Innuendo becomes currency of news in Madeleine McCann case

An excellent article under the above heading can be found online by John Jewell, Director of Undergraduate Studies, School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies at Cardiff University. The article appears in "The Conversation". I am sorry I can't be more helpful with a link, I "received" it as a Google Alert. Perhaps someone can locate it and post it; I believe it will be of interest to all.

Is our fascination an example of a kind of collective bias in favour of the middle classes? It is a fact that scores of children disappear every year yet not one has received a fraction of the attention given to Madeleine who comes from a family of wealthy, white, photogenic doctors.

The fact that the Madeleine mystery – and I use my words carefully – began abroad in less affluent, less prosperous Portugal may also be significant in why we’re so interested. This is because (in a sense) we as nation can absolve ourselves from responsibility. Despite evidence to the contrary in terms of crimes committed against children in Britain, we can tell ourselves that this is crime that happened because the family was abroad"

There is some truth in this, but I think as far as Forums go, it is the protection the McCanns have received that bothers us , their Celebrity status that ignores the fact that Madeleine would be alive if it wasn't for their original negligence.

He had me until about the second last paragraph, when he started on about how "shabbily" the McCanns had been treated by the press. Then I just switched off and shut it down. Not interested, don't want to hear it.

Morning Iris, what bothers me is that so many intelligent people believe the Press and the McCanns without thinking for themselves. I remember my first reaction when I read the News was how any Parent could leave 3 small children unattended in a strange place. From then on it has all been PR defence and if it wasn't for the Blogs and Forums that would be the case today

I agree Panda, when I first heard that they had left the 3 children I thought there was something not right about things, and then the fund. They were not wealthy, they made two mortgage payments from the fund. I think thats called illicit enrichment!

tanszi wrote:I agree Panda, when I first heard that they had left the 3 children I thought there was something not right about things, and then the fund.  They were not wealthy, they made two mortgage payments from the fund.  I think thats called illicit enrichment!

Yes tanzi, the Fund has been their piggybank from day one. A few months ago I wrote to Scotland Yard about the £300,000 paid to Halligen and asked if , as part of the review, he would be interviewed while he has been in Prison for the past 18 months. I got the usual reply "we cannot comment on this matter". Ten days later Halligen was extradited to the US which means if the Fund was ever investigated , he would not be available to interview.