Unlike many of my colleagues, I had planned to abstain from writing about Michael Jackson’s latest troubles. I wanted to just say no. And I was doing fine until Jermaine Jackson asserted that his brother was being lynched.

The problem is that when we take cases that have only a tangential relationship to race and characterize them as “racism” or a “lynching,” we cheapen the instances where that is actually the case. Getting justice or even media attention in a legitimate discrimination case is hard enough without the distraction of throwing irrelevant analogies into the mix.

We don’t like to admit it, but there are some African-Americans who see a conspiracy in everything negative that involves a Black person. I suspect that when it rains, some Black people believe that a White person is disturbing the clouds to make African-Americans wet. It’s time to get a grip.

The latest case is the result of the alleged victim of child molestation confiding to a professional counselor who, as required by law, shared that information with law enforcement authorities. A search was made of “Neverland,” Jackson’s sprawling California estate in Santa Barbara County, and the singer was subsequently charged with multiple counts of lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor, booked and released on a $3 million bond. Jackson has steadfastly maintained that he’s not guilty.

This would have been a major story if such accusations had been filed against Captain Kangaroo. Jackson’s race is not the issue. It’s even more of a story because a decade ago, Jackson reached an out-of-court settlement to resolve a similar complaint.

Unfortunately for Jackson, these charges came in November, a sweeps period in which many television stations measure their audience. The larger the audience, the more a station or network can charge for commercials. Coverage is also expanded because we live in a world of around-the-clock cable television networks that need stories to fill all that airtime.

The media deserves criticism, but for a different reason.

The name and the photograph of the boy making the allegation against Jackson have been widely circulated in foreign newspapers and on Web sites. An Australian site, newscom.au, has reproduced a picture of Jackson with the boy, now 14 years old, and disclosed his name. South Africa’s Sunday Mail ran the headline, “The boy who outed Jacko.” A headline in the Sydney, Australia, Sunday Telegraph read, “Jackson’s accuser–Revealed: The boy who brought down superstar Michael Jackson.”

While professing not to stoop to such low levels, U.S. newspapers have not used the name of Jackson’s accuser. Anyone who saw a British documentary by Martin Bashir on Michael Jackson, the one in which he admits to having slept in the bed with young boys but sees nothing wrong with the practice, can easily identify the boy.

The Los Angeles Times, under the headline “Hard Life for Jackson’s Alleged Victim,” quotes the boy in the documentary: “There was one night I asked him if I could stay in the bedroom. And he let me stay in the bedroom.” Jackson quickly added at the time that he had slept on the floor that night. The Times further identifies the kid by writing, “The boy had leukemia and received treatment at Childrens Hospital in Los Angeles.”

The New York’s Daily News struck a self-congratulatory tone: “And the boy – who has not been identified by police, and whose name is being withheld by the Daily News – is caught in a tug-of-war between his estranged parents.”

Considering the amount of details the Daily News provided about the boy, they did not need to publish his name in order to identify him.

The paper’s story began, “Be careful what you wish for.” It continued, “The cancer-stricken boy said to be at the center of the Michael Jackson kiddie sex scandal was introduced to the pop star by a soft-hearted businessman who wanted to make the youth’s dream come true…His wish was to met Adam Sandler, Chris Tucker or Michael Jackson. The child got his wish–forever altering his life and Jackson’s.”

Syndicated columnist Leonard Pitts Jr. put it best: “He is a 45-year-old man wearing lipstick and eyeliner on a surgically altered face that could give Charles Manson nightmares. He is 10 years removed from a child molestation scandal. His home is a monument to arrested development.”

And the boy’s parents are not without fault. Michael gave everyone a clue when he named his larger-than-life playground. “Neverland.” It should have sent all parents a clear message: Never let your son land in this place.