What felt the most shocking, as the first reports of Michael Jackson's death rolled out, was how expected the news was. Maybe not today exactly, but if there was ever a Greek tragedy that seemed to be forming in the very first years of a man's life, this was it.

The adorable and preternaturally talented boy who could sing his heart out. The engaging cartoon that made the Jackson 5 a household presence Saturday mornings. The dancing skill that evoked praise from a marveling Fred Astaire. Then came "Thriller." The album exploded on the music scene like a super nova and the creepy/funky video changed the genre forever. But it also changed Jackson. He too burned white hot, and the flames revealed an unknown dark side: the ambitious, and as Jackson described it, abusive father. The stunted childhood. The career so fully engulfed in glitz and money -- and so removed from anything resembling normal life -- that there was little opportunity for the singer to learn a few home truths: that we don't get everything the way we want it, that we have to take responsibility, that sleeping in bed with young boys isn't OK, that dangling babies over balconies and draping their faces, or breezing through expensive tchotchke shops pointing at the million-dollars' worth of goods we'll buy, reflect an inability to reckon with what life is about. The successive plastic surgery that ultimately made his face look like a badly sculpted clay mask.

We saw him dazzle with individuality and originality in "Thriller," then saw him wither away to the frail middle-aged man who was dragged to court in his pajamas. Ultimately there would be no comeback.

Photo: Michael Jackson thanks the audience during the Radio Music Awards in 2003. Credit: AP Photo / Joe Cavaretta

Today's editorial about the new SAG contract tried to summarize more than two years of Hollywood labor talks in a single sentence, a high-risk move that, ahem, was not completely successful. Here's the sentence:

By "residuals intact," we meant that the new contracts didn't change the residuals already established for TV and other traditional outlets. "Albeit less generous" was a reference to newly created residuals for online programming that were minuscule in comparison to the ones paid for TV reruns. But our words didn't necessarily get these points across, and AFTRA National Executive Director Kim Roberts Hedgpeth sent me an e-mail registering her protest:

She's right on all accounts. I would add, though, that many writers and actors don't view the new residuals for programs streamed on Hulu and other online sites as being "more generous" than what they've relied on for years in television. Nor are there any residuals to be paid when a program made for the Internet is resold to other new-media outlets.

The ad-supported streaming provisions of the contracts are the real flash-points, because many union members see Hulu and its ilk taking the place of reruns on TV. In their minds, they are trading hefty TV residuals for parsimonious Internet ones. There's no question that the networks are airing far fewer reruns, and that more people are catching those repeats online than before. But it's also true that, at least so far, the shows that air on Hulu et al aren't generating nearly as much revenue for the networks as their reruns used to.

So, that's what we meant by "less generous." Now if only the newspaper offered as much space as the Opinion L.A. blog....

-- Jon Healey

The Times editorial board notes the end of the Screen Actors Guild's two-year contract saga but cautions that peace is "illusory." SAG remains bitterly divided between hard-line factions and more moderate ones, and relations remain strained with the American Federation of Radio and Television Artists. Oh, and the Directors Guild of America isn't a happy camp either.

The editorial board also notes that despite the political upheaval in Iran, with political rallies and surprisingly open criticism of the government, the winner of the presidential election tomorrow probably won't be able to circumvent the ruling mullahs and bring about real reform.

Lastly, the board hopes that if her nomination to the Supreme Court is confirmed, Judge Sonia Sotomayor will urge her colleagues on the bench to permit television cameras in the court. Technological advances, among other reasons, make objections to broadcasting oral arguments quaint:

The contention that cameras would alter the traditions of the court has been undermined by recent innovations such as the same-day release of audio recordings of high-profile arguments and the prompt posting on the Internet of transcripts.

Over on the Op-Ed page, UC Berkeley professors Laurel Fletcher and Eric Stove say the best way for the United States to prevent radicalization of prisoners freed from Guantanamo Bay is to help them readjust to life at home:

As the U.S. prepares to close Guantanamo, it also needs to plan for post-release services to  help detainees reintegrate into their communities. U.S.-supported programs should provide former detainees with job training and psychological support and help them secure stable employment...By helping re-anchor released detainees in their communities, we will reduce the risk of terrorist attacks against the United States.

Further down the page, columnist Meghan Daum muses about a study released by the National Bureau of Economic Research and the University of Pennsylvania that found women's "subjective well-being" has declined. No one knows exactly why this is, but Daum blames Angelina Jolie. With her Oscar, Brad Pitt, pilot's license and mega family, she sets a standard other women simply can't meet.

Lastly, Mark Steinberg, a retired partner at O'Melveny & Myers, writes about the political $kills he learned growing up in Chicago.

Photo: Uighur detainees display a homemade message to media visitors (Brennan Linsley / AP).

Update: The DGA accurately noted a discrepancy between the editorial published in today's pages and its scrunched up summation on the blog. The editorial notes that factions in the talent unions remain bitter about the DGA's deal wth studios while writers were striking, not that the DGA itself is unhappy.

You would think that the movie industry, which celebrates documentarians every year at its awards ceremonies, would want to help those filmmakers overcome the hurdles posed by changing technology. But Hollywood's copyright holders don't see things quite that way. In fact, they're trying to make it harder for documentarians to practice their craft, opposing the latter's bid for the freedom to extract short clips directly from DVDs.

This is an arcane topic that's down in the weeds of federal copyright law. But if you'd like to explore it further, hop on over to the Times' Technology blog, where I write about it at length. Click here for the shortcut.

Credit: Spencer Platt / Getty Images

Today's Editorial Page weighs in on a Los Angeles billboard ordinance being considered today by a City Council committee, offering The Times' prescription for how the city could best fashion enforceable and effective sign restrictions. But we'd have more faith that the council could pull off such a feat if it hadn't failed so dismally in the past:

Before the city permits any new billboards or draws any new districts, it must demonstrate its ability and its will to enforce current law, cite and dismantle illegal signs and complete and publicly post its sign inventory. Absent that showing of good faith, over the course of a year or two, no Angeleno can be expected to see any new law as anything other than further concessions to the billboard industry.

We also discuss the Screen Actors Guild's tentative deal with the Hollywood studios, pointing out that SAG's efforts to negotiate a better deal in new media was undermined by the willingness of other unions to accept less. Next time around, the union might want to increase its leverage by negotiating jointly with the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists and the Writers Guild of America, whose contracts will expire at about the same time as SAG's.

Over on the Op-Ed page, columnist Jonah Goldberg says the Environmental Protection Agency's decision last week to regulate greenhouse gases should be disturbing to "people who believe in democratic, constitutional government." That's because the agency is taking on sweeping powers to regulate nearly every sphere of economic activity, powers that were never put before the voters.

Neal Bascomb, author of a recent book on the hunt for Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann, points out that the fledgling nation of Israel's pursuit and prosecution of the notorious operational manager of the "Final Solution" exposed his crimes to the world and served justice against a man who might otherwise have gone free. That's worth noting as the world works on systems, like the International Criminal Court, for trying others who have committed crimes against humanity.

And Dean Florez, chairman of the state Senate Committee on Food and Agriculture, points out the folly of some California pistachio growers, who thought the nuts' thick shells and the methods used to process them would protect them from bacteria. That mistake was exposed when about 3 million pounds of pistachios from a Terra Bella plant had to be recalled because of salmonella contamination. Florez has introduced a bill that he says will reduce the risks.

All that, and Letters, too.

*Photo of Adolf Eichman by Associated Press

The filmmaking industry seems so closely identified with Los Angeles, it was a shock to see Richard Verrier's story this morning about the dramatic decline in feature film shoots this year. In the first three months of 2009, Film L.A. reported, feature filmmakers racked up only 903 production days in Los Angeels County, down 56% from the previous year. In fact, the number was the lowest quarterly total since 1993, which is as far back as Film L.A.'s statistics go.

Also down: commercial shoots, which fell more than 34% from the first three months of 2008. That figure was the lowest first-quarter number in at least 25 years. But it wasn't the lowest ever, not by a long shot -- commercial shoots tend to fall off sharply during recessions, then bounce back quickly. In fact, the big dropoff for commercials in the current downturn came in the third quarter last year, and they've rebounded a bit since then. Meanwhile, television production remains strong, compensating for the fall-off in features and commercials. 

So, what to make of these numbers? Some film-industry allies have renewed their call for tax breaks for filmmakers, saying California had to start competing with the giveaways offered by New York, Louisiana and New Mexico. (The Legislature recently approved breaks for films with budgets below $75 million, but the subsidies aren't as generous as other states' and don't take effect until 2011.) There's no question that those states' financial incentives have helped them attract producers who weren't wedded to other locales; the issue for California officials is whether they'd gain more than they lose by offering more competitive subsidies. And while at least one filmmaking hotbed outside of SoCal is reporting boffo production numbers, it's hard to find the data for U.S. film production that could reveal just how well other parts of the country were doing in comparison to the local doldrums.

One other thought: as Richard's story noted, the local feature-film numbers may be affected not only by the recession, but also by the protracted impasse in contract negotiations between the studios and the Screen Actors Guild, the union with a virtual lock on film actors (but not on TV productions). Local film production days hit their highest point in nearly seven years in the second quarter of 2008, as studios raced to finish work before SAG's contract expired June 30. Since then, however, the numbers have new lows every quarter.

In sum, the picture's murkier the deeper you go into the numbers. But what do you think? Should the financially crippled state ramp up incentives for filmmakers? Are there other, better ways to boost the production numbers? Or will these worries fade when the SAG impasse ends and the recession goes away?

Credit: AP Photo, FILE

Today's editorial page leads off with kudos to President Obama for reversing the Bush administration's ban on federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, but chides him for not calling on Congress to reverse its own restrictions. While we're at it, we helpfully point out that California would be a terrific place to invest some of that federal money, given all the facilities and scientists here thanks to 2004's Proposition 71.

We also call for more transparency on earmarks, as the Senate prepares to approve an omnibus spending bill that contains more than 8,500 of them accounting for $7.7 billion. And we urge Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder to reverse the Bush administration's position on medical marijuana research and change the culture at the Drug Enforcement Agency, whose rigid ideological position on cannabis is thwarting the advancement of science.

On the Op-Ed page, Santa Monica City Councilman Bobby Shriver and environmental lawyer Joel Reynolds plea for the state Legislature to fix what ails the Orange County Transportation Corridor Agencies, an organization whose devotion to toll roads is threatening mobility, the environment and recreation.

David Schenker, Arab politics expert at a Washington think tank, worries that the Obama administration's efforts to reach out toward Syria's authoritarian government will come at the cost of U.S. attempts to advance human rights.  And writer Charles Fleming, in an installment of the "Postcards from the Recession" series about the real-world impacts of the troubled economy, describes the wrenching effects of hard times on Southern California's self-employed creative community.

Finally, columnist Jonah Goldberg wonders why liberals think it's OK for the Obama administration to use the economic crisis as an opportunity to impose a far-reaching liberal agenda, when they excoriated President Bush for using 9/11 as an opportunity to encourage right-wing policies. "It's not leadership. It's fear-mongering," Goldberg says of Obama's style.

All that, and Letters too!

* Photo of a public hearing for the Foothill South toll road by Don Bartletti / Los Angeles Times

In Wednesday's letters, readers offered praise for this story about wasteful -- and possibly fraudulent-- reimbursements for travel expenses filed by high-ranking state officials.

According to the report, "Carrie Lopez, director of the Department of Consumer Affairs, charged taxpayers to fly from Sacramento, where she works, to Los Angeles, where she lives, to attend a Justin Timberlake concert with her daughter."

David Goodwin, of  Los Angeles, is unimpressed with her attempt to bring sexy back:

On Sunday, The Times ran an expose of high-ranking officials who seek reimbursement for questionable, and possibly fraudulent, expenses.

On Monday, George Skelton reported on the creation of the Assembly Accountability and Administrative Review Committee, an attempt to trace government waste and fraud.

A few suggestions for California officials:

• Abolish the committee and read the paper.
• File criminal charges against everyone exposed by The Times as an example to others.
• Don't insult our intelligence by pretending you care. Have your stupid meeting, adjourn, and go to an expensive restaurant and bill the taxpayers for dinner.

And Marilyn J. Collier, of Twentynine Palms, writes that:

I frequently disagree with The Times' editorial positions, but the article about the state-funded trips for California's appointed bureaucrats illustrates why newspapers and top-notch reporters are so vital.

The Times' future was on the mind of other readers, too, who for the most part lament this newspaper's decision to fold local and state coverage into the front section. Writes Cynthia A. Smith, of Venice:

Thank you for streamlining my morning. Without the California section, there is so little in the paper I want to read that I'm up and out in no time.

I can't wait until you go tabloid.

The Rocky Mountain news and the San Francisco Chronicle, reaching L.A.'s unbanked, and Hollywood's tense relations with Iran, too.

Photo: Justin Timberlake in concert.  Credit: Los Angeles Times.

The other day White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel  identified Rush Limbaugh as "the voice and the intellectual force and energy behind the Republican Party." It wasn't meant as a compliment to either Limbaugh or the GOP.  Your party is so hard up, Emanuel was suggesting, that it has to seek star power in a blowhard radio personality  who preaches to the converted.

But maybe Limbaugh ought to accept Emanuel's tribute at face value and run for public office. It's not as if Americans won't vote for entertainers. Arnold Schwarzenegger is governor of California, and Minnesota may soon be represented in the U.S. Senate by "Saturday Night Live" alumnus Al Franken -- who is also the author of "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot."  And a history of drug addiction isn't a disqualifcation for holding public office. Ask Patrick Kennedy.

It would mean a pay cut, but if Limbaugh really wants Obama to fail what better way to accomplish that than run for Congress, where he could vote against Obama's anti-capitalist schemes?

When Ronald Reagan announced his candidacy for governor, movie mogul Jack Warner supposedly said: "No, no. Jimmy Stewart for governor. Ronald Reagan for best friend." How about Rush Limbaugh as senator,  and Ann Coulter as speaker of the House?

Run, Rush, run.

Photo of Rush Limbaugh speaking at "An Evening with Rush Limbaugh" by Brill Pugliano/Getty Images

Awww, maaaannnnnnn.

And on Oscar Day, too.

LA's lost Fortune 500 companies galore. We've lost movie productions, and our locally branded department stores have been supplanted by Macys and other carpetbagger brands.

And now one of Hollywood's senior gossip websites, the venerable Defamer.com, has been absorbed by its New York flagship gossip site called Gawker. The Gawker Media president blogged on Sunday that ``the movie industry stories will remain showcased on Defamer.com but the sites will be staffed and managed as one.``

I think Nikki Finke is right that  http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/goodbye-defamer-editors-and-writers-fired-site-will-be-merged-into-gawker/  Defamer lost a good bit of its smart sizzle when founder Mark Lisanti decamped.

Defamer usually managed to be snarky without being skuzzy, and was, refreshingly, polysyllabically clever. I was partial to the black-and-white photograph illustrating Defamer's home page. I am all but certain that it was Charles Boyer, an elegant face you would never see on other gossip sites whose idea of the last word in glamor is Paris Hilton.

When I checked the new co-joined site, there was a farewell photo of Boyer in virtually the identical pose, but with his eyes -- well, one eye was all you could see -- closed.

Bonne nuit, sweet prince.