Madeleine McCann And Shannon Matthews: Mari Luz Cortes And A Middle-Class Media
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann and Shannon Matthews
DAILY RECORD: “Body In River Is Mari Luz”
Sad news. The picture of a girl. A girl not here.
THE body of a girl found in a river estuary in south-west Spain was identified last night as that of missing Mari Luz Cortes. Five-year-old Mari Luz vanished on January 13 after going to buy sweets from a stall only yards from her front door in Huelva.
The town is near the border with Portugal and less than two hours’ drive from where Madeleine McCann went missing.
Last night Madeleine’s parents Gerry and Kate sent a message of support to Mari Luz’s mother and father, Juan Jose Cortes, 34, a former professional footballer, and Irene Suarez.
Are the cases linked? Spain and Portugal. A body found. A child missing. Are the McCanns now nodding heads with whom the media consult and look to for an easy quote whenever a child goes missing; a child is killed; a child goes missing somewhere in the world?
THE SUN: “Mari Luz Cortes found in river”
The five-year-old’s parents feared she had been snatched like Madeleine McCann when she vanished on January 13. Last night Maddie’s parents Kate and Gerry were “extremely saddened”.
Who cannot be made sad by such grim news? Who in their right mind?
Huelva is less than two hours’ drive from Praia da Luz where Maddie, four, disappeared on holiday in Portugal last May. The McCanns, both 39, of Rothley, Leics, said their “thoughts and prayers” were with parents Juan Jose, 34, and Irene, who had been sure Mari was being held alive.
The McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: “They had developed a sense of unity with Mari Luz’s parents. Both families were going through similar agonies.”
Will the press now look for a new child to link Madeleine McCann to?
DAILY TELEGRAPH: “Spanish police find body of missing girl”
Her disappearance less than two hours drive from Praia da Luz in the Algarve had prompted police to investigate whether there was any link to the apparent abduction of Madeleine McCann.
Shannon Matthews is missing. A picture of a girl not here.
DAILY STAR: “SOBBING SHANNON WAS BEING BULLIED.”
Best friend Megan Aldridge, nine, yesterday told “GMTV that her pal, also nine, who disappeared on February 19, had a hideaway near her home in Dewsbury, West Yorks.”
Children on the telly. News or exploitation? Hearts or minds?
“She has pinpointed the location of the ‘foxhole’ to detectives during two interviews. Megan said: “A girl came up to her at school and started bullying her. “I told her to go away or I would tell, so she walked off.”
INDEPENDENT: Deborah Orr provides context.
Many commentators have remarked that the disappearance of Shannon Matthews has not made the same impact as the disappearance of Madeleine McCann because of “class”. There is truth in that, but not all of it is as uncomplicated as some observers suggest.
There was an undercurrent in the McCann case of antipathy towards the couple, who could dine out each evening in a nice resort but scrimped on babysitting, and a sinister hope that these seemingly upright citizens might have had a hand in their daughter’s fate, and that their “class” might be shielding them from exposure.
There is, at least, no such smear of Schadenfreude in the Matthews case. It is understood that nine-year-old girls going home from school in insalubrious areas are rarely, but plausibly, abducted.
There may have been no great rush to sanctify Karen Matthews, whose anguish over the loss of her daughter is not questioned. But there has been little attempt to accuse her either. People feel sorrow, but not as much surprise. The less comfortable an existence you have, the more likely it is that you will undergo awful life experiences. That isn’t class prejudice, but a sad fact of life in a remarkably unequal society.
Money. A missing child is a matter of money? A mising child is a matter of a white middle-class media entertaining its white middle-class readers? A mising child is a matter of empathy?
BRISBANE TIMES: “Two mothers, two lost girls, one class system”
Meet the two sides of the social class coin in Britain: Karen Matthews and Kate McCann. From parallel socioeconomic worlds, the two women are bound by perhaps the most traumatic experience a parent can have: the disappearance of a child… The unkind have depicted the two mothers as Waynetta Slob - Britain’s most famous underclass stereotype - versus Kate Moss - darling of the glamour set.
Anyone read of such a thing?
They have compared Ms Matthews’ seven children by five fathers and her 22-year-old boyfriend with Mrs McCann’s IVF-conceived twins and heart-surgeon husband. The high-minded say these things should not matter; it is the missing girls that are important. But it is clear that the perception of class does matter when trying to capture the public’s imagination…
The high-minded? Or just the police and those looking for the missing children. The children pictured. The children not here.
A former Daily Mirror editor and media commentator with The Guardian, Roy Greenslade, appraises public perception and media judgement. “The mother (Karen Matthews) is unsympathetic. This is a dysfunctional family, and people feel, ‘Does she not bring this upon herself? Is she not the author of her own misfortune?’ ” He says Ms Matthews represents an underclass that Daily Mail readers and their like cannot and do not want to relate to.
But the McCanns, he says, with their seemingly respectable lives, represent the aspirations of Middle England. “It shouldn’t matter. But it does. This is a really difficult thing for editors. They don’t like talking about this aspect because it really does betray the unspoken way they make their mind up.”
Media spin? If it bleeds it leads. Stories of girls not here.
Shannon Matthews is on the front pages of the Sun. Madeleine McCann is on the front page of the Daily Express.
March 9th, 2008 at 8:59 am
Spongebob© Copyright 1999 Viacom International Inc. All Rights Reserved
agw.
I’m disappointed in your belief that someone like me - someone who has firm beliefs and never ‘cosies up’ to anyone to obtain the support of their authority, someone who uses their real name and does not hide behind the labels of popular culture - would be trying to cosy up to an authority for a satirically based and frankly inconsequential (in the context of the wider media and political arena - not to say ‘not fun’) web site!
You seem to be telling us that the authority you have on Anorak puts you in a dictatorial position - something to be frightened of in case kicked off with no justification? Your describing yourself as a ’sabre toothed tiger’ is indicative of a belief that you are held in some kind of awe? Not by me you arent. If you choose to kick me simply for my challenging you or anyone else then the act would be self defeating.
If your position is indeed dicatatorial and not based on a reasonable set of rules then you really ought to make it explicit somewhere. - I see that some of the more investigative and creative posters have stopped posting here, whilst the more consistantly vitriolic are tolerated - encouraged in fact. Bully tactics, when employed by the powerful in any context, by the moderators in this context, is no more acceptable to me than bully tactics by us - the posters without whom you have nothing (even the trolls benefit the site).
Spongebob is not a name like ‘Ian’ - which cannot be copyrighted. I’m sure if the name ‘Madeleine’ and an eye defect can be copyrighted, then the possibility of the copyright of a created characters name is not up for debate.
I’d remind you that the law is based on precedent and their is such a thing as original precedent.
Administrator: …and you are proof of the the saying “…the Law is an ass”… and an example of a slipshod and poor education since you do not trouble to correct your grammar or spelling before issuing an attacking statement. One of the reasons I know the foregoing to be fact is, unlike you, I am -agw, LL.D (that’s Legum Doctor to you….and you are a very, very, long way from that) Evaluate that. If you return again to lecture me or anyone else on here on matters of the law, as you perceive them to be, you will find how sharp my teeth are. As I said, act your age or remove yourself. An attack on the level you choose for S.Bob should be beneath you. It is certainly below mine or that of the majority represented here. I will not debate the issue with you. I do not debate. Believe it or not, I adjudicate and if you do not understand how that works in the order of things your career will be a short and and extremely miserable one. You bore me and I have a very high threshold. It must be truly awful for others here. -agw
March 9th, 2008 at 8:11 am
I shouls have added, the DNA quote puzzled me, because I had posted to Scarlett on this board a few weeks ago, that I had heard it was Equine DNA.
But I had never seen any official quotes on the matter.
March 9th, 2008 at 8:10 am
Morning Gandy
There’s a new thread (and NO you won’t be first
) - perhaps you want to copy your post over there?
March 9th, 2008 at 7:58 am
The world is not flat, it has lumpy bits on it, allegedly.
Good morning.
Mods + Admin, after much sleuthing, finally I unearthed directly attributable quotes to a PJ named spokesman.
The link is to see if it is of any relevance to todays debate, Sunday.
The quote about not even being sure if the DNA is/was human or animal, pezzled me.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
March 9th, 2008 at 7:54 am
913 agw
remember when they had to change the “top cat” cartoon in the uk to “boss cat” because of the cat food product copyright?
March 9th, 2008 at 7:44 am
913 agw
i shall be contacting ade edmonson forthwith
i’m older than him
March 9th, 2008 at 7:42 am
836 Châtelaine Says:
March 9th, 2008 at 12:05 am
âde
If you read this tomorrow
I finally found the worst version ever
hugh grant did a better version in “about a boy” film
March 9th, 2008 at 5:56 am
An interesting little playground tiff was brought up for discussion in the staff coffee room this morning:
Ian spat at Spongebob:
789 I shall discuss this with Mods and Admin. You are not allowed to use the name and they know who you are, I shall be requesting a withdrawel or taking action on behalf of the copyright owner.
This followed a previous posting and reply from the name-stealing SpongeBob (though, I note, not claiming to be the possibly copyrighted SB Squarepants )
SpongeBob
774
Ian
‘You are breaking a copyright - you should not use the name you use. Please remove it’
‘Squeeze me”
Were I King James l of GB and James Xl o’ the Scots, I may have been sorely tempted… but no not at this time of the morning….
This is reminiscent of a fight over who sits where on the children’s see-saw.…
Following that argument everyone named Wendy (J.M. Barrie invented it for Peter Pan) should immediately give up the name; pay the residual literary estate all their and all their husbands/significant others’ money. They should then adopt the name Gladys or Iris and wait for the inevitable suit organised by the Royal Horticultural Society.
The use of the names Ian, Iain or John would also be forbidden by the John Knox Society and the scriveners committee established to ensure the copyright purity of the… literally fellow-man loving… King James Version of 1611 of the New Testament.
Far more concerning is the fact Ian gives the suggestion he is familiar enough with the Moderators to cosy up to them. A bit foolish, in fact, those in the know would prefer to snuggle into a prone position with a sabre-toothed tiger…the resulting bites are said to be far less painful
I was going to carry on by signing this… Duncan Digestive McVitie
But chickened out in case I had a jointly raised writ from United Biscuits and DuncanR (one of our more cuddly Moderators).
Alternatively Ian may making an attempt at satire / irony; a deliberate goad perhaps.
Ah well. I await with interest to see who lifts the corner of my blanket to settle in and whisper sweet vitriol in my shell like.
Do us all a favour, grow up….and settle into the debate… -agw
March 9th, 2008 at 3:56 am
911
sam Says:
March 9th, 2008 at 3:40 am
___
Sam, I’ve thought of the possibility of an accident in apt. and mother found her. But that could be explained and no need to cover up…there was no time to get rid of the body once calling out they took her…..
March 9th, 2008 at 3:40 am
910 chreyll, agree, but instinct, my instinct tells me its not right.
March 9th, 2008 at 3:30 am
904
annie1 Says:
March 9th, 2008 at 1:48 am
____
The only known fact by any of us is the child is missing. Where are your facts the parents did it? Rumours, speculations, innuendos and fabrications are not facts.
March 9th, 2008 at 2:12 am
CSN, you love it here you get creamed every time.
March 9th, 2008 at 2:06 am
Nite everyone - Tuesday is the day that you have all been waiting for - you will need to polish you sky dishes - and plug in the TV - Tuesday is the day.
March 9th, 2008 at 1:59 am
Now how can this have happend, could be equine DNA after all.
Fluid and hair from a corpse, not necessarily human, and a separate DNA sample that’s a partial match from Madeleine and comes from a primary source. Our senior Portuguese contact has said the partial results that have been sent are inconclusive and that he doesn’t expect the full set will ever be enough on its own to bring a case, a view shared by those familiar with the investigation.
Still laffin ?
March 9th, 2008 at 1:56 am
904
annie1
Read their posts ,and have a good laugh at them
March 9th, 2008 at 1:55 am
904
annie1
This site is braindead
We use it only to tease the McaMafia suporters
March 9th, 2008 at 1:48 am
McCann supporter - What makes you so very sure that the McCanns have nothing to hide. What makes you so sure that they are good parents, when all of the indications are that they are selfish parents who put their children second to the their social lives. What makes you think that Madeleine was abducted - when the contradictions in the statements with regard to the shutters being broken, etc. have been proved. What makes you think that parents who care about their children would put the price of a couple of bottles of wine before the price of a baby sitter. What makes you think that the McCanns are innocent of any accidental incident involving their daughter. What makes you think that the McCanns would not try to cover up an accident when to admit to it would not bring their daughter back, but would involve them losing their status, and probably their jobs and luxury home. What makes you think that with all of the discrepancies in reports of what actually happened on May 3 that the McCanns version of events is anymore reliable than the ones of others ( who honestly have a lot less, or even nothing to lose by telling the truth) Maybe if you let us into you mind we too might be able to follow the same thought pattern. I doubt it, but give us a chance to understand. Or is it because Kate is a GP, and Gerry is a cardiologist? OR is it because Kate is a GP, Gerry is a cardiologist, and neither of them want to not be
March 9th, 2008 at 1:37 am
So ex- Peter O
Are ya well paid ????
March 9th, 2008 at 1:36 am
901
Totje
Night John-Boy
March 9th, 2008 at 1:33 am
900
yampster
Phew, that’s a relief. MrT just told me what time it was. I nearly got a fit. So I’m really off now. I won’t even look if my post shows up!
Bye and sleep well.