More Clarence than we can digest.../Unterdenteppich

http://unterdenteppichgekehrt.blogspot.com/2011/10/mehr-clarence-als-man-vertragt.html?spref=tw
updated

More Clarence than we can digest...

Excerpt from the book "Skandal! Die Macht öffentlicher Empörung" Jens Bergmann / Bernhard Pörksen (Hrsg.)(Leseprobe) v. 2009 (trial read) from 2009




Mr. Mitchell, in November 2007, the German satirical magazine Titanic printed a fake ad under the headline: "Find Maddie - In your supermarket is a hidden Maddie". The now world-famous face of missing Madeleine McCann was there to be seen on biscuits and chocolate wraps and a household cleaner, “wiping all traces". You described the article on behalf of the McCann family "as" sick "and" disrespectful. What do you think was so scandalous about it?

Clarence Mitchell: This clearly exceeded the limits of what is acceptable in journalism and satirical articles. This fake ad was not funny, it hurt Kate and Gerry McCann's feelings. Therefore we demanded an apology from those responsible, and threatening further legal action.

The Titanic editor was pleased with the threat: In this way, the paper remained in the conversation and got free advertising.

It then did not come to legal action. The important thing was that we had made our position very clear. If a child is missing, the parents are desperate - the last thing they need in this situation, are journalists who think they are funny. The British media have also, incidentally, clearly distanced themself from the Titanic article, with the tenor, that it had been a German attempt at humour that had gone awfully wrong.



No wonder that the British press was not amused - the satire was aimed at them. Newspapers and magazines had earned brilliantly with the coverage of the missing child. Up to 70,000 additional copies were sold per title when there were news to the case. Maddie was made by the media into what the Titanic dramatically demonstrated with the display: a means of promotion.

I can understand why the Titanic people have brought the story: They wanted to show that we have sold Madeleine's face in the style of a brand label. But in this day and age you have to act that way if you want to stay in the media spotlight. Nevertheless, I do not like to talk about a little girl like Madeleine as a 'brand'.



But this is how the little girl is presented by you. Even a mail order business with T-shirts and wristbands is being operated from the so-called Find Madeleine website.

In a way, you may be right - there are actually parallels to marketing. Kate and Gerry decided very early on to spread the image and the name of her missing daughter. And after all in the modern media aera different stories compete for attention. Therefore, we have to approach the matter professionally. People may say it's cynical - I consider it almost a necessity.

Madeleine's father Gerry said after the disappearance of the child, that a "marketing campaign" was necessary to find her. His biggest concern was that the media would lose interest after a few days in history. It sounds, Sir, quite callous.

It is Gerry's nature, to look at things sober and focused. And also I was forced to think like this. We had no choice but to organize the search in a rational manner and almost commercially.

Already during the night of Madeleine's disappearance numerous photos of the girl arrived at the British media .

That's right, but not by the parents - Kate and Gerry were too busy looking for Madeleine. The photos were supplied by friends and relatives in England. The Internet has played a decisive role in their global distribution: Before Kate and Gerry had finished the first night of the search, their daughter had become an icon.

How can a three year old become an icon overnight ?

In this media world, there is constant demand and immense competition: For many editors, it is essential to get a message onto the market as soon as possible to outdo competitors. This leads to sloppy research, a reduction of journalistic quality and more often to ensure that a once published message has to be revised only a short time later. The online media have exacerbated this competition even further: Suddenly the BBC news broadcasts compete with their own Internet site to see who brings the news first. This creates such an insane pressure within the media system that affects not least those reported about. Especially if they, like the McCann family, are quite suddenly in the focus of the media.

What effect had this pressure on you, the press spokesman for the family?

At the height of public interest the story for me was very stressful. In front of the apartment of the McCanns were waiting up to 300 media people, including 40 television teams. Fast responses were constantly asked for, and sometimes I would have liked to have put this or that in other words. There were days in Portugal, when I got 200 calls from journalists from around the world, which was really tiring. My wife was at times not happy with my job. Even when I was at home, I was not really present. The phone was ringing permanently, I always sat at the computer.

You were under the most pressure when the McCanns in September 2007 brought you back as their private spokesperson on their own account after your job as a PR man employed by the British government had ended. Madeleine's parents had just been officially declared suspects and come into the focus of the investigation. How did it happen?

Constantly rumors were given to the public by police sources - even though the Portuguese law prohibits police information to get out. Partly they were untenable assumptions. For example, DNA traces were found in the parent's rental car and they claimed that the parents had taken away the body of the dead child with the help of the car. In truth, weeks after Madeleine's disappearance the McCanns had transported garments of her missing daughter in the car. DNA is easily transferable - the smallest amount of sweat or skin particles is enough. Judging from these traces that a body was transported, is erroneous. Additionally, the car was parked in front of the apartment 24 hours a day and was filmed by television cameras.

For the media the rumors from police circles were exactly what they were waiting for: The Maddie story got a new twist.

So it was. At that time there was a terrible smear campaign against Kate and Gerry n the Portuguese press. Those responsible used each new rumor to produce Maddie title pages. Every day a new scandal! The McCanns were imputed to have hosted sex parties with other couples, Gerry was accused of not being Madeleine's biological father. Such malicious false allegations had to be stopped. That's why I regularly assembled journalists away from the official press conferences and presented them our version of the story. It was not to paint Madeleine's parents in a favorable light, but only to guarantee a fair and balanced reporting.

But moral suasion alone was apparently not sufficient, because a defamation lawsuit against the major British Express Group that had been strained in the name of the McCanns in March 2008, proved successful in court.

That action was needed to solve our biggest problem: Different rags copied unaudited false reports of each other, giving the the appearance of truth. If on Monday there had been a smear campaign in a Portuguese newspaper it was reproduced on Tuesday by British papers. And then on Wednesday it Portugal reported: The renowned Daily Express has confirmed our story, so there must be some truth to it. It was a cycle of nonsense, and the papers of the Express Group had propelled it most fervently. That cost the publisher 550 000 pounds in damages. After our lawsuit the Express newspapers were forced to apologize on the front page to Kate and Gerry. With this verdict, we were able to put the British press firmly in their place.

Lawsuits are the only means to get to the boulevard under control?

You should only control what is out of control. In a democracy it is allowed to each man to express freely his opinion - within the legal limits. That's why I do not believe in trying to control journalists. Many PR people see things differently and respond to reporter's questions with a gruff: "No comment.'' In today's world this response is a big mistake - it does not help anyone and is extremely bad for the reputation! In contrast, I have always tried to be as open and honest as possible to the press. This is how you reach much more "control" than with any defensiveness in my opinion. Legal action must therefore remain a last resort.

You had to resort to this last measure. Did you lose control over the story?

That was the case in some phases. The media were crazy about the story, and it had developed an incredible momentum.

So you could not get rid of the spirits that you had called anymore?

There is something to it. Who goes to bed with the media, has to adjust to everything - even the fact that they can hurt you a lot. The Maddie story had eventually become independent. We just had to give a press conference, a comment or post a picture, and it would be discussed for days in the media. The story had such momentum that I could not really control it. It was possible for me to channel it a bit here, and promote or restrain there, but I could never stop it. The media wanted this story.

And you have deliberately kept it going. You even made a tour through European capitals with the McCanns in a private jet, financed by sponsors.

Just a minute, this was not a rock-'n'-roll tour! We had just been thinking about where Maddie could have been brought. Most of the Algarve tourists come from Great Britain, Germany and the Netherlands. So we decided to organize a trip to Berlin and Amsterdam, to draw attention to Maddie. The highlight was a visit to the Pope. It had been the Vatican who approached us. The British clergy called and sent a message: The Pope followed the story on television. He saw a catholic couple in need and offered an audience. I thought, fantastic, spiritual support for the McCanns. But Kate and Gerry refused at first, they did not want to make themselves important. So I said: Think it over, I can make it happen. Then they said yes.

Despite all the PR, the search has so far not produced the decisive clue. How many worthless tips did you get?

Approximately 4,000 self-proclaimed clairvoyants and mediums have provided detailed comments on the alleged whereabouts of Madeleine.We have investigated all of them, and they were all wrong. We had some malicious informants, a few attempts at extortion, and even some death threats. With a matter of this size it brings any form of human existence along, whether benign or malevolent. Nevertheless, each serious information is followed up, either by the police or our private investigators.

Can you tell us concretely what kind of information do you get?

I, for example, was told that Madeleine was booked on specific flights, including exact seat details. She was supposed to be in Chile and Moscow, was seen in Sydney and in Malta. Others gave me car number plates or locations around the world. But mostly I hear any perverse stories about Maddie traveling in a ship on the clouds.


Is not it frustrating to constantly get served these tales?

Yes it is. Frustrating was also the work of the Portuguese police, which has closed its investigation. Nevertheless, the search is not over yet. The patrons of the McCanns fund further private investigations. We are an international network. Recently, a girl was seen in Chile, which could have been Madeleine - an investigation team was on site three hours later. Via Interpol it would have taken three weeks. Moreover, these supposed clairvoyant sometimes have to be taken quite seriously. In the past, kidnappers have called as a "medium" to provide information on the whereabouts of missing persons, so as not to be caught.


What does the police think about your private investigation?

They are not very happy about our work. But of course we take all relevant material to them. Had the police done their job well from the start, had they approached the matter impartially, we would have worked even better with them.


Were you aware from the beginning that the disappearance of this little girl would be a media event of the year?

Even when I first heard of Madeleine's disappearance, I thought: This will be a big thing! A photogenic little girl disappears under mysterious circumstances. Add the entire circumstances: a happy, well-paid family of doctors with cute kids on a well-deserved holiday - and then this stroke of fate.


Gerry McCann's sister noted soberly that the press would have make so much money out of the story had Madeleine's mother Kate been "fat and pimply."

I also do not think that the media had fallen like this if something similar had happedned to a poor, underprivileged family. The social status of the McCanns was not the only factor that explains the enormous interest in this story. It was also about parental responsibility in general, the competence of the police and the cooperation or non-cooperation between Portuguese and British authorities. Adding the almost daily rumors. Thus, beyond the actual search, the Madeleine case quickly turned into a kind of soap opera.


How much fiction is in the case of Maddie? Books and films should already be in progress.

The case actually resembles a popular novel - all the necessary elements are present. Our mission is to bring the story back to reality. Because its core is very real: A little girl is gone - because Madeleine has become an icon, people tend to forget that. And there is no evidence that the child was injured or even killed. Kate and Gerry are not naive. They know that she could be dead. They have learned more about pedophilia and child abduction than they ever wanted since Madeleine's disappearance. And yet they still hope that their daughter is kept somewhere, but will be cared for.


This case was the trigger for you to switch careers and to move to PR. You had previously worked many years as a journalist. Despite your relative inexperience, you were already called a "PR guru" by the Boulevard.

Isn't that ridiculous? I've worked 25 years as a journalist, was twelve years at the BBC. Then I enlisted the Blair government: As head of the Media Monitoring Unit I was responsible for analyzing the media coverage, informed politicians about current events and advised MPs. So I asked my boss if I could work again a little more journalisticly. I was thinking of events such as a bomb attack or an outbreak of plague. That I would have to deal with a kidnapped girl, I would not have thought.

Is it normal that a country provides PR staff to citizens in need?

When Madeleine disappeared, the government sent me to Portugal to assist the police spokesmen on the spot. In the UK the process is not unusual: the British Embassy in Portugal was overstrained with the overwhelming media attention. I spent several weeks with the McCanns and was then called back to my post. But we kept private contact. And as a benevolent businessman then agreed to pay me a decent salary I quit my job in London - and since then took full time care of the McCanns. That is how I slipped into the PR industry.

First you were a journalist, then a civil servant and are now an official PR man. Purists would say that you have strayed further and further from the journalistic ideal.

I can not say that a PR job was my big dream. I had established myself comfortably at the BBC, but I wanted more. I wanted a top position and did not really progress. So I eventually said: So let's see what else is thus possible. When I worked for the McCanns, I realized how much support people need who are suddenly at the focus of media attention. This constant siege no one can endure - and yet you have to deal with it. I realized that in this industry was potential.

You mean, even private people today need a PR consultant?

Who knows, maybe I've actually developed a new business model. But ultimately people have to decide in such a situation if they should get professional help. Generally speaking, the utterance of an affected person is always better than that of a spokesperson. They say PR pros like myself could change and twist things if necessary. Sometimes this is certainly true. For example when I want to rid the world of lies. Sometimes I'm just a facilitator. If you have lost a child, you are overwhelmed by a horde of reporters at your front door. Especially since the interest of the media can stay for a long time. The more important the media are for our lives, the greedier they become. Therefore, professional assistance may be useful. Only it is not exactly cheap.

Not many families in similar circumstances have rich patrons like the McCanns. The PR man in need is still an absolute luxury.

I do not claim that the Maddie case is good as a blueprint for other cases. It is truly unique. Nevertheless, I currently advise three other families in similar tragic situations. They have heard of me and turned in desperation to me. I can not complain about a lack of demand.

More Clarence than we can digest...


Excerpt from the book "Skandal! Die Macht öffentlicher Empörung" Jens Bergmann / Bernhard Pörksen (Hrsg.)(Leseprobe) v. 2009 (trial read) from 2009





Mr. Mitchell, in November 2007, the German satirical magazine Titanic printed a fake ad under the headline: "Find Maddie - In your supermarket is a hidden Maddie". The now world-famous face of missing Madeleine McCann was there to be seen on biscuits and chocolate wraps and a household cleaner, “wiping all traces". You described the article on behalf of the McCann family "as" sick "and" disrespectful. What do you think was so scandalous about it?


Clarence Mitchell: This clearly exceeded the limits of what is acceptable in journalism and satirical articles. This fake ad was not funny, it hurt Kate and Gerry McCann's feelings. Therefore we demanded an apology from those responsible, and threatening further legal action.
The Titanic editor was pleased with the threat: In this way, the paper remained in the conversation and got free advertising.


It then did not come to legal action. The important thing was that we had made our position very clear. If a child is missing, the parents are desperate - the last thing they need in this situation, are journalists who think they are funny. The British media have also, incidentally, clearly distanced themself from the Titanic article, with the tenor, that it had been a German attempt at humour that had gone awfully wrong.


No wonder that the British press was not amused - the satire was aimed at them. Newspapers and magazines had earned brilliantly with the coverage of the missing child. Up to 70,000 additional copies were sold per title when there were news to the case. Maddie was made by the media into what the Titanic dramatically demonstrated with the display: a means of promotion.


I can understand why the Titanic people have brought the story: They wanted to show that we have sold Madeleine's face in the style of a brand label. But in this day and age you have to act that way if you want to stay in the media spotlight. Nevertheless, I do not like to talk about a little girl like Madeleine as a 'brand'.


But this is how the little girl is presented by you. Even a mail order business with T-shirts and wristbands is being operated from the so-called Find Madeleine website.


In a way, you may be right - there are actually parallels to marketing. Kate and Gerry decided very early on to spread the image and the name of her missing daughter. And after all in the modern media aera different stories compete for attention. Therefore, we have to approach the matter professionally. People may say it's cynical - I consider it almost a necessity.
Madeleine's father Gerry said after the disappearance of the child, that a "marketing campaign" was necessary to find her. His biggest concern was that the media would lose interest after a few days in history. It sounds, Sir, quite callous.


It is Gerry's nature, to look at things sober and focused. And also I was forced to think like this. We had no choice but to organize the search in a rational manner and almost commercially.
Already during the night of Madeleine's disappearance numerous photos of the girl arrived at the British media .


That's right, but not by the parents - Kate and Gerry were too busy looking for Madeleine. The photos were supplied by friends and relatives in England. The Internet has played a decisive role in their global distribution: Before Kate and Gerry had finished the first night of the search, their daughter had become an icon.
How can a three year old become an icon overnight ?


In this media world, there is constant demand and immense competition: For many editors, it is essential to get a message onto the market as soon as possible to outdo competitors. This leads to sloppy research, a reduction of journalistic quality and more often to ensure that a once published message has to be revised only a short time later. The online media have exacerbated this competition even further: Suddenly the BBC news broadcasts compete with their own Internet site to see who brings the news first. This creates such an insane pressure within the media system that affects not least those reported about. Especially if they, like the McCann family, are quite suddenly in the focus of the media.
What effect had this pressure on you, the press spokesman for the family?


At the height of public interest the story for me was very stressful. In front of the apartment of the McCanns were waiting up to 300 media people, including 40 television teams. Fast responses were constantly asked for, and sometimes I would have liked to have put this or that in other words. There were days in Portugal, when I got 200 calls from journalists from around the world, which was really tiring. My wife was at times not happy with my job. Even when I was at home, I was not really present. The phone was ringing permanently, I always sat at the computer.
You were under the most pressure when the McCanns in September 2007 brought you back as their private spokesperson on their own account after your job as a PR man employed by the British government had ended. Madeleine's parents had just been officially declared suspects and come into the focus of the investigation. How did it happen?


Constantly rumors were given to the public by police sources - even though the Portuguese law prohibits police information to get out. Partly they were untenable assumptions. For example, DNA traces were found in the parent's rental car and they claimed that the parents had taken away the body of the dead child with the help of the car. In truth, weeks after Madeleine's disappearance the McCanns had transported garments of her missing daughter in the car. DNA is easily transferable - the smallest amount of sweat or skin particles is enough. Judging from these traces that a body was transported, is erroneous. Additionally, the car was parked in front of the apartment 24 hours a day and was filmed by television cameras.
For the media the rumors from police circles were exactly what they were waiting for: The Maddie story got a new twist.


So it was. At that time there was a terrible smear campaign against Kate and Gerry n the Portuguese press. Those responsible used each new rumor to produce Maddie title pages. Every day a new scandal! The McCanns were imputed to have hosted sex parties with other couples, Gerry was accused of not being Madeleine's biological father. Such malicious false allegations had to be stopped. That's why I regularly assembled journalists away from the official press conferences and presented them our version of the story. It was not to paint Madeleine's parents in a favorable light, but only to guarantee a fair and balanced reporting.
But moral suasion alone was apparently not sufficient, because a defamation lawsuit against the major British Express Group that had been strained in the name of the McCanns in March 2008, proved successful in court.


That action was needed to solve our biggest problem: Different rags copied unaudited false reports of each other, giving the the appearance of truth. If on Monday there had been a smear campaign in a Portuguese newspaper it was reproduced on Tuesday by British papers. And then on Wednesday it Portugal reported: The renowned Daily Express has confirmed our story, so there must be some truth to it. It was a cycle of nonsense, and the papers of the Express Group had propelled it most fervently. That cost the publisher 550 000 pounds in damages. After our lawsuit the Express newspapers were forced to apologize on the front page to Kate and Gerry. With this verdict, we were able to put the British press firmly in their place.
Lawsuits are the only means to get to the boulevard under control?


You should only control what is out of control. In a democracy it is allowed to each man to express freely his opinion - within the legal limits. That's why I do not believe in trying to control journalists. Many PR people see things differently and respond to reporter's questions with a gruff: "No comment.'' In today's world this response is a big mistake - it does not help anyone and is extremely bad for the reputation! In contrast, I have always tried to be as open and honest as possible to the press. This is how you reach much more "control" than with any defensiveness in my opinion. Legal action must therefore remain a last resort.
You had to resort to this last measure. Did you lose control over the story?


That was the case in some phases. The media were crazy about the story, and it had developed an incredible momentum.
So you could not get rid of the spirits that you had called anymore?


There is something to it. Who goes to bed with the media, has to adjust to everything - even the fact that they can hurt you a lot. The Maddie story had eventually become independent. We just had to give a press conference, a comment or post a picture, and it would be discussed for days in the media. The story had such momentum that I could not really control it. It was possible for me to channel it a bit here, and promote or restrain there, but I could never stop it. The media wanted this story.
And you have deliberately kept it going. You even made a tour through European capitals with the McCanns in a private jet, financed by sponsors.


Just a minute, this was not a rock-'n'-roll tour! We had just been thinking about where Maddie could have been brought. Most of the Algarve tourists come from Great Britain, Germany and the Netherlands. So we decided to organize a trip to Berlin and Amsterdam, to draw attention to Maddie. The highlight was a visit to the Pope. It had been the Vatican who approached us. The British clergy called and sent a message: The Pope followed the story on television. He saw a catholic couple in need and offered an audience. I thought, fantastic, spiritual support for the McCanns. But Kate and Gerry refused at first, they did not want to make themselves important. So I said: Think it over, I can make it happen. Then they said yes.
Despite all the PR, the search has so far not produced the decisive clue. How many worthless tips did you get?


Approximately 4,000 self-proclaimed clairvoyants and mediums have provided detailed comments on the alleged whereabouts of Madeleine.We have investigated all of them, and they were all wrong. We had some malicious informants, a few attempts at extortion, and even some death threats. With a matter of this size it brings any form of human existence along, whether benign or malevolent. Nevertheless, each serious information is followed up, either by the police or our private investigators.
Can you tell us concretely what kind of information do you get?


I, for example, was told that Madeleine was booked on specific flights, including exact seat details. She was supposed to be in Chile ....................................


2 pages missing

..............................................................................................
to inform and advise members.So I asked my boss if I could work again a little more journalisticly. I was thinking of events such as a bomb attack or an outbreak of plague. That I would have to deal with a kidnapped girl, I would not have thought.
Is it normal that a country provides PR staff to citizens in need?


When Madeleine disappeared, the government sent me to Portugal to assist the police spokesmen on the spot. In the UK the process is not unusual: the British Embassy in Portugal was overstrained with the overwhelming media attention. I spent several weeks with the McCanns and was then called back to my post. But we kept private contact. And as a benevolent businessman then agreed to pay me a decent salary I quit my job in London - and since then took full time care of the McCanns. That is how I slipped into the PR industry.
First you were a journalist, then a civil servant and are now an official PR man. Purists would say that you have strayed further and further from the journalistic ideal.


I can not say that a PR job was my big dream. I had established myself comfortably at the BBC, but I wanted more. I wanted a top position and did not really progress. So I eventually said: So let's see what else is thus possible. When I worked for the McCanns, I realized how much support people need who are suddenly at the focus of media attention. This constant siege no one can endure - and yet you have to deal with it. I realized that in this industry was potential.
You mean, even private people today need a PR consultant?


Who knows, maybe I've actually developed a new business model. But ultimately people have to decide in such a situation if they should get professional help. Generally speaking, the utterance of an affected person is always better than that of a spokesperson. They say PR pros like myself could change and twist things if necessary. Sometimes this is certainly true. For example when I want to rid the world of lies. Sometimes I'm just a facilitator. If you have lost a child, you are overwhelmed by a horde of reporters at your front door. Especially since the interest of the media can stay for a long time. The more important the media are for our lives, the greedier they become. Therefore, professional assistance may be useful. Only it is not exactly cheap.
Not many families in similar circumstances have rich patrons like the McCanns. The PR man in need is still an absolute luxury.


I do not claim that the Maddie case is good as a blueprint for other cases. It is truly unique. Nevertheless, I currently advise three other families in similar tragic situations. They have heard of me and turned in desperation to me. I can not complain about a lack of demand.
Eingestellt von Johanna um 13:31 Diesen Post per E-Mail versendenBlogThis!In Twitter freigebenIn Facebook freigeben2

frencheuropean wrote:More Clarence than we can digest...


Excerpt from the book "Skandal! Die Macht öffentlicher Empörung" Jens Bergmann / Bernhard Pörksen (Hrsg.)(Leseprobe) v. 2009 (trial read) from 2009

They say PR pros like myself could change and twist things if necessary. Sometimes this is certainly true. For example when I want to rid the world of lies. Sometimes I'm just a facilitator.


Eingestellt von Johanna um 13:31 Diesen Post per E-Mail versendenBlogThis!In Twitter freigebenIn Facebook freigeben2

This is of course God Speaking...... 'For example when I want to rid the world of lies.'