The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

The Guardian Icons of the decade

View previous topic View next topic Go down

The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by DCB1 on 22.12.09 17:59

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/2009/dec/22/icons-of-the-decade?picture=357218820

"7 / 10

Madeleine McCann
"Most remarkable of all is that ­despite the many thousands of ­articles, the millions of words, written about Madeleine McCann, there remains more than two and a half years later just one solitary fact that we know for sure. In the early hours of 3 May 2007, she vanished without trace from her parents’ ­holiday apartment""


Spot the error?

DCB1

Posts : 334
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2009-12-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by Guest on 22.12.09 18:06

Yes.
Sloppy work and that is a fact!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by Guest on 22.12.09 18:21

@DCB1 wrote:http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/2009/dec/22/icons-of-the-decade?picture=357218820

"7 / 10

Madeleine McCann
"Most remarkable of all is that ­despite the many thousands of ­articles, the millions of words, written about Madeleine McCann, there remains more than two and a half years later just one solitary fact that we know for sure. In the early hours of 3 May 2007, she vanished without trace from her parents’ ­holiday apartment""


Spot the error?

Yes, clearly they didn't bother to read any of the articles or words written about Madeleine, otherwise they would have known.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by Autumn on 24.12.09 3:29

JessicaPer wrote:
@DCB1 wrote:http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/2009/dec/22/icons-of-the-decade?picture=357218820

"7 / 10

Madeleine McCann
"Most remarkable of all is that ­despite the many thousands of ­articles, the millions of words, written about Madeleine McCann, there remains more than two and a half years later just one solitary fact that we know for sure. In the early hours of 3 May 2007, she vanished without trace from her parents’ ­holiday apartment""


Spot the error?

Yes, clearly they didn't bother to read any of the articles or words written about Madeleine, otherwise they would have known.


That 'one solitary fact' is debatable as there is much to suggest that Madeleine vanished 30th-1st May 2007.

Autumn

Posts : 2603
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2009-11-25

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by vaguely on 24.12.09 6:54

What, apart from the fact that so many people saw her after those dates and that she was booked in to the creche?

vaguely

Posts : 440
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2009-12-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by Janz on 24.12.09 7:15

In the early hours of 3 May 2007,


Which stories have they been reading? Or maybe they know something we dont. thinking

Janz

Posts : 111
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2009-12-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by vaguely on 24.12.09 8:04

hmm, nothing like a bit of shoddy journalism to spark a new conspiracy.

vaguely

Posts : 440
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2009-12-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by Guest on 24.12.09 8:49

@vaguely wrote:What, apart from the fact that so many people saw her after those dates and that she was booked in to the creche?

But that's only because they're ALL part of a huge conspiracy (which aims to...err.... something...) or they were collectively hypnotized into beleiving that they saw her, but in reality they didn't.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by Guest on 24.12.09 10:07

@vaguely wrote:hmm, nothing like a bit of shoddy journalism to spark a new conspiracy.

It was shoddy bloody journalism that started the whole conspiracy theory to begin with, contradictory, sloppy stories leading people to go... oooh that's changed, why are the stories changing, that's not what I first heard.... oooh suspicious.

Rolling Eyes

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by vaguely on 24.12.09 10:08

tyra wrote:
@vaguely wrote:hmm, nothing like a bit of shoddy journalism to spark a new conspiracy.

It was shoddy bloody journalism that started the whole conspiracy theory to begin with, contradictory, sloppy stories leading people to go... oooh that's changed, why are the stories changing, that's not what I first heard.... oooh suspicious.

Rolling Eyes

tis true.

vaguely

Posts : 440
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2009-12-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by Guest on 24.12.09 10:12

@vaguely wrote:
tyra wrote:
@vaguely wrote:hmm, nothing like a bit of shoddy journalism to spark a new conspiracy.

It was shoddy bloody journalism that started the whole conspiracy theory to begin with, contradictory, sloppy stories leading people to go... oooh that's changed, why are the stories changing, that's not what I first heard.... oooh suspicious.

Rolling Eyes

tis true.

That combined with the fact that they had to organise their own press conference to inform people that their child was missing and were standing outside the apartments looking completely shellshocked and readong off their bits of paper and not as you'd expect with your friendly police unforms flanking them, supporting them, speaking FOR them. Led a great number of people to think there was something off about it, of course there was something off about it, we had never seen anything like it before.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by Slartibartfast on 24.12.09 10:17

tyra wrote:
@vaguely wrote:hmm, nothing like a bit of shoddy journalism to spark a new conspiracy.

It was shoddy bloody journalism that started the whole conspiracy theory to begin with, contradictory, sloppy stories leading people to go... oooh that's changed, why are the stories changing, that's not what I first heard.... oooh suspicious.

Rolling Eyes


Pools of "bodily fluids" and "clumps of hair", 100% DNA match. "find the body and prove we killed her" etc. etc.

Question is who was behind all the leaks. Cui bono?

Slartibartfast

Posts : 135
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by Guest on 24.12.09 10:36

@Slartibartfast wrote:
tyra wrote:
@vaguely wrote:hmm, nothing like a bit of shoddy journalism to spark a new conspiracy.

It was shoddy bloody journalism that started the whole conspiracy theory to begin with, contradictory, sloppy stories leading people to go... oooh that's changed, why are the stories changing, that's not what I first heard.... oooh suspicious.

Rolling Eyes


Pools of "bodily fluids" and "clumps of hair", 100% DNA match. "find the body and prove we killed her" etc. etc.

Question is who was behind all the leaks. Cui bono?

Well yes, by then the stories were intentionally misleading, I was thinking more about the innocent errors in reporting from the first few days when no-one really knew much other than what was said by the parents, Jon Hill and any unnamed guest from anywhere in pdL who had a thought, so wrong no of people in group, wrong professions, wrong date of quiz night, wrong arrangements of child checking, wrong description of apartment, wrong description of bedroom layout. None of these mistakes are at all unusual in a rolling news case like this where info is scarce and confusing but very rarely is shoddy, guesswork style reporting like this used by people as hard evidence of some sort of active lying or cover up on the part of the victims.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by Slartibartfast on 24.12.09 10:43

tyra wrote:
@Slartibartfast wrote:
tyra wrote:
@vaguely wrote:hmm, nothing like a bit of shoddy journalism to spark a new conspiracy.

It was shoddy bloody journalism that started the whole conspiracy theory to begin with, contradictory, sloppy stories leading people to go... oooh that's changed, why are the stories changing, that's not what I first heard.... oooh suspicious.

Rolling Eyes


Pools of "bodily fluids" and "clumps of hair", 100% DNA match. "find the body and prove we killed her" etc. etc.

Question is who was behind all the leaks. Cui bono?

Well yes, by then the stories were intentionally misleading, I was thinking more about the innocent errors in reporting from the first few days when no-one really knew much other than what was said by the parents, Jon Hill and any unnamed guest from anywhere in pdL who had a thought, so wrong no of people in group, wrong professions, wrong date of quiz night, wrong arrangements of child checking, wrong description of apartment, wrong description of bedroom layout. None of these mistakes are at all unusual in a rolling news case like this where info is scarce and confusing but very rarely is shoddy, guesswork style reporting like this used by people as hard evidence of some sort of active lying or cover up on the part of the victims.

But there is the added dimension of judicial secrecy in this particular case. None of the information reported during the investigation was actually supposed to be available publically.
I agree that in an information vacuum journalists will simply make up stories or use unreliable sources as the basis for their articles.
But there was information leaking from the investigation and with 20/20 hindsight we can see that some of it was a gross exaggeration of the truth. eg.. there was some kind of cellular material found but hardly classifiable as pools of "corpse fluid"
That where the most pertinent leaks that influenced public opinion and the conspiracy loonies came from. The ones cited even by Amaral (Find the body and prove we killed her, for example.)

Slartibartfast

Posts : 135
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by Guest on 24.12.09 10:56

Absolutely, my point is that there are two types of misleading story, the innocent errors made by journalists to flesh out an otherwise weak story, so some assumption, some guesswork, they never expect to have to justify it (they never expected their words to add 'colour' to a news story to be used by someone as EVIDENCE of something) and then of course as you rightly say, the intentional false leaks, that were based enough on what was actually going on in the investigation to flag it as coming from within the investigation but was slanted to suggest Madeleine's death, a murder cover up, parental involvement, of course none of which transpired to be true.

That had to have been intentional.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Guardian Icons of the decade

Post by Guest on 24.12.09 17:58

tyra wrote:Absolutely, my point is that there are two types of misleading story, the innocent errors made by journalists to flesh out an otherwise weak story, so some assumption, some guesswork, they never expect to have to justify it (they never expected their words to add 'colour' to a news story to be used by someone as EVIDENCE of something) and then of course as you rightly say, the intentional false leaks, that were based enough on what was actually going on in the investigation to flag it as coming from within the investigation but was slanted to suggest Madeleine's death, a murder cover up, parental involvement, of course none of which transpired to be true.

That had to have been intentional.

Yes, to put pressure on the parents. But why? They could be quietly working on the case and interviewing them over and over again. Leaking stories to the press -ignoring the secrecy- isn't professional. So may be it was because someone realized they had nothing, no case, unless someone confessed due to the pressure?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum