Michael Jackson was not just a musician; he was a global icon, a cultural force whose influence extended far beyond the realm of music. He earned the title “King of Pop” not only for his revolutionary contributions to music and performance but also for the power he amassed within the entertainment industry.
But as his star ascended, so did the forces that sought to dismantle his legacy. What was once Hollywood’s golden child became public enemy number one. Was Michael Jackson’s downfall orchestrated by a few powerful figures within the industry? Could the answer lie in his business dealings, his critiques of Hollywood, and his strained relationships with figures like Oprah Winfrey?
Michael Jackson’s Rise and the Power Play with Sony
Michael Jackson was a visionary. His creativity and business acumen made him not only a chart-topping artist but also a shrewd entrepreneur. One of his most significant moves came in 1985 when he acquired ATV Music Publishing, which owned the rights to the Beatles catalog.
But Michael’s ambitions didn’t stop there. By the early 1990s, he had struck a deal with Sony that gave him a significant stake in their publishing company. This partnership, however, was seen as a challenge to the traditional gatekeepers of the industry.
For every song that Beyoncé, Jay-Z, or other artists signed to Sony released, Michael received royalties. His growing influence made him a formidable figure. He wasn’t just a performer; he was a mogul, controlling the flow of money and the power to shape musical careers.
But with great power came great opposition.
Oprah Winfrey: Friend or Foe?
Oprah Winfrey was once considered one of Michael Jackson’s allies. Their infamous 1993 interview was a moment of reckoning for Jackson, as he addressed rumors about his skin condition, his relationships with children, and his so-called eccentricities.
Many saw Oprah as a figure who could protect Jackson’s image from the tabloid storm. However, her approach in this interview raised questions. Rather than offering Michael a platform to clear his name, Oprah pressed him on uncomfortable subjects, including his relationships with children and bizarre rumors about his personal life. The interview did little to quell public speculation and, for some, felt more like an interrogation.
But it was Oprah’s actions after Michael’s death that caused an irreversible rift between the two. In 2019, Oprah gave her full support to Leaving Neverland, a documentary that accused Jackson of sexual abuse, based on the testimonies of Wade Robson and James Safechuck.
Even though Michael had been acquitted of similar charges in 2005, Oprah chose to amplify these allegations by interviewing the accusers. To many, this felt like a betrayal, especially given Oprah’s close connections with other powerful figures in Hollywood who had been accused of much worse, such as Harvey Weinstein.
Oprah’s selective activism—using her platform to spotlight accusations against Michael Jackson while remaining largely silent about the crimes committed by others like Weinstein—led many to question her motives. Some believed Oprah was trying to align herself with the prevailing narrative that sought to tear Michael down, perhaps to protect her own interests in an industry that was growing increasingly hostile to the King of Pop.
Quincy Jones: From Collaborator to Critic
If Oprah was Michael’s public critic, Quincy Jones became his public antagonist. Jones, a legendary producer and the mastermind behind Thriller and Off the Wall, was once Jackson’s closest musical collaborator. Together, they created some of the most influential music in history.
However, after Michael’s death, Quincy’s opinions of him soured, and in 2018, he made several eyebrow-raising comments in an interview with Vulture. He accused Michael of being “greedy” and even suggested that Jackson had stolen parts of songs, such as the iconic bassline of “Billie Jean.”
Jones also cast doubt on Jackson’s claims of vitiligo, the skin condition he had publicly disclosed, questioning whether Jackson’s cosmetic surgeries were genuinely necessary. These remarks, which many saw as a betrayal, fueled speculation that Jones had been influenced by external forces—perhaps even financial disputes—after Jackson’s passing.
In 2013, Jones filed a lawsuit against the Jackson estate seeking $30 million in unpaid royalties, particularly from posthumous projects that featured Jackson’s music. Although Jones won a partial victory, the lawsuit only highlighted the growing tensions between him and the Jackson family.
Michael Jackson’s Legacy and the Battle for Control
What was it about Michael Jackson that made him such a target for these powerful figures? It wasn’t just his music; it was his independence. His ability to challenge the industry’s status quo, coupled with his control over his own catalog and the royalties he earned from other artists, threatened the traditional power structures in Hollywood and the music industry.
When he acquired the Beatles catalog, he didn’t just become a music mogul—he became a symbol of artistic independence. Michael’s power and influence over the industry made him a threat to those who had long controlled it.
After his tragic death in 2009, the vacuum left behind by Michael’s absence allowed the music industry to shift. What followed was an era of over-commercialization and exploitation, where the artistry Michael championed gave way to manufactured talent and industry “plants.” The void left by Michael Jackson’s absence was quickly filled by corporate interests, and artists who didn’t control their own work became the new norm.
Conclusion: The Price of Power
Michael Jackson’s downfall was not merely the result of personal failings or allegations; it was the culmination of years of conflict with the very industry he had helped shape.
From his acquisition of the Beatles catalog to his support for fellow artists like Little Richard, Michael Jackson represented a threat to the entrenched power structures in the music industry. Oprah Winfrey, Quincy Jones, and others may have played roles in tarnishing his image, but their motivations were tied to their own interests in preserving the status quo.
Ultimately, Michael Jackson’s legacy serves as a cautionary tale about the price of power. His ability to challenge the industry’s traditional gatekeepers was both his strength and his undoing. Had he lived longer, it is possible that he would have continued to reshape the music industry in his image. But the forces aligned against him made it clear: Michael Jackson, for all his genius, was simply too powerful to be allowed to thrive unchallenged.
