OK Magazine’s front cover this week, a special “tribute issue” to Michael Jackson.
I’m generally not offended by relatively gruesome images and the like, but this must be one of the most tasteless covers I think I’ve ever seen on a magazine. Was it really necessary to put this image on the cover? Think of all the iconic images of Jacko over the years.
This image could’ve quite happily been placed inside, as part of the story of his death, but to put it up front and centre in this manner is pretty grotesque and unnecessary. To think, if this is their official tribute issue (and like it or not, OK is one of those journals of record which people will keep for decades), then this is how he will be remembered.
Fine, they got the “exclusive”. Well done. Great chequebook journalism. Hell, they can advertise that on a strapline or something, and do a big spread inside. Don’t put the whole damned image up there on the cover for everyone to see in every newsagents.
It really is gratuitous, and to my mind it’s offensive.
Oh, and for reference purposes, the last time they used black backgrounds instead of red, it was for Jade Goody. Before she died…
