.jpg)
As it was bound to happen, dying pictures of Michael Jackson have been not only published online, but also broadcast on television.
ET won the race posting the last picture of a living Michael Jackson on its website.
The publication of said picture, taken shortly before he passed away, raises an undoubtedly serious question: is that right? Why should fans and followers get to see a picture of a dying Michael Jackson in his last moments? Should the media draw a line somewhere?
In a poll conducted by Miami Celebrity Headlines Examiner Colleen Starr 40% of participants answered "Yes, the world has a right to see him" to the question "Should pictures of Michael Jackson's dead body be published? However, and with those results in mind, the question remains: Should they, really?
The issue, regardless of how famous Michael Jackson was, is whether pictures of him dying do anything for the perpetuation of his memory. How does his legacy benefit from a picture of him in a stretcher, heading to his last minutes in a hospital? It seems like the airing of these images is only good for those who publish them, doesn't it? And, if so, is that fair? Sure, the media's job is to report on the latest developments of an ongoing story. But shouldn't all of that be done with some regard for the subject in question?
On the other hand, however, if the public finds it entertaining, if they really want to see those pictures, should the media be the one to stop them?
In Michael Jackson's case it was most likely impossible to prevent the less than respectful treatment of the news of his death. Has the entertainment media gone too far, once again, or is all of this fair game?
For more MJ: Check out Michael Jackson's official website, Michael Jackson's YouTube channel or check out this slideshow.
More coverage on the death of Michael Jackson
More coverage on the death of Farrah Fawcett