The late out pouring of "love" for Mr. Jackson reminds me of Festinger's classic social psychology, When Prophecy Fails. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Prophecy_Fails

All of a sudden, it becomes important for many people to convince themselves that they were in contact with the greatest pop idol ever; trying to displace their current knowledge of the failed human being in their presence.

This is not a comment of intentional degredation, but rather a humble account of the style of Pelele's article.

Peele, you're only making yourself look bad, not Michael. You're probably right when you say that he would be "better off dead." With people who say things in the cold and indifferent way as you do, he is in fact much better off being in the peace of the afterlife, in the peace of God.

I know you've heard the saying "two wrongs don't make a right." If you think, as a professional that is, that Michael is responsible for something and thus, is better off dead because of some moral indignity, perhaps you should take a more learned (or scholarly) and adroit standpoint. This only shows that what comes along with your credentials (much of what doesn't always prove astuteness) is also virtue.

Lets be an example, not the cause of any wrong doing.

Dr.T

Stanton Peele get a life and find something less judgemental and critical to write.I used to respect you and read your book 1 book written how many years ago?...maybe you need to look at the man in the mirror? Loss of respect for Psycology Today for publishing this idiots article.

Agreed... the failed human beings are those who speak against Michael Jackson!

I could understand (maybe even appreciate some day) the main message of your article, but c'mon. The man has even been laid to rest and you're already writing this tongue-in-cheek commentary. Clearly, timing must not be one your professional strengths. Show some compassion and take off that distasteful avatar accompanying this article!

better dead??!!! that is soo mean... michael could have been an enigmatic man but that does not gives u authority to say such horrible things!! i always have in mind the michael that wrote "man in the mirror", and "we are the world"!after all he seemed to be loving man! have some compasion would you?

An itch is inconvenient. Maybe a rainy day.

To call a person's life or death inconvenient says much less about the subject, only he who is making the observation.

It is not your place, neither is it mine, to judge the "convenience" of this person's life. To suggest that anyone "needed" MJ's passing is not something for you to speculate about.

Wow, I guess you hit a nerve Dr. Peele. I agree with your article and understand that it's a non-biased account of human nature. Thank you!

I think our author (not to mention respondees) is overlooking some major flaws in the late Mr. Jackson's character. He was on trial for child molestation, accused by numerous boys worldwide of fondling them. He held his 4 month old son over a balcony railing for the attention of the crowd below. He used faux injuries as diversion and self mutilated to the point of having to have a prosthetic nose.

He also hid behind the notion of being persecuted for being black while having his skin bleached, invited the Enquirer to his home for a tour then loudly denied their story, and appeared in court in his pajama pants. After settling out of court for one trial for child molestation for 20 million dollars spoke out against the accusations claiming to give children all he had to give because he loved children so.

The people who really needed Micheal Jackson to die are his own children.

Mr. Peele, the point that this article makes (as summed up in the last paragraph) is rather trite without further elaboration. It's almost like there is a second half to it that has gone missing.

What most drew my attention, however, was the "melting head" icon of Michael Jackson. It is disrespectful and in extremely poor taste, and its association with this article sullies both you and the Psychology Today site as a whole. Have you no decency, sir?

I have a few bones to pick with this article and Psychology Today.

1) Why is this article listed under "Addiction"? I don't see anything in this article that discusses Michael Jackson's addiction. In my mind, this would be something worthy to discuss as it is what most likely lead to his death. I feel that if this subject had been explored, it could have been used to educate the public on the dangers of painkiller addiction, or even on the psychology of fame. However, I'm not sure that Psychology Today even has such a noble cause. Which brings me to...

2)What is Psychology Today's purpose? Honestly. I feel (due to this type of "article" and others I've read) that this magazine should more properly be titled "Pop Psych and Opinions of PhD.s" If you're going to include someone as incredibly popular and intriguing (from a psych standpoint) as Michael Jackson, at least DISCUSS his psyche and emotional problems. So much more could have been done with this article and subject. I'm also repeatedly repelled by articles in Psychology Today such as "Could This Amazing Hunk Be Hitting on Me?" I might as well pick up a beauty magazine.

3)Quite frankly, this article was written in poor taste (furthered by the disgusting avatar that accompanies it) and merely reflects on an author who must have nothing better to do and a magazine that is scurrying to pick up any hits from the overwhelming "Michael Jackson" searches done on search engines. At least be respectful of his friends, family, and fans and take down that terrible avatar.

I'm disgusted in so many ways. In answer to your question, "Did some people need Michael Jackson to die?" the answer is obviously "Yes. Mr. Peele."

You would think half of the commenters on this blog were related to Michael Jackson! All this article does is point out the ludacris habits we have as celebrity consumers. None of us knew Jackson and clearly the man was extremely disturbed. The adulation and idolism of a larger than life figure was the exact sort of impossible disconnect that likely provoked many of Jackson's problems. Whats so terrible about pointing out a man's flaws dead or alive? People are flawed. Jackson was extremely flawed. Perhaps he's in a better place now and no doubt laughing at the millions of people elevating his influence to that of a God and turning a blind eye to his intense suffering while alive. The guy had serious issues and was killing himself with prescription drugs. Michael Jackson needed Michael Jackson to die and the over the top tributes of complete strangers, in my view takes away from his real life and the family and friends who actually knew him. His music is still there for us to listen to. His actual life ( very different from stage appeal) is for those who really knew him to mourn. It's not our sadness so lets get a life and stop acting like our best friend just died!

There was some truth to Peele's statement. If anyone has been keeping track, Janet Jackson was the only sibling who kept close to Michael in recent years... Now that he is dead the others are quick to say "I loved him and he will be missed." Would they even talk to him now if he was alive? Michael Jackson did not need to die, but his family needs to grieve and be sincere.

You either love(d) Michael Jackson or you hate(d) him. The majority of the people seemed to idolize him. While his death might not have been a "convenience", I do believe that all things happen for a reason. There is a higher power who believed that for whatever reason, "this was it" and MJ did not have the final say on when "it" was going to be. Maybe we were not deserving of anymore of his time and energy and we could not appreciate him while he was here. Is this what you meant by "convenience". It takes him dying for us to marvel over his Netherland's home, and his dancing, and his lyrics, and his music - how GREAT the legendary Michael Jackson is/WAS. Could we really justify getting more of what he had to offer, so we can find other ways to criticize him. Perhaps having more time to accuse him of doing some other wrong, humiliate him some more--or talk about him negatively (plastic surgery, skin bleaching, alleged child molestations)" while all the while, you're tapping to the beat of his songs. "We were not ready for him" were the words, so accurately spoken by his brother Jermaine on the Today Show and God took him. I think we All should "take a look in the mirror".

What Michael has been doing for his physical appearance may be a way to represent his resentment with racism which inflicts many individuals as they have no control about the genetic make-up that they carry.
So please don't keep condemning him as weird but put yourself into his position and try to understand him.