maddeline mccann : media snookered?

constitutionus

just something that struck me lately over the allegations that the parents might have something to do with the girls disappearance. Now this thread isnt about whether they did it or not ,and i do know the law in portugal says they have to be declared suspects in order to ask certain questions in interviews ,but rather the fact that if it is true thanks to the stance the print media in this country has taken theres no way any journalist thats covered this can come out without looking like the biggest tool in the universe.

on the surface this is incredible as 90% of the time the people most likely to kill you are your friends and family. ditto paedophillia is generally preformed by a family member so how is it the possibilty of the family being involved, given that they were the last to see the kid, hasnt been entertained? when you consider the zeal evident in the murder trial earlier this year which secured a conviction on purely circumstantial evidence on a man whom also went on TV to find his wife killer you'd think the media would be more savy.

so i guess what im asking is has the coverage, no matter how well meaing, that the media have engaged in on this issue prejudiced them from getting to the truth of the story. particularly if its not the story they want?

Mental Mickey

I'll tell you before the mods do, there is already a thread dedicated to this story.

mike65

I dunno, the whole saga has got very messy. The media in Portugal seems to have it in for the McCanns, so the UK media (not sure who 'this country' refers to in your thread) is giving them an easy time - its getting 'us verses them' in tone which is not helpfull at all.

With human interest murder/abduction/kidnap type stories you don't often get unanimity with the media but when the context involves dozy foreign coppers, a hostile foreign media and a nice respectable professional couple this sort of thinking happens.

It should'nt but it does.

Mike.

constitutionus

sorry mike. i meant ireland. but i suppose it extends to the uk as well. like i said in my first post . its not the story but the behaviour of the media in it. ive been rooting around and i cant find any reports that entertain the notion the line the media's been taking is wrong. like mike said its unaminous support which frankly is disturbing. the whole things turing into a "dirty foreigneres besmirching our brave parents" type of thing and i cant help thinking theres an big media ego element to it.

honestly if the media did get it catastrophically wrong i dont see a way out of it that doesnt involve attacking the parents like a buch of rabid dogs and the whole things become very very unprofessional.

mike65

A couple of good pieces from the guardian

Martin Bell speaks and BBC listeners revolt

Mike.

jdivision

Yep, coverage has been ridiculous. Sky is particular will look stupid if they are charged because their whole angle was johnny foreigner can't do a good job

mike65

They won't look stupid if they are charged as thats not a guilty verdict. Its merely a charge. The stupidity may come later though.

Mike.

Kevster

How will the Pope feel? I'm not trying to be cocky or humerous but really: how would he feel if it turned out they were guilty? he may feel rather silly, like millions of other people. I can envisage the majority of Brittans still claiming their innocence; because they have been duped by the British media into believing the Portuguese police are incompetent.


... ...this may be the biggest attempted cover-up of a murder in Earth's history, going by money spent.

homah_7ft

I don't see the media as being losers in this story. It's a numbers game and as long as their coverage draws in the public they are happy.

mike65

The Portugues police are incompetent. That not in question at this stage unless having your 'clean-suit' mask removed then smoking and stubbing out cigaretes within a crime scene is now best practice. Still that's all a bit Off Topic.

Mike.

flogen

Yes, Mike, it is.

Please stay on the topic of media coverage, not of the ins and outs of the investigation itself.

jonny72

I'm not following all this too closely, but I friend of mine is very into it, and theres been more than a few occasions that forums concerning the whole case have been modified/censored because certain posters were questioning the Mcanns innocence.

I can't remember specifically which forums, but they included a few notable English newspapers or tabloids I believe.

The US and foreign media have no problem being objective, but the UK media is failing big time, they've chosen their side and are sticking to their guns, despite the developments.

Royale with Cheese

I dunno. I wasn't at all interested in this story when sky were ramming it down our throats for no apparent reason. Now it looks like the parents could be guilty and i'm much more interested, because 1. i like a good scandal and 2. the media fúcked up so so badly. (Irony being I couldn't understand why this was such a big story in the first place, and now the attention it got could be justified but for all the wrong reasons as far as the British media are concerned)

Like homah 7ft said, it'll draw more viewers/readers so I guess they won't care what they look like if they're making more money.

flogen

jonny72 wrote:

I'm not following all this too closely, but I friend of mine is very into it, and theres been more than a few occasions that forums concerning the whole case have been modified/censored because certain posters were questioning the Mcanns innocence.

I can't remember specifically which forums, but they included a few notable English newspapers or tabloids I believe.

The US and foreign media have no problem being objective, but the UK media is failing big time, they've chosen their side and are sticking to their guns, despite the developments.

I'm not so sure if the Portuguese media has been objective either but the UK media certainly hasn't. That said I believe they're only going to "stick to their guns" as long as no charges are brought; even then they might maintain that message.

Royal with cheese wrote:

Like homah 7ft said, it'll draw more viewers/readers so I guess they won't care what they look like if they're making more money.

I think that's a very short-sighted view which is somewhat misguided.
Should these two actually be guilty of anything the British public will feel extremely misled and robbed due to their passionate support of the campaign. Under these circumstances the media would be a valid target of public outrage as they were very much a conduit for the whole thing.

So yeah, it means big sales/viewers now but if their failure to be objective comes back to bite them they may well lose a lot of trust in the long term.

homah_7ft

flogen wrote:

I think that's a very short-sighted view which is somewhat misguided.
Should these two actually be guilty of anything the British public will feel extremely misled and robbed due to their passionate support of the campaign. Under these circumstances the media would be a valid target of public outrage as they were very much a conduit for the whole thing.

So yeah, it means big sales/viewers now but if their failure to be objective comes back to bite them they may well lose a lot of trust in the long term.

In an ideal world perhaps this is true but going on past experience the media will just pretend they took no stance all along e.g., "Oh how we all were duped". They will imply they were taken in too. They will follow this by pouring hate on whatever party is guilty or suspected of being guilty.

maniac101

flogen wrote:

So yeah, it means big sales/viewers now but if their failure to be objective comes back to bite them they may well lose a lot of trust in the long term.

But there's no precendent for this. In fact, I'd suggest that there's no relationship between the trust that the public places in the media and the veracity of the stories published or broadcast by that media. The Sun reporter who pointed the finger of blame at the only other suspect in the case already looks foolish. But that won't stop people from buying the newspaper.

When covering these types of news stories, the media often serve to reflect public opinion, for better or worse, rather than form or inform it.

brianthebard

I think this case has been the most surreal study in modern journalism, the way it has been treated is just incredible. The family ask that they be left alone by the media-so the story for that day is that the McCann's plead to be left alone! Its not even important what happens with the girl (from the media's point of view) its just important that there is something to talk about, whatever that might be.

blue4ever

brianthebard wrote:

I think this case has been the most surreal study in modern journalism, the way it has been treated is just incredible. The family ask that they be left alone by the media-so the story for that day is that the McCann's plead to be left alone! Its not even important what happens with the girl (from the media's point of view) its just important that there is something to talk about, whatever that might be.

A couple of things:

Some of the Portuguese media look ‘jingoistic’ and particularly out to ‘get’ the McCanns – notably the paper that the Mccanns are taking legal’s against who changed their p1 on the run.

Its not to say that the Brit Media wouldn’t have been fed the same diet – if the roles were reversed… the London tube shooting of Menezes – The Broadcast media had him practically related to Bin Laden and ‘well done our boys in blue’ in the hours after.

Is there a reason for the Media being so bitter? Well one speculation is that the Portuguese were initially disgusted that the mccanns left their children in the apartment –
2 they didn’t simply ‘tip around the corner’ to eat it was a good distance –
3 – they goy nicely during dinner (nothing in itself wrong with that)

why is all this now coming out – did the Portuguese media have the inside track. Portuguese Press reported over the weekend that Gerry McCann admitted to sedating his children on the night in question…… and this came out when – when first I mean and to whom – was this (and other gems) in the preserve of the chattering classes for a while?

jimmychin

i like that fact that someone has raised the part the media have played in this whole drama.

right from the off i found the coverage far too extreme - i thought it was overkill and questioned the releavance of this kind of (over)exposure

did the McCanns instigate all this, have they led the media a merry dance to gain empathy when all they were doing was 'using' the media for their own gain?

i'm not saying their guilty, just asking a question about WHO led the media circus.

walshb

mike65 wrote:

The Portugues police are incompetent. That not in question at this stage unless having your 'clean-suit' mask removed then smoking and stubbing out cigaretes within a crime scene is now best practice. Still that's all a bit Off Topic.

Mike.

They may very well have been incompetent but what are the McCanns?
They are the ones who left three very young children alone in an apartment while they might as well have been back in bloody Britain. People are forgetting that the real crime in this case is the McCanns gross negligence towards their children. They put those children in a terrible position and they are now paying heavily for it. They were lucky they didn't lose all three, that's assuming they had nothing to do with the childs disappearance

mike65

Oh I agree entirely but that off-topic (here comes flogen!).

Mike.

flogen

walshb wrote:

They may very well have been incompetent but what are the McCanns?
They are the ones who left three very young children alone in an apartment while they might as well have been back in bloody Britain. People are forgetting that the real crime in this case is the McCanns gross negligence towards their children. They put those children in a terrible position and they are now paying heavily for it. They were lucky they didn't lose all three, that's assuming they had nothing to do with the childs disappearance

I've already told Mike65 to discuss the media coverage here and nothing else - the next time someone discusses the investigation the thread will be locked and the culprit banned.

If you want to discuss the case itself take it to the thread in AH (or anywhere else this topic has popped up for that matter).

@Homer - I think you may be right about the media playing the victim should any conviction be made, and I think they'll turn on the McCanns if charges are brought to ensure this*. The way they're playing it at the moment, though, the McCanns can do no wrong and the readers will start to question this now that they've been forced to at least consider the parents as potential suspects.

I think to that extent the media has not snookered itself but it will be forced to make a u-turn (and will have no problem doing it) if they feel events are only going to go one way.

I did find it extremely interesting how, on news of both gaining 'arguido' status, even the most reputable of media outlets tried to play it down. Jane Hill on the BBC said that it didn't really mean anything and could lead to nothing (the latter of which is true to some extent) - then later on Friday night someone on the BBC suggested that the new status could actually be a good thing for the McCanns! Maybe I'm being forgetful but I clearly remember the media reacting to Robert Murat's (sp?) status as 'arguido' as a huge development, and one that was at the time 100% certain to lead to charges.

This in itself showed just how close the media had gotten to the McCann family and just how dangerous that is - Hill had interviewed the two shortly before these developments and all the British media were/are being briefed by the McCann team on a daily basis and due to secrecy laws were often the only source of information. This is something they'll have to address if they want to be objective.

In fact the hours directly following the 'arguido' status development - the McCann's team were very quick to get their message out to the media (Which, in fairness, is their job), were quick to plant the seed of them being prepped to be set up, were very much the only point of reference for the media about the new developments and were the ones who spread the story about Kate McCann being offered a deal etc... the latter has all been accepted as certain to have happened by the media but I don't think the police/legal system has confirmed or denied this to be the case. At the very least it should always be prefixed with "It has been claimed that..." or something similar. Although in fairness there they did at first and only stopped a day or two later - that could be because a leak from the police confirmed it.

It's hard to tell if the Portuguese media may have had the inside track - of course it's possible because they would already have their sources in the area while the British would have to come in cold... then again they could just be quicker to turn on the McCanns with their own fictional crap, probably like the British media would if it was a Portuguese couple suspected of killing their kid on British soil.

* There's a story in the possession of The Mail and NoTW, amongst others, which could be used to paint the two in a very negative light (at least that is how these two papers usually treat stories of this nature). At present they've both held on it because they know the backlash would be too great - I'm certain they'll run with it should charges be brought against them.

blue4ever

flogen wrote:

I've already told Mike65 to discuss the media coverage here and nothing else - the next time someone discusses the investigation the thread will be locked and the culprit banned.

Jeese Louise – don’t be such a ..........

The investigation and the media coverage are intrinsically linked. You cant have a discussion about one with reference to another.

And, how about this – 10:18 am Thursday 13th – I just got a text message – see how the mood has changed – and before you step in - the mobile is as equal a ‘medium’ as print broadcast - and this is a media forum

The Message:
‘Renault have a people carrier so spacious & comfortable that you can hardly notice that the kids are in the back. They have called it the Renault McCann’

Not on that basis walshb was entitled to comment

flogen

blue4ever, it's quite obvious that you're trying to troll so I won't punish those who actually want a serious discussion by locking the thread. I will stick to my promise to ban people who go OT, though.

blue4ever, banned... 4ever.

For the record and future reference - yes, the investigation is central to any discussion because it is what the media are talking about. That said this thread is here to talk about how the media are reporting the investigation, not how we think the investigation itself is going, should go or will go. Nor is it for us to give opinions on what we think happened or should not have happened. If you can't see a difference between talking about media coverage and talking about the investigation then don't bother posting at all.

OTK

constitutionus wrote:

theres no way any journalist thats covered this can come out without looking like the biggest tool in the universe..

Journalists and news outlets are not like politicians, they are not called to account. They don't have to resign if they lie. Often they change angle on a story if they sniff the changing winds and nobody notices or cares. Sometimes conflicting opinion columns appear within the same issue (as covered by Private Eye)

..has the coverage, no matter how well meaing, that the media have engaged in on this issue prejudiced them from getting to the truth of the story?

The aim is not to find the truth but to appeal to the brute prejudice of their lumpen readership. The aim is to entertain and sell. News is fun more than it is information.

This tale is ideal for the media. We have a twist. Just when everyone was sick to death of the story well whaddaya know?

When someone disappears or is murdered, it's traditional to point the cameras at the relatives making their tearful pleas. Everyone at home sits on their sofas and speculates on whether the relative done it.

No matter what way this turns out, plenty of media revenue will be generated. Nobody will 'look stupid'. I don't see the Economist apologising for touting the Iraq war as a smashing idea.

One outcome of the case is a trial without conviction followed by media stories that suggest they got off on a technicality. Or maybe a trial with conviction followed a campaign for justice.

If they are innocent, it is sad that the media will have made their ordeal even more painful. In this case, all of us consumers of mccann entertainment bear guilt for ruining their lives in exchange some emotional titillation.

Kevster

Do ye think it's significant that the prosecutor passed the case so quickly to a judge? I mean, doesn't it indicate that the evidence against them may be overwhelming? It may not be concrete evidence, but people have been convicted before based on overwhelming circumstantial evidence; even for muder/manslaughter.

_blank_

Kevster wrote:

Do ye think it's significant that the prosecutor passed the case so quickly to a judge? I mean, doesn't it indicate that the evidence against them may be overwhelming? It may not be concrete evidence, but people have been convicted before based on overwhelming circumstantial evidence; even for muder/manslaughter.

This thread is about the Media coverage of the case.

NOT the case itself.

Come on people. Keep it on topic.

There's a huge thread in AH, have a look at that.

santosubito

Take a look at this story, published on the UK Times online on May 15.
It's disgraceful. The first two paragraphs clearly insinuate he took the child because of his own family law problems. He should sue the arse off them all.




Michael Horsnell of The Times
Robert Murat, a suspect in the disappearance of four-year-old Madeleine McCann, adored his own daughter and desperately missed her after his marriage broke down.

The former car salesman “lost” her when his wife, Dawn, returned to her native Norfolk with their daughter four months after the family had emigrated to Portugal because she was homesick and he stayed behind.

Mr Murat, 33, whose father is Portuguese, carried on as a self-employed property consultant on the Algarve, but visited the child regularly.

Gareth Bailey, a close friend and former colleague of the suspect at Inchcape Autoparc used car dealership in Norwich, where Mr Murat had worked for four years, said the family embarked on a new life in Portugal in 2005.

Married in 1994 in Deerham, Norfolk, the couple had been trying for a baby for years until she fell pregnant in 2002 and had looked forward to moving abroad.

”But Dawn was unhappy in Portugal and became homesick,” Mr Bailey said. “She is a Norfolk girl and her family are in Norfolk.

”She only stayed with Rob for three or four months before she decided to come home with [their daughter]. He had already got a life out there, so he decided to stay. At first, he kept his relationship with Dawn and kept flying back to the UK to spend time with her and her daughter.

”He was going backwards and forwards between Portugal and here all the time, often only staying a couple of days before going back there. In the end, their relationship just fizzled out.”

Friends today described Mr Murat's daughter, four, who is also blonde, as “his life”.

Mr Bailey, who last saw his friend two months ago, added: “He is a laidback guy who loves the wonderful weather and the relaxed lifestyle out there.

”But he was upset about being away from his daughter. She is his first child and she means a lot to him. When she was born, it was the best thing ever for him. I know he stays in contact with [her] and telephones her all the time from Portugal. She is his world and he loves her to bits.”

Mr Murat was born on November 20, 1973, at Queen Charlotte’s Hospital, Hammersmith, west London - the elder son of John Henry Queriol Murat, a company director, who is Portuguese, and Jennifer (nee Eveleigh), from Sidmouth, Devon.

mike65

Don't see the problem with that article. Murat was questioned by police on May 14th therefore was at that point a suspect (how much of one is another matter). The piece above does nothing except outline his personal circumsances. Not sure on what grounds he could sue anyone.

Mike.

santosubito

Ah, come on. Read the first two pars: does it not scream: "He kidnapped Maddie to substitute for his own daughter!"?

Makes a change for me to be attacking the meeja.

hshortt

Just adding my opinion here, I found/find the Sky News coverage to be obsessive, and misleading and I purposely try to limit my exposure to it for that reason. They have become such a large organisation that it reminds me of James Bond - Tomorrow never dies. (Where the media actually make the news, not just report it)

The sheer size of the media invasion is disturbing. Should any persons come to trial over this case, how can it be a fair one with so much media attention?

Cheers

santosubito

hshortt wrote:

The sheer size of the media invasion is disturbing. Should any persons come to trial over this case, how can it be a fair one with so much media attention?

Cheers

Ah, the old canard.

Firstly, Portugal has a different legal system. Would there even be a jury?
Secondly, in Ireland, I can only think of one person who had his trial thrown out because of pre trial publicity. That was CJH and the person who made the comments was the then Tanaiste.
Can't think of any other examples. Joe O'Reilly's legal team (surely the most high profile case in years) didn't even try to get the case thrown out because of the media.

flogen

hshortt wrote:

The sheer size of the media invasion is disturbing. Should any persons come to trial over this case, how can it be a fair one with so much media attention?

Well the scale of attention in the British media isn't really as important in regard to this (as far as I can see) - it's only the Portuguese media coverage that is important as it would be a Portuguese jury.

hshortt

santosubito wrote:

Joe O'Reilly's legal team (surely the most high profile case in years) didn't even try to get the case thrown out because of the media.

Can't recall seeing much (if any) coverage of that case on Sky News. by contrast it seems that Sky want us to know what the McCanns are eating for breakfast.

cheerio
Howard

Riviera

Coverage of the whole case seems to have been complately blown out of proportion. Its a very interesting case, not least because of the huge lack of any facts/answers.
I think its time to wait and see.

orestes

I have issues with the amount of media coverage on this case, but not for the same reasons as most people.

I have felt there was somthing a bit off about the media portrayal of the case from day one, and something about it didn't sit well with me since they were relying very heavily on emotionally charged terminology and human interest rather than actual facts and evidence.

The main problem I have is that this case got such a massive amount of press attention. Don't get me wrong, I feel that every missing child deserves as much media attention as can be given in order to find the child, and I cannot stress that enough. But the last time there was anywhere near this amount of media coverage when children went missing was Holly and Jessica. Apparently the other children who went missing in the time between these two cases weren't worthy of mass media coverage.

Am I the only one disgusted that the media apparently only care that a child goes missing if the child is a cute little white girl with blonde hair?

mike65

That proposition has been put forward elsewhere. Blondes are so cute it seems.

Anyone see Charley Brookers dissection on Screenwipe last week?

Mike.

jonny72

flogen wrote: »

blue4ever, it's quite obvious that you're trying to troll so I won't punish those who actually want a serious discussion by locking the thread. I will stick to my promise to ban people who go OT, though.

blue4ever, banned... 4ever.

Christ, can't I read one thread without seeing some mod pulling the Simpsons comic shop owner routine?

Anyways, Charlie Brooker has some pretty insightful views on the whole media treatment of the McCann case..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO9sNoWSVN8

I haven't been following the media coverage too closely, although I believe there is still a "Madeline" tab on the Sky News site (right beside the "World News" tab). Bernstein (Watergate reporter) hinted recently the media is as much to blame as this emerging 'idiot culture' that is fueling the whole thing.

flogen

jonny72 wrote: »

Christ, can't I read one thread without seeing some mod pulling the Simpsons comic shop owner routine?

Errr... It was a purposely bad joke based on his username...

Anyways, Charlie Brooker has some pretty insightful views on the whole media treatment of the McCann case..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO9sNoWSVN8

I haven't been following the media coverage too closely, although I believe there is still a "Madeline" tab on the Sky News site (right beside the "World News" tab). Bernstein (Watergate reporter) hinted recently the media is as much to blame as this emerging 'idiot culture' that is fueling the whole thing.

Brooker's dissection of the whole thing is pretty spot on - it has been an ideal case for 24 Hour News and has turned into an obsession. The McCanns invited the media into their lives in an attempt to help them and now it has begun to turn on them, be it by watching their every move or in rarer cases suggesting their guilt.

I think regards the "idiot culture", it's a tough one. People are to blame for wanting things spoon-fed to them, wanting things dumbed down and wanting things simplified. A lot of the media is to blame for taking that easy option over the harder one, and for taking it to the extreme of trying to convince the viewer that something is important or unimportant based on how easy it is to deliver and disseminate.