paparazzi behaviour, but the people that buy these sort of magazines too.
In my local Asda today there were four rows of shelving, and the ok magazine was on the second from top shelf and amazingly, at kiddy height on the bottom shelf. I was disgusted so I turned them all round to face the other way. Not much I know, but it made me feel better.
Well done. I was at the newsagents this morning and it was there right on the counter as I was paying so I turned them over and told them I refuse to have such disgraceful and sick pictures of a poor dead man staring at me in the face.
Also done the grocery shop at Sainsburys this morning and even after my complaint yesterday they are still on the shelves. No surprise there though as I think it would take many complaints and Head Office agreement. But I will have to go back into Sains in the next couple of days and I'm going to take up your idea Noorani and turn them all round.
Is this something we could all do? It doesn't look like they will be removed from the shelves but we could all turn the magazines round so the front cover isn't on display?
Is this something we could all do? It doesn't look like they will be removed from the shelves but we could all turn the magazines round so the front cover isn't on display?
To be absolutely honest i think people would be more encouraged to investigate the magazine if they saw a row of them facing the wrong way. It would be more likely for me to go "oh, whats that?" if i saw them turned over.
To be absolutely honest i think people would be more encouraged to investigate the magazine if they saw a row of them facing the wrong way. It would be more likely for me to go "oh, whats that?" if i saw them turned over.
Maybe then they would give some thought into why they were turned over?
Maybe then they would give some thought into why they were turned over?
Thats true. I would certainly hope so. However judging by posters saying they have been flying off the shelves maybe we are giving people too much credit.
My mother manages (not owns) a post office and shop which sells a small selection of magazines including OK. Becuase of my location it wont come in until today but ive already suggested that she not put it out on the shelves or if she feels she has to that it should go on the top shelf. She agrees its out of order so she may well do that.
I couldn't believe it when i saw this in the co-op.I, like a lot of people chose not to look at this picture when it was on here and other sites.
OK took that choice away.It's disgusting but not altogether surprising.No one should have to look at a picture of a dead/dying person without making that choice for themselves.
T.V programmes and the news etc have to warn people if there are distressing scenes in a show or segment so you can choose whether to watch or not.OK should never have been allowed to publish this on the front cover.
Thats true. I would certainly hope so. However judging by posters saying they have been flying off the shelves maybe we are giving people too much credit.
My mother manages (not owns) a post office and shop which sells a small selection of magazines including OK. Becuase of my location it wont come in until today but ive already suggested that she not put it out on the shelves or if she feels she has to that it should go on the top shelf. She agrees its out of order so she may well do that.
Yes, I feel sickened and incredibly disappointed knowing people are actually buying this in droves.
Hopefully, and providing she doesn't get into trouble for it, if your mother does refuse to put them out, give her a huge thanks from us lot at DS.
Yes, I feel sickened and incredibly disappointed knowing people are actually buying this in droves.
Hopefully, and providing she doesn't get into trouble for it, if your mother does refuse to put them out, give her a huge thanks from us lot at DS.
Well im not a big fan but i dont think this has much to do with being a fan, its a bigger issue than that. I think at the very least it will be placed at a height where people will have to actually look for it rather than have it forced upon them.
Well im not a big fan but i dont think this has much to do with being a fan, its a bigger issue than that. I think at the very least it will be placed at a height where people will have to actually look for it rather than have it forced upon them.
Exactly, whether a fan or not, this is indecent, it's graphic, repulsive, it's distressing and it's massively disrespectful to MJ and his family and to the general public as a whole. We should have a choice whether we see this or not as we have on the internet. As I said earlier, most places, especially here have been kind and courteous and warned us beforehand of the content and it was out choice whether we clicked on it, then OK just slaps it on the front of their magazines in full view of everyone, who are unable to make that informed choice for themselves or their children and have it forced in our faces instead.
We can only hope people complain to the Press Commission in droves and try to make a little difference ourselves in the meantime in the shops themselves.
Getting some feedback from the Boycott OK Facebook Group and people think turning the magazine around in the shops is a good idea and going to do the same. We could be onto something here.
I still think he looks less pale and his nose looks different in that photo though.
Every time I've seen that picture, I've thought it more reminiscent of what he looked like when he got burned doing the Pepsi advert. I really don't think that, in the midst of trying to get him treated last Thursday, someone would have been able to take such a picture. It's appeared all over the place as the last ever photo, but I'm not convinced it is.
Getting some feedback from the Boycott OK Facebook Group and people think turning the magazine around in the shops is a good idea and going to do the same. We could be onto something here.
I signed that petition, Its sick and immoral what OK magazine have done, i'll never ever buy a magazine from that sick stupid nasty company.
Every time I've seen that picture, I've thought it more reminiscent of what he looked like when he got burned doing the Pepsi advert. I really don't think that, in the midst of trying to get him treated last Thursday, someone would have been able to take such a picture. It's appeared all over the place as the last ever photo, but I'm not convinced it is.
I wonder... I did think he looked a lot less pale than he usually does, although that could be down to makeup but - graphic description, be warned...
it looks like the end of his nose is missing as it seems to be here.
Every time I've seen that picture, I've thought it more reminiscent of what he looked like when he got burned doing the Pepsi advert. I really don't think that, in the midst of trying to get him treated last Thursday, someone would have been able to take such a picture. It's appeared all over the place as the last ever photo, but I'm not convinced it is.
Has it been revealed who took this pic? Was it on a cmera phone? I'm not sure if it is at his home or as they took him into the hospital. Surely it must have been someone within the Jackson group or medical teams to have gotten that close?
I actually think there is worse to come. There are pictures of Tupac and Marilyn both after autopsy, the same here wouldn't surprise me.
I would also point out that the market for these "tasteless" pictures will be almost exclusively Jackson fans. I certainly wouldn't want a picture of him alive or dead and I doubt many of his detractors would either. His other detractors I should say.
i saw this yesterday and read the article because it was lying about...it was disturbing and disgusting. he deffinately was dead at this point, and they KNEW this when they printed it, because underneath the photo in the article, it said something along the lines of 'Michael Jackson's motionless body being taken away'...it's sick:(
Comments
Awful.
OK magazine once again makes toilet paper look like a good read.
I've just done what feels like an essay on the Boycott OK Facebook group including that very subject. All the outrage and agreements following the paparazzi involvement and pictures surrounding Diana's death have been forgotten and it's not only the magazines that are condoning and encouraging this sort of paparazzi behaviour, but the people that buy these sort of magazines too.
Well done. I was at the newsagents this morning and it was there right on the counter as I was paying so I turned them over and told them I refuse to have such disgraceful and sick pictures of a poor dead man staring at me in the face.
Also done the grocery shop at Sainsburys this morning and even after my complaint yesterday they are still on the shelves. No surprise there though as I think it would take many complaints and Head Office agreement. But I will have to go back into Sains in the next couple of days and I'm going to take up your idea Noorani and turn them all round.
Is this something we could all do? It doesn't look like they will be removed from the shelves but we could all turn the magazines round so the front cover isn't on display?
It seems that publications like OK just completely ignore the Code of Practice. How can they just continue to blatantly ignore it?
To be absolutely honest i think people would be more encouraged to investigate the magazine if they saw a row of them facing the wrong way. It would be more likely for me to go "oh, whats that?" if i saw them turned over.
Maybe then they would give some thought into why they were turned over?
Thats true. I would certainly hope so. However judging by posters saying they have been flying off the shelves maybe we are giving people too much credit.
My mother manages (not owns) a post office and shop which sells a small selection of magazines including OK. Becuase of my location it wont come in until today but ive already suggested that she not put it out on the shelves or if she feels she has to that it should go on the top shelf. She agrees its out of order so she may well do that.
OK took that choice away.It's disgusting but not altogether surprising.No one should have to look at a picture of a dead/dying person without making that choice for themselves.
T.V programmes and the news etc have to warn people if there are distressing scenes in a show or segment so you can choose whether to watch or not.OK should never have been allowed to publish this on the front cover.
Yes, I feel sickened and incredibly disappointed knowing people are actually buying this in droves.
Hopefully, and providing she doesn't get into trouble for it, if your mother does refuse to put them out, give her a huge thanks from us lot at DS.
Well im not a big fan but i dont think this has much to do with being a fan, its a bigger issue than that. I think at the very least it will be placed at a height where people will have to actually look for it rather than have it forced upon them.
Exactly, whether a fan or not, this is indecent, it's graphic, repulsive, it's distressing and it's massively disrespectful to MJ and his family and to the general public as a whole. We should have a choice whether we see this or not as we have on the internet. As I said earlier, most places, especially here have been kind and courteous and warned us beforehand of the content and it was out choice whether we clicked on it, then OK just slaps it on the front of their magazines in full view of everyone, who are unable to make that informed choice for themselves or their children and have it forced in our faces instead.
We can only hope people complain to the Press Commission in droves and try to make a little difference ourselves in the meantime in the shops themselves.
Getting some feedback from the Boycott OK Facebook Group and people think turning the magazine around in the shops is a good idea and going to do the same. We could be onto something here.
I signed that petition, Its sick and immoral what OK magazine have done, i'll never ever buy a magazine from that sick stupid nasty company.
I wonder... I did think he looked a lot less pale than he usually does, although that could be down to makeup but - graphic description, be warned...
Has it been revealed who took this pic? Was it on a cmera phone? I'm not sure if it is at his home or as they took him into the hospital. Surely it must have been someone within the Jackson group or medical teams to have gotten that close?
I actually think there is worse to come. There are pictures of Tupac and Marilyn both after autopsy, the same here wouldn't surprise me.
It's worth a try. Something has to be done.
Can't view it at work. Any other way of seeing it?
http://www.ok.co.uk/currentissue/
I totally agree with you about 'spoiler'
This is what I had thought when I saw the photo!:eek:
He really didn't look any worse than he usualy does. It says something that it's impossible to tell from the picture if he's dead or not.
I think I shall never again buy those papers and similar. Not that I'm a regular customer anyway, just an occasional one.
Toni xxx