Complaint Letter Kelvin Mackenzie

Hello everyone,
Today I'm not sending you any links to Report. I'm sending you a mail on behalf
of Jinane Bensaidi. This is, once again ITV contact information and a letter (wh
ich you can copy/paste) to complain about Mackenzie. What K.M. did can not and m
ust not be left just like that without reacting. He can not get away with this o
ne that easy.
Another thing I'm sharing with you today is a video of a young boy, who's trying
to start his career as a singer/dancer. It's always nice to see young generatio
n being inspired by Michael, trying to move and sing like him. (This is not to r
eport, of course:)
http://www.facebook.com/l/3d5142FMUNtQkxQSkhGQXBaV6JQ;www.youtube.com/user/ki3ra
natorv3#p/u/3/Gy0hLhfYU6w
Always Remember United We are Strong.
L.O.V.E.
Lulu

PLEASE SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE FAN BASE:

URGENT! Complain about Kelvin MacKenzie TODAY! Here is how:
http://www.facebook.com/l/3d514TQBeQTmCV2Rq10TypsPkXQ;www.michaeljackson.com/us/
node/997465
Also, the following is a letter that we can copy/paste and send to:
viewerservices@itv.com
groupsecretariat@itv.com
Fans wishing to complain to OFCOM can do so at this link:
http://www.facebook.com/l/3d5143MHpW35i_DscjugPcsTdIQ;https://stakeholders.ofcom
.org.uk/tell-us/specific-programme-epg
However, they will be required to supply a UK address and telephone number.
OVERVIEW:
From a generic, non-geographic email address such as Gmail, I sent the following
letter of complaint to viewerservices@itv.com. I think this is the best that U.
S. residents can do. It should be easy for hundreds if not thousands of Michael
Jackson advocates to cut/paste/send.
LETTER: (Please copy/paste/send) â ¥
To Whom It May Concern:
Former tabloid provocateur Kelvin MacKenzie's comments on "ITV This Morning" bre
ached numerous sections of the OFCOM Broadcast Code.
Section 2.2 of the Code demands that "Factual programmes or items or portrayals
of factual matters must not materially mislead the audience."
MacKenzie's comments were clearly misleading. He ignored the facts and evidence
presented at Jackson's trial and dismissed the verdict. He also ignored the chil
dren's firsthand accounts of their lives with Jackson in order to portray them i
nstead as having been "corrupted" and say that they were potential victims of "a
buse."
Section 2.3 of the code demands that "Broadcasters must ensure that material whi
ch may cause offence is justified by the context."
MacKenzie's comments were patently not justified by the context. In a discussion
about an interview between Oprah Winfrey and Michael Jackson's children, MacKen
zie irrelevantly raised the subject of Jackson's trial and proceeded to dismiss
the verdict, insinuating that Jackson was a child molester.
Section 7.1 of the Code demands that "Broadcasters must avoid unjust or unfair t
reatment of individuals or organisations in programmes."
This section of the Code is constantly flouted when dealing with Michael Jackson
. Examples of programmes which were biased, inaccurate and borderline illegal in
clude Martin Bashir's "Living With Michael Jackson" and Jacques Peretti's "What
Really Happened." OFCOM rarely if ever implements this section of the Code. Does
calling somebody a child abuser when they've been acquitted in a court of law c
onstitute treating somebody unjustly or unfairly? Most assuredly, yes.
Section 7.9 of the Code demands that "Before broadcasting a factual programme, i
ncluding programmes examining past events, broadcasters should take reasonable c
are to satisfy themselves that material facts have not been presented, disregard
ed or omitted in a way that is unfair to an individual or organisation."
Material facts were clearly omitted and disregarded during Kelvin MacKenzie's un
provoked diatribe against Jackson. He ignored the facts, evidence and verdict in
Jackson's trial and accused the star of being a child molester. The host did no
t point out Jackson's acquittal, either. MacKenzie also ignored the children's c
omments about their upbringing and proceeded to portray it as the exact opposite
of what they claimed.
Section 7.11 of the Code demands that "If a programme alleges wrongdoing or inco
mpetence or makes other significant allegations, those concerned should normally
be given an appropriate and timely opportunity to respond."
Clearly, Jackson could not respond to Kelvin Mackenzie's inaccurate allegations,
but no representative of Jackson's family or estate was invited to appear on th
e show or to offer a rebuttal in the aftermath.
As a viewer, I demand an apology for and a retraction of MacKenzie's reprehensib
le comments.
[name]