The most famous person in the world

[MaryAnnDVC]

Annoying? Who do you think fits that term of 'most famous' more? Just curious.

I'm not into "fame" or the people who claim to have it. My point is...for a NEWS person to state that someone is THE MOST FAMOUS person, I want to know...based on what? There are TONS of famous people, of varying degrees. He may be ONE OF the most famous people, but to declare him as "THE"? If one of the other "most famous" people had died yesterday, they'd be declaring that person "THE" most famous. It's just one of those things that "news" people throw around. I'm not saying that *I* believe another particular person is (because who REALLY knows who IS?)...just that I prefer news people talk about facts, not drone on in the emotion of the moment. Factually, I believe he was ONE OF the most famous people in the world; I don't KNOW if he was THE most famous. Actually, I thought my other was pretty clear.

 

[phamton]

Then Mickey Mouse.

Please, no one here say "he never lived."

OK I won't burst your bubble by saying that but you do agree that he isn't a person. You could've just as easily listed Santa Claus. At least he is a person not a mouse.

 

[lemondog]

I agree with this. Esp seeing the footage of fans mouring all over the world. He has been so famous for so long, and known by several generations...heck, even my grandparents knew who he was and they died in the 80s.

That's so true. Michael Jackson is one of the only musicians in the world whose success has spanned more than one generation. He first hit it big as part of the Jackson 5 when my parents were in high school. Then he hit it even BIGGER when I was in middle/high school with Thriller and Bad. You can't even say that about Elvis or The Beatles -- both were strictly my parents' generation.

 

[CaliforniaDreamin]

I'm not into "fame" or the people who claim to have it. My point is...for a NEWS person to state that someone is THE MOST FAMOUS person, I want to know...based on what? There are TONS of famous people, of varying degrees. He may be ONE OF the most famous people, but to declare him as "THE"? If one of the other "most famous" people had died yesterday, they'd be declaring that person "THE" most famous. It's just one of those things that "news" people throw around. I'm not saying that *I* believe another particular person is (because who REALLY knows who IS?)...just that I prefer news people talk about facts, not drone on in the emotion of the moment. Factually, I believe he was ONE OF the most famous people in the world; I don't KNOW if he was THE most famous. Actually, I thought my other was pretty clear.

Obviously it is just speculation. We can't poll the world and find out who the most famous person in the world is. But I see your point, a newsman should be objective and "most famous" is a subjective term. Like I said in a previous post, if someone had asked the board last week who the most famous person in the world is, it might give us a better picture. But that can't happen. So since MJ has died, he is on the forefront of everyones mind. I remember when Dale Earnhardt died, I was shocked at how his death made worldwide news. I live in NC and didn't realize anyone who lived outside of NC or was not a NASCAR fan knew who he was. But with Michael Jackson, I would have to guess that most of the world population knew who he was, this of course is not including remote jungles or anything like that.

 

[islandmum]

Michael Jackson is/was definately the most famous person in the World. He spanned generations and had a long career. Now that he has passed, my list is above.

I would say MJ was the most famous CELEBRITY in the world - not the most famous person.

The most famous person is going to be someone like the pope, Queen Elizabeth, etc - a figurehead, historical, on a worldwide level, not something that a section of the worlds population will have listened to at some point or read about in a magazine.

Historical figures will always reach a wider global audience through learning and teaching, rather than celebrities.

 

[islandmum]

You can't even say that about Elvis or The Beatles -- both were strictly my parents' generation.

and the next generation will think the same about MJ as we do about Elvis and the Beatles, yesteryears music icon.

 

[Topper]

People in the smallest hovels in the most remote corners of the Earth know who he is.

Got a link to back that up?

 

[ericamanda01]

All great choices and I have to agree with Princess Diana and Madonna. But I was really surprised that no one mentioned Britney Spears. I know she hasn't spent the same number in the public eye, but I am sure she is very famous.

 

[Tiggerlover91]

THE most famous....I'm not sure...ONE of the most famous....ABSOLUTELY! I've heard his death compared to that of JFK, Elvis, and Princess Di. I can only imagine the coverage his funeral will get.

 

[mickaholic4077]

What about Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis?

 

[DMRick]

You can't even say that about Elvis or The Beatles -- both were strictly my parents' generation.

My grands (all young teens) all listen to Beatles music and certainly know who Elvis is, although they don't own his music and they do the Beatles.They have definately spanned generations. They do, of course know who MJ is, but none of them have his music. They mostly know of him because of the court cases, and they'll see a cover in a grocery store about him.

 

[disneyjunkie]

I think the most famous/popular list has a lot do with the type of music you grew up listening to.

My mom was born in 1948. However, she would have never said Elvis. As far as music goes, here list would have included Michael Jackson, Little Richard, Diana Ross, Smokey, Stevie Wonder, Wilson Picket, Sam Cook, James Brown, Ray Charles, Patti LaBelle, Tina Turner, The Four Tops, The Temptations...

I was born in 1968. My list would only include one pop singer - Michael Jackson. The rest would be R&B and hip hop singers/groups.

My son was born in 1991. His list would include Michael Jackson, R&B and Hip Hop.


That doesn't mean the others weren't great, they just would not make our lists.

 

[raysnkaysmom]

I would say MJ was the most famous CELEBRITY in the world - not the most famous person.

The most famous person is going to be someone like the pope, Queen Elizabeth, etc - a figurehead, historical, on a worldwide level, not something that a section of the worlds population will have listened to at some point or read about in a magazine.

Historical figures will always reach a wider global audience through learning and teaching, rather than celebrities.

As much as it SHOULD be the case, I think more people know celebrities than historic figures..
Honestly, I wouldn't know who the Pope was or Queen Elizabeth by a picture..

 

[The Mystery Machine]

I thought of someone who is pretty universal, Captain James T. Kirk of the Starship Enterprise.

Now he may not be known by everyone as Shatner of course and everyone but his fame is global.

 

[islandmum]

As much as it SHOULD be the case, I think more people know celebrities than historic figures..
Honestly, I wouldn't know who the Pope was or Queen Elizabeth by a picture..

In america maybe - but thats definately not the global case. In places like th African continent, high Asia continent, there are hundreds of millions of people with no access to entertainment TV or magazines or pop music. Yet I'd be willing to bet the majority know about the Pope or QE or the Dalai Llama.

If you're talking America -then yes, celebrities are more well know, a rather sad fact to be honest, globally I'm willing to bet the statement I posted before is true.

 

[luvsJack]

That's so true. Michael Jackson is one of the only musicians in the world whose success has spanned more than one generation. He first hit it big as part of the Jackson 5 when my parents were in high school. Then he hit it even BIGGER when I was in middle/high school with Thriller and Bad. You can't even say that about Elvis or The Beatles -- both were strictly my parents' generation.

Not so sure about that. If the Beatles had stayed together or gotten back together; I am pretty sure they would have hit it even BIGGER at a later date. And each one continued to have a major career after the break up, and that spanned more than one generation. Their music is still played, remade and played again. McCartney and Lennon wrote songs that are timeless.

Elvis started in what? the 50's? I wasn't even born then but grew up listening to him. My mother collected his albums up to a point, my sister collected the ones from her "era" and then I have the rest. Put them all together and we have a record collection that spans from the 50's to his last album in the 70's. He died selling out concerts and still selling records.

Elvis is still famous. Not saying that everyone still listens to his music, but most kids still at least know who he is. And probably have heard at least one of his songs.


Not taking anything away from MJ--I was a huge fan. He was an extremely talented individual that had a tremendous amount of influence on the music industry and is unarguably one of the most famous people in the world.

MJ and Elvis are not only comparable because of the drug uses and the way they died. Their talent combined with the changes each of them brought in the music world will continue to add to the fame of each of them.

Being famous and being liked are too different things.

What was it Captain Jack said "but you have heard of me?"

 

[moon]

That's so true. Michael Jackson is one of the only musicians in the world whose success has spanned more than one generation. He first hit it big as part of the Jackson 5 when my parents were in high school. Then he hit it even BIGGER when I was in middle/high school with Thriller and Bad. You can't even say that about Elvis or The Beatles -- both were strictly my parents' generation.

What's that/ 70's and 80's?

If you want to break it down like that, Paul McCartney made it big with the beatles in the 60's then he was big with wings in the 70's. The man has toured filling arenas and staduims WORLDWIDE in the 60's, 70's 80's 90's and 00's. That's truly extraorinary. He has toured constantly, never using the "retired and then big comeback" gimmick.

Just some samples

paul McCartney in at The Olympia in France

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=paul+Mc+carney+in+france&search_type=&aq=f

Paul McCartney at the Red Square, Russia There are people as far as the eye can see
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8jrd5UYNFs

Paul McCartney Tel Aviv, Israel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFonR7TLioA

Brazil -which I believe was (or is) a in the guinness book for largest paid audience for a show.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuqQrtjMCUw

So you see, there are others whose success span several generations. If you see the audience at any of those clips the ages go from grandparents to small children.

Mind you, I belong to MJ's generation, but to me nothing beats The Beatles and Paul

 

[Faith09]

Michael Jackson is the most famous person. He will go down in History as the Greatest Entertainer.

I TOTALLY agree

 

[novajeanjellybean]

I think he is ONE OF the most famous people on the world but not THE most famous.

I don't think that there is one solid person that can be named THE MOST FAMOUS person in the world. There's a few of them.

 

[Faith09]

I think he is ONE OF the most famous people on the world but not THE most famous.

I don't think that there is one solid person that can be named THE MOST FAMOUS person in the world. There's a few of them.

Okay I can respect your statement and agree. I must agree their or others my list. Thanks!!