Madeleine McCann: Prayers, Bones And Media
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
Remember, everyone, to play Anorak Bingo you must mention Madeleine McCann, Shannon Matthews and – here’s the tie-breaker – Scarlett Keeling. Eyes down…
DAILY MAIL: Amanda Platell
There cannot be a person in the country who didn’t feel a surge of delight on learning that little Shannon Matthews has been found alive and well.
We can think of one.
All the more so in these days when good news has become such a rare commodity. Yet even as we celebrate, we should spare a thought for Gerry and Kate McCann, for whom Shannon’s discovery, wonderful as it is, will be a fresh reminder of their own terrible loss. The return of one lost girl is a marvel. The return of two . . . now that’s a miracle worth praying for.
Was it the power of prayer that got Shannon Matthews found? If so, who gets the reward?
Tick. Tick.
THE INDEPENDENT: “Deborah Orr: Wonderful news that carries a message for the media”
It isn’t often that the papers have some really wonderful news to report. But it really is wonderful that Shannon Matthews has been found alive.
Amanda Platell agrees.
This amazing news also carries a lesson for the media, about the way it turns horrible crimes into great stories, and what an unpleasant, self-regarding business this can be.
There were suggestions that Shannon’s disappearance was not getting the coverage afforded to another lost child, Madeleine McCann, because the latter was a middle-class child and the former a child from a more modest and chaotic background. There is some truth in this argument, of course.
You can read about it all over the media.
But the underlying assumption is that all the publicity around the McCann case is something desirable and useful, while the more meagre reporting about the Matthew case is undesirable and useless. If children really could be reunited with their parents because of the magical power of speculative column inches, though, then Madeleine, not Shannon, would have been returned to her family by now. The very idea that the hypocritical furore around Madeleine is something to be aspired to, a benchmark of any positive kind, is quite wrong and ought to be challenged.
The McCanns should not be the media’s benchmark for missing children. We’ve heard that before…
True, the “debate” helped to keep Shannon’s abduction in the public domain, just as the “debate” around Made-leine continues to keep her case in the public domain.
A debate. On what? What was being debated?
It might be argued that there would have been no great endeavour to find Shannon had the press not made the supposedly modest fuss it did.
MEdia.
I believe this isn’t the case. The local media has a vast part to play, but the national and international press, apart from reporting facts about the investigation, can offer little but intrusive “colour”. The reality is that the vast majority of the “stories” written about the McCann case have been prurient and sensational pieces of cynical propaganda, serving no practical purpose at all except for the selling of newspapers.
Indeed. Read all about selling papers in the Independent.
Tick. Tick.
IRISH INDEPENDENT: “Divers recover bag of small bones in search for Maddy”
DIVERS searching an Algarve reservoir for Madeleine McCann yesterday found a plastic bag containing small bones. Police experts were last night examining the gruesome find made by a frogman working for a Portuguese lawyer.
Gerry and Kate McCann were informed immediately by a private detective who was observing the search. Madeira-based lawyer Marcos Aragao Correia says he was tipped off by underworld contacts that Madeleine was murdered and her body thrown into the reservoir last May.The search turned up the bones in the murky waters of the Barragem do Arabe reservoir yesterday at 3.30pm.
Mr Correia said last night: “We found two bags one of which contains some small bones. We don’t know if they are human bones or not at this stage. If they are human bones, they look like they come from a child’s fingers.”
Tick. And a half tick for speculation.
THIS IS LONDON: “Bag of small bones found in reservoir where lawyer claims Madeleine McCann’s body was dumped”
Says Clarence Mitchell: “We have not been informed of anything by the police to indicate that this find is significant. There is nothing to indicate at this stage that they are human bones and they could easily be from an animal. There is nothing at the moment to indicate that this find has anything to do with Madeleine. We continue to believe she is alive.”
THE SUN: “Shannon: 24 days of tears”
IN the end, the prayers were answered – as yesterday the tears of anguish over missing Shannon Matthews turned to sobs of relief.
Prayers. What of the tip off? The police work?
TIMELINE:
Sunday, February 24: CHURCHGOERS pray for Shannon’s safe return. Madeleine McCann’s parents send a message of support.
Tick. Tick.
THE GUARDIAN: “What women want”
Following last year’s Booker win, Anne Enright is finally enjoying wider recognition - despite her work’s reputation for being gloomy and obsessed with sex and death
She became the target of ire in the tabloids when they picked up an article she wrote in the London Review of Books dissecting her reaction to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. The piece was full of ambivalence, describing her suspicions of Gerry and Kate McCann but in the end condemning her own voyeurism. She refuses to say whether the fracas upset her, but seems sensibly resigned, agreeing that events proved how she was naive to think her nuances would be understood in the grotesque guessing game that the story had become: “I was misread and I hoped that would become apparent, but there’s no point in me stomping around and fighting with shadows.”
Posted: 15th, March 2008 | In: Broadsheets, Madeleine McCann, Tabloids Comments (621) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- The Real Stig on The Great Cathay Pacific Blocked Toilet Mystery
- HOTWATER on Madeleine McCann: The Media Creates A New Maddie Monster And Twists The Facts
- yampster on Dundee Woman Accused Of Ripping Out Lover’s Testes With Her Bare Hands
- KathyM on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
- Desperate Dan on I’m A Celebrity: Joe Bugner’s Career In Pictures
March 16th, 2008 at 12:43 am
500
Denzylle Says:
March 16th, 2008 at 12:36 am
—
Denzylle, I will have to disagree with you on this one. I have watched many Police investigative shows on TV and the bones can give a lot of information. For example, if there was a blow to the head, the scull would show damage, if there was a stabbing, the ribs or other bones would have cut marks, if there was strangulation, the bones around the neck could have marks, etc. Forensics can even match the blade of a knife to the particular shape of the abrasion/mark on a bone, etc. I agree that it might not prove “who did it” but it could give the police more ammunition.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:41 am
I’m off to the silken sheets. It’s 1:37 a.m. here and early days tomorrow.
May I suggest to maintain the sleuthing and the satire and forget about the rest…?
Good night
March 16th, 2008 at 12:41 am
502
Châtelaine
Ah but you see it matters if the person is capable of getting the joke. You didn’t, so I apologised, then you brought it up again, knowing the joke, soo….
March 16th, 2008 at 12:39 am
497
Châtelaine Says:
It’s about time to try and check into the mirror: I have new boobs, too much eye-makeup and am blind?
-I know - it is a pity as you look great. you don’t need all that makeup you know
March 16th, 2008 at 12:39 am
501
SpongeBob Says:
March 16th, 2008 at 12:37 am
“[...] Some of the names could arguably be satirical. Many of the arguments would not be. Satire is not hatred.”
Personal offense isn’t satire neither…
March 16th, 2008 at 12:37 am
495
Châtelaine
‘Most posters are calling them names as part of the satire here’
Some of the names could arguably be satirical. Many of the arguments would not be. Satire is not hatred.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:36 am
Daisy
496
No.
A body found after ten months would be bones and teeth and, apart from DNA ID, would tell little - almost certainly not cause of death, and certainly not who caused the death.
This is exactly what the McCs intended by delaying in absolutely every respect from 10pm on 3/5/07 (or before) forthwith.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:36 am
486 Annie 123
Without firm evidence it is impossible to have debate, we can only speculate and I
would suggest that “wait and see” after 10 months is not forming an opinion at all, so what would you want to debate?
March 16th, 2008 at 12:34 am
494
Karen Says:
March 16th, 2008 at 12:27 am
—
Karen, I know that many posters are “civilized” and debate without insult or put downs and I like that attitude. But, there are some who are so convinced that the parents allegedly killed the child and IMO have real hatred for the McCanns. They express it not in a satiric way, but with feeling, at least that’s how it comes across to me.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:31 am
493
SpongeBob Says:
March 16th, 2008 at 12:26 am
489
Châtelaine
“[...] - on here…. what HAVE you been reading? No pre judgement? I would suggest that you are blind. What would in your mind constitutes a judgement then?”
*****
It’s about time to try and check into the mirror: I have new boobs, too much eye-makeup and am blind?
March 16th, 2008 at 12:28 am
490
val Says:
March 16th, 2008 at 12:22 am
—-
Val, I live in Australia. Yes, it is true that if the police can find a body, the body can give them clues that are sometimes better than any other evidence or that in conjunction with other evidence, can prove what happened to that person. If, in this case, the child is dead (I am not convinced of that yet), and the PJ can find the body, it would be the “icing on the cake” for the PJ.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:28 am
492
Daisy Says:
March 16th, 2008 at 12:25 am
“[...] Chatelaine, I have seen posters (quite a few) with such hatred for the parents and calling them all sorts of names, when they themselves don’t really know the truth. They speculate and become convinced that what they are saying is the truth. Some posters are open to debate and “listen” to other theories, but some do not.”
********
Most posters are calling them names as part of the satire here. “Hate” would really be a very harsh word to use for that [though I must admit that some might really hate them]. However, it’s the parents themselves that call it upon them with their obvious lies and story changes, as they have been documented here many times.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:27 am
Daisy
I always take other scenarios into account and try to debate them and Gandolf gets hysterical about it. He objects to fences - and he believes in the abduction theory.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:26 am
489
Châtelaine
‘I haven’t anyone seen, though, pre-judging - apart from the apparent neglect case.’
- on here…. what HAVE you been reading? No pre judgement? I would suggest that you are blind. What would in your mind constitutes a judgement then?
March 16th, 2008 at 12:25 am
489
Châtelaine Says:
March 16th, 2008 at 12:21 am
—
Chatelaine, I have seen posters (quite a few) with such hatred for the parents and calling them all sorts of names, when they themselves don’t really know the truth. They speculate and become convinced that what they are saying is the truth. Some posters are open to debate and “listen” to other theories, but some do not.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:24 am
486
annie123 Says:
March 16th, 2008 at 12:17 am
“[...] Still haven’t received a satisfactory explanation as to why an abduction couldn’t have occured between 9-30pm and 10pm. So much for debate lol”
*****
I think that’s for the simple fact that the “abductor” was - according to the only witness - seen by JT at 9:10 p.m.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:22 am
482 Daisy
Yes, your”e right. the case could be shelved for years, but importantly if there is
a 12 month time limit on the Arguido status at least we would get to know what
evidence they have and end all this speculation. Unless Madeleine is found either
alive or dead (sad to say) it will be hard to prove anything.
Don”t know where you live, but a couple of years ago, here in the U.K. the body of
a woman was found in a lake . she had been missing for I think 30yrs, the evidence
the Police uncovered proved the husband had murdered her.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:21 am
485
Daisy Says:
March 16th, 2008 at 12:15 am
“[...] I don’t deny that there are many inconsistencies and “strange” aspects to this case. That is why my position has always been to “wait and see” before pre-judging. IMO, there is a lot more to this sad case than anybody here can imagine. I think we will all be in for a big shock when the truth comes out, or at least when the files are made public. IMO, there is more to this than meets the eye.”
******
Yes, we all agree that there are many inconsistencies to this case. That’s why we’ve “all” been here for months. I haven’t anyone seen, though, pre-judging - apart from the apparent neglect case. Because of the inconsistencies we’ve been developing theories, based on the little bit of reliable information available in the public domain. We have been correcting each other frequently on using hear-say or unreliable newspaper quotes for developing these theories. Again: I don’t see any pre-judging. Just a genuine interest in the very strange case of a little girl gone missing.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:20 am
484
Châtelaine
Ok I do apologise - honestly, I was having fun with your name..
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6245940.stm
she has got really nice new boobs though…
March 16th, 2008 at 12:17 am
484
Châtelaine Says:
March 16th, 2008 at 12:14 am
—
Don’t know what that means … my first language is Spanish. Suggest you don’t take any notice of it.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:17 am
476
Daisy Says:
Totally agree with you.
Putting a ‘pro’ head on suggested a later abduction, dismissing the ‘egg head man’ and was shot to pieces by Ian. Still haven’t received a satisfactory explanation as to why an abduction couldn’t have occured between 9-30pm and 10pm.
So much for debate lol
March 16th, 2008 at 12:15 am
480
Châtelaine Says:
March 16th, 2008 at 12:07 am
—
I don’t deny that there are many inconsistencies and “strange” aspects to this case. That is why my position has always been to “wait and see” before pre-judging. IMO, there is a lot more to this sad case than anybody here can imagine. I think we will all be in for a big shock when the truth comes out, or at least when the files are made public. IMO, there is more to this than meets the eye.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:14 am
Can anyone explain to me what ” coming back with Preston” means …?
March 16th, 2008 at 12:12 am
481
Châtelaine
Ok, hope you get back with Preston
March 16th, 2008 at 12:11 am
479
val Says:
March 16th, 2008 at 12:06 am
—
Val, I believe they were referring specifically to the McCann case. If another extension is granted by the Portuguese Judge, after 12 months the files are made public but the arguido status could stay indefinitely and the case would basically be unsolved.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:09 am
478
SpongeBob Says:
March 16th, 2008 at 12:05 am
473
Châtelaine
You have selective reading yourself Chantelle. Can I suggest something other than the MM threads?
Read ‘More’ today - Like your new boobs btw, but too much eye makeup”
****
You’re making a fool of yourself and you know it.
I will apply selective reading to your posts and forget stupid remarks about “boobs” and “makeup” to someone you don’t know.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:07 am
And they know that an innocent pair of parents have hired the cleverest team of lawyers that money can buy, who will happily shoot holes in every comma and dot if ever there would be a case. Hence they take the time to build the case IMO
March 16th, 2008 at 12:06 am
472 Daisy
You may be right, the Law in Portugal was changed quite recently I understand to
stop these prolonged arguido cases, I think the McCanns and Murat were made
arguidos a few days before the Law changed so don”t know if it applies to them.
March 16th, 2008 at 12:05 am
473
Châtelaine
You have selective reading yourself Chantelle. Can I suggest something other than the MM threads?
Read ‘More’ today - Like your new boobs btw, but too much eye makeup
March 16th, 2008 at 12:04 am
476
Daisy Says:
March 16th, 2008 at 12:02 am
473
Châtelaine Says:
March 15th, 2008 at 11:57 pm
“[...] The fact is that we, the public, do not know the truth at this stage.”
*****
Fact.
Let’s hope the PJ does. I think they do.