Maddy Mccann And 24-hour Rolling News

[feelslikeitshould]

I'm pretty sure there's some provision under Portuguese law which forbids anyone to talk directly about the details of the case, meaning that their friend's are not allowed to talk to the media about events that night. Gerry McCann has expressed his frustration at not being allowed to answer questions put to him in press conferences before now.

 

Exactly. Which is why I'm not paying much heed to headlines stating that the Portuguese police have apparently come out and said they have enough evidence to convict the McCanns of the childs murder. What a load of bollocks. The media are trying to vilify them before they've even been charged, if they even get charged! It's getting more and more ridiculous by the day.

[iLuvBoots]

how devestating will it be though if after all this it is found that the mccans are guilty

[Albert Tatlock]

how devestating will it be though if after all this it is found that the mccans are guilty

If that turned out to be the case - what would be most devastating? - the fact that they did it? or the fact that you'd been led by the nose by the British press on events that are happening hundreds of miles away of which you know little about, and which rightly, the Portugeuse police keep information to themselves until they have drawn a proper conclusion?

 

For me, it is already: further damage to 'trust' in British society, evidence of a British media that is simply out of control and which needs reigning-in (especially in the case of crime reporting - innocence before guilt - diminishing the chances of fair trials - and a failure to leave the police to get on with their work), the media not reporting the news and making it up through supposition, and that the British media are gullible enough to make anyone a 'celebrity' these days.

 

If that turned out to be the case - I hope the outcome would be an enquiry into why we let this happen, what we can do to make the media more responsible (legislation), and further legislation to ensure that criminal investigation proceedings are not leaked, as well as bringing in stricter rules during investigations such as those in Portugal.

 

A newspaper is simply a business product, and nothing more. If I was a crisp manufacturer, would I be allowed to put gossip based on supposition on each packet of crisps just to sell more crisps? These people need reigning in. Free speech is one thing, but it should be responsible free speech and not based on supposition.

[iLuvBoots]

how devestating will it be though if after all this it is found that the mccans are guilty

If that turned out to be the case - what would be most devastating? - the fact that they did it? or the fact that you'd been led by the nose by the British press on events that are happening hundreds of miles away of which you know little about, and which rightly, the Portugeuse police keep information to themselves until they have drawn a proper conclusion?

 

For me, it is already: further damage to 'trust' in British society, evidence of a British media that is simply out of control and which needs reigning-in (especially in the case of crime reporting - innocence before guilt - diminishing the chances of fair trials - and a failure to leave the police to get on with their work), the media not reporting the news and making it up through supposition, and that the British media are gullible enough to make anyone a 'celebrity' these days.

 

If that turned out to be the case - I hope the outcome would be an enquiry into why we let this happen, what we can do to make the media more responsible (legislation), and further legislation to ensure that criminal investigation proceedings are not leaked, as well as bringing in stricter rules during investigations such as those in Portugal.

 

A newspaper is simply a business product, and nothing more. If I was a crisp manufacturer, would I be allowed to put gossip based on supposition on each packet of crisps just to sell more crisps? These people need reigning in. Free speech is one thing, but it should be responsible free speech and not based on supposition.

 

all true the media in this country is laughable where z list celebrities get more importance and there no such thing as unbiased reporting anymore. But don't lose sight of the face that the Mccanns wanted the media involved..to give whats happening better coverage. I think what would devestate me more is if they had done it but allowed all this publicity happens to rally ppl behind them so ppl didn;t suspect them.

 

I really hope she is ok though and it comes to a happy ending

[Pragmatopian]

A newspaper is simply a business product, and nothing more. If I was a crisp manufacturer, would I be allowed to put gossip based on supposition on each packet of crisps just to sell more crisps? These people need reigning in. Free speech is one thing, but it should be responsible free speech and not based on supposition.

 

There have always been causes célèbres in the commercial press. What really disappoints me is the the way that the BBC has followed the pack and given this story coverage grossly in excess of that which it deserves. A child abduction is obviously newsworthy, but I don't need to hear about the minutiae of the police investigation as it proceeds or what the parents are doing or how they're feeling on a day-to-day basis from some reporter standing on a beach in Portugal when he should be covering the real news.

 

Having said that, I shie away from press censorship that goes beyond enforcing existing defamation laws. As insubstantial and distasteful as speculation may be, unless it says something patently false about someone that is liable to damage their reputation it is not the place of anyone to prevent it being said. The old principle still applies:

 

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

 

Editorial decisions rest with the editor, and the decision whether or not to continue buying that paper or watching that channel rests with us.

[Albert Tatlock]

A newspaper is simply a business product, and nothing more. If I was a crisp manufacturer, would I be allowed to put gossip based on supposition on each packet of crisps just to sell more crisps? These people need reigning in. Free speech is one thing, but it should be responsible free speech and not based on supposition.

 

What really disappoints me is the the way that the BBC has followed the pack and given this story coverage grossly in excess of that which it deserves. A child abduction is obviously newsworthy, but I don't need to hear about the minutiae of the police investigation...

 

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

 

Editorial decisions rest with the editor, and the decision whether or not to continue buying that paper or watching that channel rests with us.

That's the point isn't it - that it's all based only on supposition. The Portuguese police have done well to stick to their rules regarding the release of information. The British media have joined a few dots and come up with their own picture. The Brits do not understand the principle of aguido - they only see 'suspect' - and in the British press all suspects are currently thought guilty until innocent.

 

An admirable quote that I have often quoted myself - but I don't defend the right to speak on supposition and present it as 'fact' - especially when my licence fee goes to those doing it (BBC) regardless of whether I watch the BBC or not. My point is, that regarding criminal investigations we need to return to 'innocent before guilty' and limit what the press say when an investigation is in progress (by specific guidelines that reports should be based on factual information released - with the exception where a cover-up is suspected) - as they are clearly too immature to handle the responsibility - and more importantly as a result are undermining our legal process.

[keyboarder]

Maybe Voltaire did it?

[Albert Tatlock]

Maybe Voltaire did it?

You still (allowed on) here?

[bluemonday]

Whilst I totally agree with the point that the media have turned this into a speculative circus with their reports, I would not like to see any further increase in legislation over the media. State control of the media is somewhere the UK shouldn't go. What I would like to see is a far more robust and accessible legal system for redress. By that I mean all sections of society can bite back and not just the rich ones. Hit their pockets when they gob off and are well out of order but don't supress the media as a whole by inflexible legislation. Having said that, in cases like this, they should be required to publish facts only and not speculate. But how you'd actually make them do that without legislation is debatable.

 

 

edit to rephrase

[Albert Tatlock]

Whilst I totally agree with the point that the media have turned this into a speculative circus with their reports, I would not like to see any further increase in legislation over the media. State control of the media is somewhere the UK shouldn't go. What I would like to see is a far more robust and accessible legal system for redress. By that I mean all sections of society can bite back and not just the rich ones. Hit their pockets when they gob off and are well out of order but don't supress the media as a whole by inflexible legislation. Having said that, in cases like this, they should be required to publish facts only and not speculate. But how you'd actually make them do that without legislation is debatable.

 

 

edit to rephrase

Indeed legislation over the media should be a last resort - though specifically I think we should have tougher restrictions and penalties on the release of investigative data and 'leaks' etc. (perhaps under the data protection act) during investigations - so that the police and authorites etc. can turn around and say - when the Daily Wail etc. report their usual rubbish - that 'this is pure speculation'.

 

As in Portugal, these sort of restrictions would show these papers up for what they are and begin to educate Joe Public - who in Britain currently believes everything he reads and then makes a judgement based purely on supposition long before any trial or investigation is complete. It would also discourage 24 hour news channels from generating speculation - which if you notice often spreads around the media into the papers next day whether it is proven or not.

 

Just imagine yourself, innocent, but come under the spotlight because, say, your company is being investigated - you'd want to protect yourself and your family from speculation and from made up 'facts' - you have the right to be treated as innocent until proven guilty because the law and judiciary is the foundation of our democracy, in many cases above government.

 

The real issue here for me, is that if the media undermines the judicial system (which I think they are clearly doing in this case and have done in several others) then it is time to act, as the UK judiciary and the Magna Carta etc. is the basis of all of our lives and everyone has the right to a fair trial and be treated as innocent before proved guilty. Again, the media should report and not make up the news, so additional restrictions under the data protection act would provide that access to the law for everyone - and not just the very rich who are the only ones capable of suing newspapers at present.

 

The data protection act might be the vehicle - because IMO at the end of the day stories about you in the press are all about use or misuse of 'your data' - and if these stories are based on supposition, rumour, and prove factually incorrect, then surely it follows that a misuse of your data has occurred - and a complaint to the ODPS or Information Commissioner etc. should be within your rights - thus making the media a little more careful about what they write or say? Once you have been proven innocent or guilty this information will be in the public domain, without having prejuduced your legal rights etc. In the meantime people more often get villified and prejudged because they simply do not have the resources or mechanism to seek redress.

[bluemonday]

Agreed. Given the speculation/hype/waffle/bulls*it etc around this particular case, I imagine it would be difficult to find people who would still be totally unbiased if they were on the jury were it to come before a UK court. Which it won't, but the principle is there. Media in these cases should be operating under firm rules that confine anything published/broadcast to fact.

[He is over the last]

Evening All

 

You may read these links at your leisure or displeasure but it is out there.

 

A couple of discussion boards about the case.

 

The first one is quite anti-McCann.

 

http://boards.courttv.com/forumdispl...s=&forumid=401

 

Second one seems more sympathetic towards the pair.

 

http://boards.crimelibrary.com/showt...70#post8968670

 

I just hope Maddy is sound.

 

Bye for now

 

He is over the last

[thebees]

I think it is time to take down the posters, its is very unlikely she will turn up in the Isle of Man & everytime I see her it reminds me, it could have be the parents and it 'unnerves' me (I really hope it wasnt ofc but, the thought is there).

[Gladys]

We were in Spain last week and the only English TV station was BBC World which covered the developments in the parents' questioning and being named as suspects, almost on a rolling basis. It started to get a little eerie seeing the posters everywhere, then seeing the news reports. Then reading the newspapers; all of which ocntradicted each other or put a different spin on the leaked developments.

 

It probably is now time for the media to switch off. The UK media doesn't understand how the Portugese system works and, apparently, this case has caused seismic shock throughout the Portugese media, justice system and how they interact (Newsnight last night had an interesting report).

 

So, in the interests of justice for everyone, including the parents and, indeed, the child(ren), it is now time for the media to go elsewhere and allow what is left of the investigation (no matter how shambolicly it appears to have been conducted) to run its course.

 

I am probably in the minority, and wouldn't want to face up to the fact if I was a parent in a similar situation, but I think we have to accept that the chances of finding Maddy alive is remote and has been possibly within a day of her going missing. Efforts should now be concentrated on establishing what happened that night and remembering who the victim is; a tiny girl.

[bluemonday]

I just hope Maddy is sound

I see the tabloids are pushing a overdose theory this morning. Whatever has happened, my heart goes out to the poor little soul.