One Blow To The Head Is All You Need

The release of the latest “contemporized” Michael Jackson album, ‘Xscape,’ has predictably triggered a new round of anti-Sony and anti-Estate rhetoric via tweets and blogs. It is always interesting when people criticize business for doing what business does, which is try to make money. That’s how a business survives. The music industry is no exception.

It goes without saying that any artist under contract to a business, a label, tries their best to keep a handle on his or her own professional standards regarding their art, but there has to be a middle ground that appeases both artistic standards and the pressurized realities of getting product to market. During his unprecedented career Michael Jackson understood this better than anyone and so does his Estate executor, John Branca. Missteps are made no matter how many high-level perfectionists get involved.

But look at it another way. When the Jacksons left Motown, the opportunity to join Epic/CBS offered Michael Jackson more artistic control, which he desperately needed. When those labels were absorbed by Sony, the advantages of world-wide distribution experience and brand presence were big and offset the risk of additional layers of management to deal with. He needed those too. In simple business terms, the global scope of Sony mirrored the scope of Michael Jackson’s super-sized aspirations. They suited one another.

But, this apparent good match took a direct hit in 1993, when Evan Chandler introduced his despicable extortion attempt. Those devastating allegations in reality had two major victims simultaneously: Michael of course, but also his label.

Looking at the fallout from those terrible days also from his label’s point of view makes a lot of the ensuing conflict between label and artist more complex. The label and the flawed human beings who ran it had to cope with their biggest money-maker and highest-profile artist in history suddenly being accused of the worst that could happen. One can only imagine the boardroom consternation. There was no precedent for a problem like this either. And, in spite of MJ’s growing distrust and active public dialogue on the subject of things he didn’t like about the way Sony did business (or were they just a symbol for the things that were unacceptable to himin the music industry, in general?), like Michael, the company had to keep its feet somehow too and decide how to control the terrible damage to both business and artist.

Many choices could have been made that weren’t and certainly some were made which should not have been. Unrelenting media attention put unbearable pressure on Michael, making pressure from the creative side even more difficult for him to endure. His personal life held yet more challenges. Compromises evidently were made by both parties to get music to market. Emotions and hype ran high and publicity sank to new lows.

That Sony stayed in the game with Jackson, and is still in it, says something rather interesting. Is it possible to look at this from a purely cynical point of view? Whether they stuck with him or abandoned him, there was certainly large monetary risk for the label. Why not cut the losses and take the assets? What seemed a sound business course of action did NOT occur.

Did Michael Jackson have advocates trying to intercede who understood both sides of the game and tried hard to steer his ship between the rocks and the hard places, between his crushing legal woes and his desire for total artistic control? There is so much we don’t know. If he did, they must have been thoroughly demoralized to see Martin Bashir finish what Evan Chandler had started.

By then, the traumatized artist had no idea who to trust, and for better or worse, began the process of disengaging from his past contractual relationships. After “Thriller 25,” he was an independent recording artist for the first time in his long career. Not a small challenge, even for such a seasoned veteran who had been to Hell and back.

The idealistic anti-Sony/Estate critics don’t take into consideration that there are always two sides to any story, and where Michael Jackson is concerned, perhaps many more. It is sincerely hoped that Zack O’Malley Greenburg’s upcoming book, Michael Jackson Inc., does look at all sides of the story and for once, covers the whole story of how MJ’s career was owned by his contracts for so long and what the consequences of that were. Michael Jackson was both Sony’s biggest treasure and its biggest challenge. HE STILL IS.

The producers of today who are also under contracts to keep Michael Jackson’s art in the public eye, following Michael’s own directive to his Estate, and yes, to make a lot of money, are running that same narrow path between his standards as they understand them and the accepted realities of today’s music business. It is unclear if there are any specific instructions in his will/trust regarding works in progress and it is doubtful that ANY artist’s work has EVER been approached and treated with more respect (and trepidation) than that of Michael Jackson. His enduring global appeal is not lost on his global record label or his Estate.

However, it seems that the anti-Sony/Estate faction would prefer that Michael Jackson be remembered by only a small select few as his art slips into the fog of time and memory, untouched — rather than being a dynamic force and an inspiration every day, and by its evolution not easily forgettable. The controversy they feed into actually provides publicity and keeps people talking about Michael Jackson in terms of new music so they are defeating themselves, in a way. But the energy of their stand does not honor his philosophy of collaboration and allowing creative engagement with his work.

To contemporize and let Michael Jackson communicate with today’s and tomorrow’s fans in the style they relate to is an elegant problem, one that he grappled with himself! Michael constantly followed trends, absorbed and honored those he valued, and created new ones. It is naïve to think that an album of demos only, no matter how terrific, would get chart traction. The decision to release the “contemporized” versions and the original demos allows for something for everyone. The music industry and music buying public is an ever evolving thing. No product released posthumously will ever please everyone but the way the legacy he gave everything he had to build is being handled is certainly also without precedent, another benchmark in a career full of them. Though irony is everywhere, I think Michael Jackson would be pleased to inspire so much effort.