The Pro-McCann's Media Machine

[BloodshotEye]

This is a reeely good thread!

Yes! To what Englishleigh and Sleuthmom said! Couldn't quite articulate how I felt, about this. You read my mind. I want to feel that I am not going to be asked to "prove my empirical sources", when I spout off one of my wild scenarios. And yes, some of my theories may speculate that the parents are guilty, without any proof whatsoever.

Thanks you guys.

The "Pro-McCann Media Machine" indeed. This is one of the elements in this case, that really creeps me out. I feel that the McCann's, and their media hacks, didn't anticipate the back-fire this would have, on public opinion.

Watching this machinery, is like watching the Wizard of Oz, and seeing the Wizard pulling the levers behind the curtain. Ooops...we weren't suppose to know/see that. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain! Pretty hard to shape public opinion, when we see this machinery at work. This "machinery" certainly has it's price. And that cost is way more than the fees charged by the PR/media spinners, to the McCanns. The McCanns seem to have been sold on a campaign to shape public opinion, at the expense of their own ethics and integrity. Maybe that was a fair trade-off, if the McCanns had neither. If you get my drift...

 

[Texana]

I agree, Blood Shot Eye.

Here's a good example of that media campaign:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=456348&in_page_id=1770#

 

[englishleigh]

I agree, Blood Shot Eye.

Here's a good example of that media campaign:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=456348&in_page_id=1770#

:silenced:

:sick:

 

[SleuthMom]

Interesting "Campaign"

Is it me or I always hear this "business-like" tone when they speak about the search for Madeline?

 

[BloodshotEye]

Here's a good example of that media campaign:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=456348&in_page_id=1770#

Ok, this is me...rolling my eyes.
This campaign of their's is ridiculous. It doesn't look like it "is all about finding Maddie" anymore, but rather "Make the McCanns look loving and cuddly". I wonder what Mark Klass would say about this privately. He is such a gracious man, I doubt that he would even want to comment about their "campaign". This is a very weird couple. Did it or not - who knows! But without a doubt, and imo, based their own statements and this lame photo-journal, they are very weird.

But seriously, how incredibly lame is this? Spending this kind of money, to have photo-shoots? Publish daily journal entries, to counter act the effect of her journal entries made in Portugal?

You can see by the few posts, underneath that article, that this little cuddly photo-journal, manages to sway the opinion of noodle-heads.

 

[Texana]

Interesting "Campaign"

Is it me or I always hear this "business-like" tone when they speak about the search for Madeline?

No,I hear it too. I can't decide if it's Gerry's personality or the PR people's voice coming through, but I hear it. Maybe a combination of both?

They talk in terms of the next step of the campaign or meetings and if you inserted a product name instead of Madeleine's it would still sound reasonable.

 

[SleuthMom]

They talk in terms of the next step of the campaign or meetings and if you inserted a product name instead of Madeleine's it would still sound reasonable.

Weird.

 

[BloodshotEye]

Had a thought. I was browsing through Dr. Creepin's other cool thread, entitled "What's Really Going On Here?".

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53481

I am trying to recall some of the missing/abduction cases, over the past 7 years or so. Especially the ones that were very high profile, and seemed to garner a lot of coverage. My objective was to evaluate my own perception of the "next-of-kin", and whether I suspected them of being involved.

My conclusion is that:

1. The amount of media coverage that targets one or more individuals, did not cause me to suspect them. e.g. parents, a husband or a boyfriend. And we all know from past cases, certain family members have had ever aspect of their private lives exposed.

2. The strenuous efforts to keep a case "alive", made by the family (parents, husband, or other), did not immediately cause me to suspect that person or family member.

So what is it, that is different about the McCann's supersized media campaign, that chills me to the bone? Possibly that they have put themselves out there, in the spotlight, rather than letting the issue take the spotlight. Big difference. Garnering the personal attention of photographers, as they gad about the globe, was very weird. Very self centered. They could have had a media buyer and PR person go FOR THEM, and place coverage/insertion stories with all the major news sources around the globe.

My gut tells me, that using/manipulating the media in the way the McCann's have done, is like casting a very wide - glamourous net. It uses attention-getting little baubles of news, intended to snare the general public's interest, and direct it. It smacks of a celebrity publicity campaign, more than a Find Maddie quest. It smack of something disingenuine and opportunistic, rather than sincere.

I have never before, had this opinion of a parent's use of media interviews etc., in their attempt to find their loved one. Never.

 

[Texana]

These are the things that to me are different about the McCanns' media campaign:

1) There are many interviews and articles in which the twins are pictured as well as photos of the parents interacting happily with the twins. Photos of Madeleine, on the other hand, feature only Maddie. Maybe the parents got cropped out of those. There is a repetition of the "life must go on for the twins' sake" theme. (see link below.) Kate talks about how "fantastic" the twins are, how funny they are, etc. It is not only themselves the McCanns put in the spotlight, which would be understandable. It is repeatedly and inexplicably (for parents with one perhaps "stalked" and kidnapped) child done with the twins.

2) Kate McCann says that it would not be fair to focus only on Madeleine without thinking of all the other missing children. She says that they found out the the problem is "massive." This is very early on, the tying of Madeleine into other missing children cases, as a kind of "poster child" for missing children. This is also unique.
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=local&id=3636882&ft=lg

3) For all the references to "massive" numbers of child abductions, we never hear any actual numbers or facts or anything concrete (other than buying a bracelet and looking at children's eyes) anything people should do to counter act this.

In one interview, Kate referred to the "hundreds" of mothers who have told her that they've done exactly the same thing (left their children alone.) She doesn't say "And we must stop this! It's clearly not safe!" There are some meetings and talk of putting Amber-style Alert laws in European countries, but there doesn't seem to be any emphasis on letter-writing campaigns or other things that people could be doing to stop the number of missing children each year.

 

[CaliKid]

For all the doubters who don't think something is wrong with the way the McCanns have acted, you really need to read the early Gerry blogs. They were not about Madeleine, not even in the beginning. They were about meetings with their campaign managers, haircuts, photo ops, etc.

In the past, the British media has been brutal in investigating people even on the fringes of a scandal or crime. So how come the newspapers in the UK just shut up when Madeleine disappeared? Why didn't they ask any hard questions about whether her parents were telling the truth and why they left the children to go out and party? Why didn't they delve into their past and talk to their friends and colleagues? After all, that's what the media is known for doing. No, all they did was cozy up to the McCanns and write "poor, poor parents" stories about how they were soldiering on in the face of adversity.

Connections with people in powerful places? You betcha. Conspiracy? Maybe.

 

[BloodshotEye]

You guys make a good point. That is, the McCann's publicity campaign smacks of a lot of image-fluffing. No real activism.

Recall the efforts by Erin, Samanths Runnion's mother; and Adam Walsh's father (The 2006 Adam Walsh Child Protection Act); and many others I can't seem to call to mind at the moment.

And other efforts, that have been spearheaded by everyday mothers and fathers, who have endured the heartbreak of a child's death, due to unsafe toys, malfunctioning escalators, and the like. All bravely leveraging the publicity surround their child's death, to heighten the awareness about a certain condition. And to effect change that is intended to protect children.

Yet I don't see any of this "activism" on the part of the McCanns, as you guys so astutely point out.
We are supposed to buy a bracelet and send in money, and wish the McCann's a bon voyage, as they globe-trotted around to pass out flyers.

Again, I have never found fault with any parent or family member, who has endeavored to keep the case alive. This does not appear to be what the McCann's are doing. imo.

 

[CaliKid]

I like that term. Image fluffing.

In the past when something negative came out about the McCanns, they released a flurry of interviews, often contradictory. The message wasn't important; the need to look good and move the negative news off the front page was.

It just seems to me that the McCanns are doing the same thing they've done for the past 4 months. Get their faces and names in the paper for their own sake, not for Madeleine's.

 

[txsvicki]

These are the things that to me are different about the McCanns' media campaign:

1) There are many interviews and articles in which the twins are pictured as well as photos of the parents interacting happily with the twins. Photos of Madeleine, on the other hand, feature only Maddie. Maybe the parents got cropped out of those. There is a repetition of the "life must go on for the twins' sake" theme. (see link below.) Kate talks about how "fantastic" the twins are, how funny they are, etc. It is not only themselves the McCanns put in the spotlight, which would be understandable. It is repeatedly and inexplicably (for parents with one perhaps "stalked" and kidnapped) child done with the twins.

2) Kate McCann says that it would not be fair to focus only on Madeleine without thinking of all the other missing children. She says that they found out the the problem is "massive." This is very early on, the tying of Madeleine into other missing children cases, as a kind of "poster child" for missing children. This is also unique.
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=local&id=3636882&ft=lg

3) For all the references to "massive" numbers of child abductions, we never hear any actual numbers or facts or anything concrete (other than buying a bracelet and looking at children's eyes) anything people should do to counter act this.

In one interview, Kate referred to the "hundreds" of mothers who have told her that they've done exactly the same thing (left their children alone.) She doesn't say "And we must stop this! It's clearly not safe!" There are some meetings and talk of putting Amber-style Alert laws in European countries, but there doesn't seem to be any emphasis on letter-writing campaigns or other things that people could be doing to stop the number of missing children each year.

Wow. So it's not fair to focus only on Madeline where's other missing kids? What a thing for a mother to say and to me, it's insane to even get involved helping with anything so soon after a child is abducted. The parents should be getting and demanding help not the other way around, especially since they claim that police aren't looking for Madeline.

 

[STEADFAST]

For all the doubters who don't think something is wrong with the way the McCanns have acted, you really need to read the early Gerry blogs. They were not about Madeleine, not even in the beginning. They were about meetings with their campaign managers, haircuts, photo ops, etc.

.

I've said before that it's possible the parents weren't all that attached to Madeleine. However, I think Kate McCann does look like she's grieving. We've also heard that Gerry wasn't as involved with the children as she was. Maybe he's just that self-centered to make this all about him. Maybe he's star struck. Doesn't necessarily mean he murdered Madeleine.

 

[Salem]

I've said before that it's possible the parents weren't all that attached to Madeleine. However, I think Kate McCann does look like she's grieving. We've also heard that Gerry wasn't as involved with the children as she was. Maybe he's just that self-centered to make this all about him. Maybe he's star struck. Doesn't necessarily mean he murdered Madeleine.

So why would it be that the night Mrs. Fenn claims she heard Maddie crying, that Maddie was crying for her father, not her mother?

This one puzzles me if mom was the one who did most of the "caretaking."

Salem

 

[CaliKid]

So why would it be that the night Mrs. Fenn claims she heard Maddie crying, that Maddie was crying for her father, not her mother?

This one puzzles me if mom was the one who did most of the "caretaking."

Salem

Hi Salem,

I don't think Madeleine calling for her father instead of her mother is that big a deal, especially if you take what Kate's diary says at face value. If she had such a difficult relationship with her oldest daughter, it makes perfect sense for Maddie to want to be with Gerry more. Why would a child who was constantly being scolded by one parent call to that parent for help? But if you want to look, discussions on this subject are sprinkled throughout these threads.

 

[CaliKid]

I've said before that it's possible the parents weren't all that attached to Madeleine. However, I think Kate McCann does look like she's grieving. We've also heard that Gerry wasn't as involved with the children as she was. Maybe he's just that self-centered to make this all about him. Maybe he's star struck. Doesn't necessarily mean he murdered Madeleine.

Regardless of whether the McCanns are guilty of Madeleine's death or not, I think they are grieving. I believe they love(d) their daughter and feel sorry for what happened.

 

[Texana]

Wow. So it's not fair to focus only on Madeline where's other missing kids? What a thing for a mother to say and to me, it's insane to even get involved helping with anything so soon after a child is abducted. The parents should be getting and demanding help not the other way around, especially since they claim that police aren't looking for Madeline.

Here's the link to the video where Kate talks about helping other children and maybe something good will come out of it. I put the wrong link in my other post.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/video/videoplayer/0,,91210-1279448,.html

Here's where she talks again about the "bigger picture."

"Once you know all that you can't turn a blind eye to it. Madeleine is our priority but we have to help. We can't just ignore those other children.

"Whatever comes out of our experience, anything that can make the tiniest bit of difference to make the world safer place is going to be a good thing. I feel a moral obligation.

"Madeleine means so much to me, but you can't take it away from the bigger picture."

http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=1590&id=1223682007

 

[Trino]

I have an unanswered question about Madeline's crying. How could the twins sleep through her wailing if they weren't drugged?

 

[ny_]

I get that they feel they can do some good for other kids by publicizing, but if that's truly the case, why do they get so defensive about people questioning the decision to leave the kids alone? And why do they still insist that was ok? If it's such a common practice, then why not raise awareness to change it? If she was abducted, while it doesn't take away the responsibility/guilt of the abductors, the fact is if she had an adult or older teen with her, she'd probably still be with her family.