Michael Jackson's 'Breaking News' -- The Real Deal

[Tarja]

That's what I noticed.  I didn't check Michael's site in that particular moment but no one said anything about listening to the song yet, we were here talking and we are put in front of a TMZ article, saying Harvey listened to it. It gives me the impression he posted the article before it was posted on Michael's site. I try to find a way to see when exactly was the song released on michaeljackson.com  but don't know how

[_Anna_]

wait a minute.... how on earth did Harvey listen to the song if it was released after he wrote the article?

Did you check the time frame? Are you sure he didnt listen to it on michaeljackson.com and THEN they posted the link on their site?

No, actually Harvey said that he listened to the song and that probably it will be available in full version for all the world this night. So yes, he listened to it beforehand.

[chloead505]

That's what I noticed.  I didn't check Michael's site in that particular moment but no one said anything about listening to the song yet, we were here talking and we are put in front of a TMZ article, saying Harvey listened to it. It gives me the impression he posted the article before it was posted on Michael's site. I try to find a way to see when exactly was the song released on michaeljackson.com  but don't know how

In that case...that's an extremely interesting piece of info! This is worth looking into...

[frogh777]

Michael is a genius.. I think its him, but he changed his voice a little bit to confuse us for some reason. we are supposed to talk en discuss about this song!

[Tink.I.Am]

You've treated me shabbily and you've hope for my demise, but I'm back!

I absolutely LOVE that part!

Plus, Harvey in person posted it...

Thats great if Mj is really back!

But the song, to me, sounds more like  Jason MAlachi with MJ on backup-vocals.... than MJ all the way....  

[Tarja]

So, I calculated and it seems that Michael's staff posted the song  on november 7th  at 1:00 am (twitter announcement, NY time) and Harvey's article was posted  on november 7th at 3:07 pm (L.A time).

L.A is GMT- 8
NY is GMT -5

In NY it was around 1:00 am while in L.A was also around 1:00 am ( because  3:07 pm L.A time  means 5.07 am GMT time. NY is GMT -5 ==> so 5:07 - 5 hours  would be around 1:07 am too)  


 God, I don't know if I did it right. My head spinns around. So it means that Harvey was on michaeljackson.com waiting and keep refreshing the page until he saw it first hand and then went and posted the article?


Also Harvey said    

"Someone has played me the song "Breaking News."

 

He didn't say "I just listened the song on michaeljackson.com." So this really means that "someone" has played him the song before it was officially released. So Harvey has a special treatment again? harvey again knows things beforehand? We know it's not the first time

[GINAFELICIA]

I just want to say this is huge. But you already know it  :lol:

Love you Michael

[jenwren20]

I just managed to listen to it for the first time ( been at work ) but i think it does sound like Michael..... :?
But i agree, that maybe it's more about understanding the lyrics rather than the sound.
What happened with the Oprah interviews today?

[MissG]

To me sounds like Michael.

The family say that is not him because "it does not sound lie him". Well, what if Michael has lost some of his voice qualities? He is not infalible. Many singers after many years of singing sound a bit different. The throath and the vocal chords also are subordinated to the process of aging.

[Sinderella]

Well well well....
I take a nap and look what happens.

Just going to point out a few things here in regards to what's already been said..

Remember who owns TMZ.Firstly.Kingdom Entertainment.Who partly owns KE?MJ.
Also remember how 'reliable' TMZ have been in the past.One article one day,total 360 flip on the story the next day.
The time thing doesn't make sense.It will never be 1am in the east AND west.So whoever is on to that one.....good going

This is clearly about bringing SONY down to it's knees
They are messing about with the greatest performer of the millenium.
After the amount of scandal and suspicion surrounding Breaking News,Opis none,the album delay,the is it him isn't it him and split of opinion through the MJ fans can only be hurting them.Who is going to buy an album which doesn't even sound like Michael but which they have totally taken the piss with by calling it...MICHAEL.
I mean the painting on the front doesn't even look like him IMO.
and for the record,not a fan of opis none.Sounds backmastered and would never be a MJ hit.In a million years.That put with this Breaking news is not giving out a very good impression of how the album is going to sound.
Anyone regretting that pre order yet?

To me sounds like Michael.
The family say that is not him because "it does not sound lie him". Well, what if Michael has lost some of his voice qualities? He is not infalible. Many singers after many years of singing sound a bit different. The throath and the vocal chords also are subordinated to the process of aging.

I Agree he is not infalible,he is human and has the same effects of age as any other person-the ones you can't pay to have altered I mean-voice etc.
This was recorded supposedly in 2007 and it doesn't sound like him so how on earth does anyone still believe that in any part of the TII movie MJ was performing... that came AFTER this.His voice didn't just change and then go back.
Check the vocals against TII.

As for the JM comparison that is supposed to be MJ releasing tracks under some 20yr olds image right?I think that is the general concensus.I think it was a MJ project to see if he could get away with it.It isn't Jason singing, think about it...if he really was signing and it wasn't MJ...why isn't he signed?ANYONE who sounds like MJ would have $$$ poured into their career.2albums on '7 and critical' and still no big deal?
Pretty sure he has never done a live show-or he has and someone caught the footage of it being badly mimed,never toured,never really tried to do anything with his 'talent'...maybe because it isn't his?
I actually have more friends on myspace than Jason M LOL.
So they have either altered MJ's vox the way they did for 'Jason's' tracks and or someone at Sony gave one of those Vegas impersonators a call and said
"Listen,we have a job for you,with what we'll pay you,you can buy the entire history tour costume collection,you in?"
Ok maybe not but I can hear it in my head and it sounds about right for a record label doing shifty deals.

IF YOU BELIEVE TS YOU MUST BELIEVE HARVEY, that it is the real deal.

Why?...

As for the 02 thing,not to get into it...but that wasn't Michael so his voice has no relevance to this at all.It's an actor with a St Tropez tan...and quite a bad one.

What a mess.

[trustno1]

Sinderella I love your ability to be straight-to-the-point and yet funny at the same time.   The Jason Malachi project has been discussed a lot for sure and maybe the intention was to have us thinking it was him so we'd all go research him even further and try and determine if he even exists or is just a persona MJ created.  I remember the live footage of him was said to sound nothing like he does in the actual video for Mammacita etc.  I don't know whether a record company would have picked him up just because he sounds very like MJ, there are a lot of people who would be against a "clone" of another artist, especially the legend that is Michael.  He could have got work as a tribute artist if he so wished though! Now a lot of fans are talking about him it'll be interesting to see if he comes out with a statement denying any involvement.  I agree with whoever said he sounds more "flat" than MJ and doesn't have the same range but that could just be Michael trying not to make it too obvious that it's actually him.  Anything's possible.

[Tarja]

I am thinking about this since I've listened to it. I really try to see all possibilities and not let myself influenced by what the family said.

 If we take for a fact what the family said (not Michael's voice) I do not understand and it's absolutelly illogical - why they don't go and sue SONY for providing a false song? Why all they do is to badmouth on twitter and when it come sto really do something they absolutelly don't move a finger? If indeed, in their opinion, SONY promoted an imposter, why not to sue it? They would gain billions from this and also SONY's name will be really dragged through dirt. A HUGE as SONY...

If SONY promotes a fake voice, do you really think they are so highly idiots as to risk their entire  company for some songs released which are actually false? Do you think they would gain from this album,with a fake  voice, more than from continuing being a huge as they are? If they are sued with this and they are found to be doing such thing they will loose volumes in the music industry. Do you think they would be so stupid in doing this, just thinking that maybe the Jacksons wouldn't sue them? I personally really think they wouldn't risk such thing, it would be absolutelly ignorant and stupid.

I also have to say that on this song I do hear Michael's voice, in a lower register on some parts, also analyzing it I notice that it has many effects on it, that the backing vocals are a bit too loud over his voice and on some parts you can't her clearily his voice, almost giving you the impression it's another voice. I know  he sounds different, I know him since I was 5 and nothing can buy me (as the double theory from TII for example, or any other aberation regarding his voice/body) but I almost have the impression it's all done on purpose to confuse us.

Also, I'd like to point out another thing: The song was released by You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login and the family declared they say it's not his voice on the song way before it was up on the site. Does this mean that mj.com gave the Jacksons the song before it was released?(and if so, why? wouldn't they actually have it as well?) Or this is another inconsistence, meaning the song really was known by the jacksons and also a song sang by Michael, bearing a lot of voice effects on purpose and they declared it's not his voice just to see how many people would actually buy this news again. To see how big the media influence STILL IS to the masses? To see what point we reached in all this? To see how much we learned and how much we believe media at this point and to see how much Michael has to still work with us, to show us TABLOIDS, MEDIA, NEWSAPERS are nothing but pure lies delivers.?

[GINAFELICIA]

OK I finally listened to it and in my opinion it is not Michael singing, except for small parts that  sound like him (kind of....).
Yet I'm thinking if this is not another mask..... because I know Michael can change his voice the way he wants