Re: Gerry McCann speaks at the International Bar

by **Tony Bennett** 04.03.10 18:08

vaguely1 wrote:That's an interesting point.....Mr Bennett has probably been on TV/radio more than the rest of us put together.

Mr Bennett, when you appear on TV/Radio is it to get a message across.....or is it because you enjoy or court the limelight?

ty in advance for your answer.

The previous week, James Whale had done his usual hagiographic piece on the McCanns and during his show put out a public challenge to me to come on his show and defend myself. This was a short while after my attempt to summons the McCanns for child neglect.

I didn't hear the show myself but someone told me about it.

I contacted the show and said: "If you want to interview me, here I am".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5lCyfAmw9g

Look at the comments on the YouTube video of the broadcast. Over 95% of all comments are with me and against Whale.

by **Tony Bennett** 04.03.10 18:12

jmbd wrote:He certainly courted the appearance on the Whale show - then complained about it afterwards, his complaint was rejected. (upheld in part)

Untrue. Whale asked me to go on his show. Simple as.

by jmbd 04.03.10 18:16

Do you accept Ofcom's decision Tony?

by jmbd 04.03.10 18:17

Whale challenged you in a previous programme.

by vaguely1 04.03.10 18:28

Tony Bennett wrote:
vaguely1 wrote:That's an interesting point.....Mr Bennett has probably been on TV/radio more than the rest of us put together.

Mr Bennett, when you appear on TV/Radio is it to get a message across.....or is it because you enjoy or court the limelight?

ty in advance for your answer.
The previous week, James Whale had done his usual hagiographic piece on the McCanns and during his show put out a public challenge to me to come on his show and defend myself. This was a short while after my attempt to summons the McCanns for child neglect.

I didn't hear the show myself but someone told me about it.

I contacted the show and said: "If you want to interview me, here I am".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5lCyfAmw9g

Look at the comments on the YouTube video of the broadcast. Over 95% of all comments are with me and against Whale.

What about the other radio show, there's a link on youtube, the presenter talks about when he took his children on caravanning holidays....did he request you go on his show too?

by whoknowsthetruth 04.03.10 18:58

Tony Bennett wrote:
vaguely1 wrote:I thought you didn't have a TV Mr Bennett?
I don't. It leaves so much time for other activities.

You will go blind doing that big grin

by **Tony Bennett** 04.03.10 19:00

vaguely1 wrote:What about the other radio show, there's a link on youtube, the presenter talks about when he took his children on caravanning holidays....did he request you go on his show too?

Absolutely. I have never gone looking for interviews. Radio Talk Europe approached me for an interview after an ex-pat supporter in Spain gave them a copy of '60 Reasons'. I may say they had many calls after the interview along the lines of: 'That bloke's right, you know'.

by vaguely1 04.03.10 19:04

But what is your reason for doing them - it would be seeking publicity no?

I'm just trying to work your issue with the McCanns seeking publicity. It seems you're both using the press for the same end.

by whoknowsthetruth 04.03.10 19:05

You may say that but you will be wrong Mr Bennett

by jmbd 04.03.10 19:07

Tony said: I contacted the show and said: "If you want to interview me, here I am".

Reading the Ofcom report it was a little more than that Tony. You negotiated terms and conditions for your appearance on the show.

by whoknowsthetruth 04.03.10 19:09

Mr Bennett have you read my last post on the Mrs Butler arrested and took a picture of my wifes bush thread yet. If not i can post it here fot you to answer.

by jmbd 04.03.10 19:17

jmbd wrote:Tony said: I contacted the show and said: "If you want to interview me, here I am".

Reading the Ofcom report it was a little more than that Tony. You negotiated terms and conditions for your appearance on the show.

In fact one of your complaints to Ofcom was that those terms and condition were not adhered to.

It's very similar to what you say the Mccann's did on the Oprah show - negotiate conditions beforehand.

by hedge 04.03.10 19:18

vaguely1 wrote:But what is your reason for doing them - it would be seeking publicity no?

I'm just trying to work your issue with the McCanns seeking publicity. It seems you're both using the press for the same end.

And neither should consider themselves or be considered as celebrities.

by **Tony Bennett** 04.03.10 19:33

vaguely1 wrote:But what is your reason for doing them - it would be seeking publicity no?

I'm just trying to work your issue with the McCanns seeking publicity. It seems you're both using the press for the same end.

Where we coincide is that both the McCanns and we/me/The Madeleine Foundation are trying to get our respective messages across.

I mentioned Oprah Winfrey in particular because of (a) the addition of a PayPal button showed that the exercise was partly about fund-raising and (b) they knew they would be watched by hundreds of millions worldwide.

We got no guidance on where to look for Madeleine (the whole world, presumably), nor which of the 11-plus abductors/abductresses we are supposed to be looking for.

Just a photo-fit of a happy, smiling girl who looked about 11 years old.

by jmbd 04.03.10 19:38

And the we/me/Foundation message is that there was no abduction - no point in looking for Madeleine, concentrate instead in how to prove that the Mccanns did something more than leave their children alone.

Simple

by hedge 04.03.10 19:51

Tony Bennett wrote:
vaguely1 wrote:But what is your reason for doing them - it would be seeking publicity no?

I'm just trying to work your issue with the McCanns seeking publicity. It seems you're both using the press for the same end.
Where we coincide is that both the McCanns and we/me/The Madeleine Foundation are trying to get our respective messages across.

I mentioned Oprah Winfrey in particular because of (a) the addition of a PayPal button showed that the exercise was partly about fund-raising and (b) they knew they would be watched by hundreds of millions worldwide.

We got no guidance on where to look for Madeleine (the whole world, presumably), nor which of the 11-plus abductors/abductresses we are supposed to be looking for.

Just a photo-fit of a happy, smiling girl who looked about 11 years old.

That's what parents of missing kids do, they ask for our help. There is no need to give all of the potentials in terms of people of interest to the investigation, partly because for all we or they know they might be innocent bystanders and also they were going on an american show where they wanted people to be aware of Madeleine, their much loved little girl, of what she might look like, of a little girl they miss terribly and who is possibly growing up with without them and her siblings right now. It's all about her and their families loss.

I don't know what you expect them to do, if fund raising for the ongoing search and awareness raising is so abhorrent to you.

by jmbd 04.03.10 19:59

it is simple - the we/me/Foundation expect them to confess of wrongdoings rather than pursuing anyone looking for Madeleine.

by jmbd 04.03.10 22:55

words per minute count please Tony?

by **Tony Bennett** 04.03.10 23:16

jmbd wrote:words per minute count please Tony?

It's good to see that you read my articles. There's another one coming along soon

by jmbd 04.03.10 23:17

Of course I read them Tony - I have run out of Calpol.

by aliberte2 05.03.10 1:39

How did Having the McCanns on Benefit Oprah? the US Papers and Newsprograms Moved on From the Case Forever Ago and concluded That Madeleine had Been Abducted but that THe McCanns' child Care Arrangements Were Wrong and Would never Have Been Tolerated in the Us, etc.

by aliberte2 05.03.10 1:42

Autumn wrote:
bunnie1 wrote:I think I'll wait until I've watched it before I comment.

People, well The Bar must think he has something important to say or they wouldn't have invited him would they?

Or are they in on it too?

Interesting how McCann bangs on about protecting the twins' privacy whilst not giving 2 hoots about the privacy of the little girl from Dunedin who was mistakenly identified as Madeleine.

The one whose face We never Saw and Whose Name We don't Know?

by vaguely1 05.03.10 1:45

who is the girl from Dunedin?

by aiyoyo 05.03.10 5:38

Not Madeleine!

by Autumn 05.03.10 9:46

vaguely1 wrote:who is the girl from Dunedin?

The girl in the NZ 'sighting - the article relating to this is attached to my post earlier in the thread.

I am very concerned that the press are splashing photos of 'Madeleine lookalikes' all over their pages - as millions of girls around the world resemble her, it is only a matter of time before someone gets hurt. Is it too much to ask that the editors of these rags exercise some responsiblility before exposing these children and their families to the full glare of the media spotlight. It took only a few hours to show that the girl in the NZ 'sighting' was not Madeleine - why didn't the lazy journos do this before publishing the photos?

by vaguely1 05.03.10 9:54

Ah okay.

The papers are rubbish and shouldn't be printing all this crap.....but I don't think it's the journalists job to rule out the sightings.

by Cath 05.03.10 10:12

Somehow I doubt they'd printed it if the sighting was ruled out.
Now it is. And it didn't even take long to do that.

by Cath 05.03.10 20:56

Tony Bennett wrote:
jmbd wrote:He certainly courted the appearance on the Whale show - then complained about it afterwards, his complaint was rejected. (upheld in part)
Untrue. Whale asked me to go on his show. Simple as.

Ofcom noted that Mr Bennett had emailed TalkSPORT to provide himself for an interview with James Whale.

www.ofcom.org.uk/tv/obb/prog_cb/obb111/issue111.pdf+bennett+james+whale+interview+transcript&cd=9&hl=%20en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Offcom

by Cath 06.03.10 0:59

jmbd wrote:Tony said: I contacted the show and said: "If you want to interview me, here I am".

Reading the Ofcom report it was a little more than that Tony. You negotiated terms and conditions for your appearance on the show.

Indeed he did:

In summary Mr Bennett complained that he was treated unfairly in the programme as broadcast in that
a) The following assurances had been given to him by the programme makers in advance of his live interview but they were not honoured
(i) The programme makers had agreed in writing that “there would be a fair introduction which would summarise changing opinion towards the McCanns in the Madeleine McCann case”; and
(ii) The programme makers had also agreed that a “fair balance of calls” would be taken during the programme from “pro-McCann” listeners and “McCann-sceptics”, like Mr Bennett
...