Madeleine McCann: Four, Three Men, DNAboost And Risk
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
DAILY STAR: “Cops slam pics of Maddie suspects – Innocent people are put at ‘risk’”
“Four” people who look like the drawings inspired by holidaymaker Gail Cooper have now been questioned by police
So says the Star. Although on closer inspection Jose Marques plus Joaquim Agostinho plus a Portuguese builder in Gibraltar makes three, not four
Celebrity criminologist Francisco Moita Flores says: “It is manipulation and propaganda.” No, not the Star’s reporting, rather the sketches
DAILY MAIL: “Fourth man questioned in Maddie e-fit probe”
When is an e-fit a drawing? Compare and contrast
The Mail sees the Portuguese builder questioned and then freed. “At least” three other men have been questioned
THE SUN: “SUPER DNA ‘WILL CLEAR McCANNS – They welcome new-style forensic tests”
A tiny sample is, reportedly, found in the McCanns’ Renault Scenic hire car. How did it get there? From her clothes, say the McCanns. “Another theory was that Maddie’s younger brother and sister may have similar DNA,” says the Sun
And there’s a new test. It’s called DNAboost. DNAboost “can separate or ‘clarify’ profiles and unravel tiny samples”
With DNAboost what you thought had gone comes back with a bang!
DAILY MIRROR (online): “McCann pics fury”
Always the “fury”
Police in Portugal “claim Kate and Gerry McCann are hindering the probe into missing Madeleine by releasing sketches of the possible kidnapper.
One detective says the drawings were too vague and could “identify dozens or hundreds of people”
“But McCann spokesman Clarence Mitchell hinted more sketches could be on the way ‘if we get any more information’”
THE INDEPENDENT: “Alastair Campbell: The Cudlipp Lecture”
“In an era of more pages, more space, more access, more talk, there is less said and done that is truly memorable. Even in Dacre’s apologia he could only draw on Stephen Lawrence – again - as the story where he felt the Mail made an impact and did some good. Similarly, in his Mactaggart Lecture Jeremy Paxman said the BBC constantly pointed to Planet Earth as evidence of good TV combining with good ratings, but did so precisely because it is a rarity. And with every front page screaming headline that doesn’t quite deliver the big story, every exclusive that isn’t, every whooshing breaking news that isn’t really breaking news at all, every new twist in the McCann case that isn’t a new twist at all, the public gets a little wiser every time”
We recognise the spin, says Mr Campbell – “Media spin to fill media space.” And we might even recognise the irony…
Madeleine McCann: A media feeding frenzy
Posted: 29th, January 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (930) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- Grande Finale on Leicester’s Manjit Singh Pulls London Bus With His Hair
- Avalon on James Arthur Ray’s Thought Of Power And Talk Of Death
- June on 2000-2010 In Pictures: The Decade In Politics
- Yimmie on James Arthur Ray’s Thought Of Power And Talk Of Death
- Dina George on Katie Price’s Alex Reid In Drunken Fight
January 30th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
909
Chloe Spain Says:
January 30th, 2008 at 11:55 am
902 Saturn
As I understand it, it’s probably the copyright of the software that was used, not of the site itself. I expect someone on here can give a fuller explanation but that is, in general terms, what I’ve been led to believe.
********
Me too at the beginning, but …. then all pages should have been [and remained] 2006
January 30th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
908
Rockhopper Says:
January 30th, 2008 at 11:53 am
902
Saturn Says:
January 30th, 2008 at 11:50 am
Whatever happened with the fact that the FindMadeleine On-line Store was copyrighted 2006? You could see that copyright on the bottom left of every page on the site. That was insignificant?
How could it have been copyrighted prior to May, 2007? Are these copyright records public?
—————————-
Just looked at the site, copyright 2007.
********
I checked a while ago and then the home page had changed to 2007, yet all other pages were still copyrighted 2006 …!
January 30th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Thanks Saturn….
New thread started for today….
January 30th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
Chloe Spain
Stevo is on the new thread that has just opened
January 30th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
916
Saturn Says:
January 30th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
908
Rockhopper Says:
January 30th, 2008 at 11:53 am
902
Saturn
Just looked at the site, copyright 2007.
****************
When I first looked, all pages had 2006. Then, the home page was changed to 2007, while all other pages remained 2006.
See:
“Mirror.co.uk (cache) - copyright on online store- ]Post Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:55 pm Post subject: copyright on online store… The home page of the store is 2007, but specific pages therein say 2006.”
This is why I ask if copyright records are public or not.
—————————–
Just googled copyright, not very helpful. Of course you can easily copyright something by posting it to yourself, copyrighting something in that way is cheap, would not appear on any official register (if such a thing exists) but would be sufficient to prove a design or logo was yours at a certain date. The link below is interesting.
http://james.cridland.net/code/copyright.html
January 30th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
My 923
Sorry, bad grammar - should be “it was he who explained”
January 30th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
921 Saturn
Wait and see if Stevo turns up this afternoon. I think I recall it was him that explained the lack of significance of the date when the question was raised before.
January 30th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
Coolandcalm
Hopefully it’s just the Disgusted Brigade.
I’ve never understood why they think children can’t look at a woman in a low-cut dress. It sort of suggests that they think young children are rampaging sex fiends who will perv on adults if adults don’t cover up.
January 30th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
909
Chloe Spain Says:
January 30th, 2008 at 11:55 am
902 Saturn
As I understand it, it’s probably the copyright of the software that was used, not of the site itself. I expect someone on here can give a fuller explanation but that is, in general terms, what I’ve been led to believe.
***************
For something so astonishing and disconcerting, “probably” is not enough. This could be the explanation, but then why was the copyright on the front page changed from 2006 to 2007?
On the face of it, the FindMadeleine On-line Store was copyrighted in 2006 — the copyright mark refers directly to the on-line store, not any software. That, if nothing else, definitely deserves a completely thorough explanation. Equally astonishing — more astonishing!– is that no one forcefully demands such an explanation.
Again, revelation by omission?
January 30th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
There’s a new thread
Are we going over there or staying here???????
January 30th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
918 just-me
Wish I had sound to watch that with!
I just lurve South Park.
Looks reeally comical
January 30th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=x1HU6iYHVVw&feature=user
January 30th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
912
can’t say no Says:
January 30th, 2008 at 11:56 am
Anyone knows where Chernier is ??
****************
Not since saturday.
Politicos: G.Brown has excluded portugal AND spain from his short meeting about I dont know what….. I havent folowed.Any news on that front?
So, Madeleine is now (or may be as early as her “disappearance”) a political figure. She has entered history and her “parents” are thriving on her death.
May be,we should gather as Citizen of the World and take the case further…..
January 30th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
908
Rockhopper Says:
January 30th, 2008 at 11:53 am
902
Saturn
Just looked at the site, copyright 2007.
****************
When I first looked, all pages had 2006. Then, the home page was changed to 2007, while all other pages remained 2006.
See:
“Mirror.co.uk (cache) - copyright on online store- ]Post Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:55 pm Post subject: copyright on online store… The home page of the store is 2007, but specific pages therein say 2006.”
This is why I ask if copyright records are public or not.
January 30th, 2008 at 11:58 am
Karen 900
I don’t think its because it was just because it was a MMC joke, there are people who just complain. They read the papers and watch TV looking to complain. I know someone like that… forever whinging about anything and everything and searching gleefully for the next thing. Send letters everywhere.
How about all of those dumbos who phoned in to complain about Holly Willoughby’s dress on ‘Dancing on Ice’? reason? children were watching. Er? Should she have bandaged her boobs out of sight?
so odd.
January 30th, 2008 at 11:58 am
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=fm3Z6-nRj9U
A short film
Hidden a New Short Film / Movie released January 2008
based upon the Madeleine McCann story.
A brief insight into the lives of two parents following the disappearance of their young child, and how the world’s media and public affect them. A loose interpretation of the Madeleine McCann disappearance.
Four-year-old Madeleine McCann Maddy Maddie. The McCann case is covered extensively in the US and in Europe
January 30th, 2008 at 11:56 am
908
Rockhopper Says:
January 30th, 2008 at 11:53 am
902
Saturn Says:
January 30th, 2008 at 11:50 am
Whatever happened with the fact that the FindMadeleine On-line Store was copyrighted 2006? You could see that copyright on the bottom left of every page on the site. That was insignificant?
How could it have been copyrighted prior to May, 2007? Are these copyright records public?
—————————-
Just looked at the site, copyright 2007. ++++ Front page
——————————————
Other pages 2006!!!!!!!!
January 30th, 2008 at 11:56 am
Anyone knows where Chernier is ??
January 30th, 2008 at 11:55 am
908 Rockhopper
It did used to say 2006 though.
January 30th, 2008 at 11:55 am
904
jo
Yep, I also need to go somewhere like Tibet
Till later
January 30th, 2008 at 11:55 am
902 Saturn
As I understand it, it’s probably the copyright of the software that was used, not of the site itself. I expect someone on here can give a fuller explanation but that is, in general terms, what I’ve been led to believe.
January 30th, 2008 at 11:53 am
902
Saturn Says:
January 30th, 2008 at 11:50 am
Whatever happened with the fact that the FindMadeleine On-line Store was copyrighted 2006? You could see that copyright on the bottom left of every page on the site. That was insignificant?
How could it have been copyrighted prior to May, 2007? Are these copyright records public?
—————————-
Just looked at the site, copyright 2007.
January 30th, 2008 at 11:53 am
Brandon
That was even more creepy. I would bet anything that the man in the picture really doesn’t exist though.
Gillyflower
I know - the chop swoosh is one of Kate’s lowest moments.
January 30th, 2008 at 11:53 am
896 Gilly
Yes, I think they went somewhere else. But the other T9 members stayed at a MW resort in Greece (although it was a closed resort, not like PdL where it is spread around the town).
January 30th, 2008 at 11:53 am
577
Abraham Zapruder
Hi
More Circus and lies
January 30th, 2008 at 11:50 am
887
can’t say no Says:
January 30th, 2008 at 11:32 am
********************
It doesnt come as a surprise.
Mortui vivos docent. The Dead teach the Livings.The mccnanns will never live in peace.There will be a constant reminder….. Madeleine will be present for ever in their mind,not their heart.
).The portuguese police will be further trashed,the McCrap will be able to go on the show and make an other awful lot of cash on MADELEINE”s MURDER…….etc…etc….
One day,we will know the truth.
The MccAwful will be soon forgotten.The general public will take it for granted it was an other miscarriage of justice (in favour of the mccanns,of course!
Here we are.
I am off to Tibet and will never come back (I should have never left in the first place)
January 30th, 2008 at 11:50 am
588
Garth
B*****
January 30th, 2008 at 11:50 am
Whatever happened with the fact that the FindMadeleine On-line Store was copyrighted 2006? You could see that copyright on the bottom left of every page on the site. That was insignificant?
How could it have been copyrighted prior to May, 2007? Are these copyright records public?
January 30th, 2008 at 11:49 am
898 BF
Wonder how long that will last on there!
January 30th, 2008 at 11:49 am
I can’t believe so many people complained about a joke that wasn’t at Madeleine’s expense.
Madeleine has obviously become a religion.
I suppose with all the paedo-panic/misery memoir mania we’ve had in the last 20-odd years that a deified abused child (and no matter who killed her it was at least physical abuse) was bound to happen eventually.
But still, it’s weird.
January 30th, 2008 at 11:46 am
897
Saturn
Sorry are you in U.K. ??
Answer only if you want