shouldn't they just arrest the 'medium' who knows where all the bodies are burried?
Maddie McCann
- Thread starter Livvie
- Start date
shouldn't they just arrest the 'medium' who knows where all the bodies are burried?
You would be right in my case. Even if I were a parent though, I wouldn't care that much. Call it different values. My parents don't really give a shit about a stranger's children, although they occasionally help out if asked.
The explanation of the differing opinions is that the cynics know the real value of human life, since they come from places where it's pretty cheap.
Spinoza, you're clearly an android.
My greatest fear is that someone will find the off switch.
Well, I am glad we have libel laws that mean you can't just speculate about people's reputations in print or online. People should be accountable for the shite they spread.
Not really. I've not seen OTT public expressions of grief anywhere.
To me, all this activity has been people mucking in while there was still a chance that their help might do some good. And I am glad that we haven't all become so cynical and detached from each other that such things never happen.
You can say this about any story. It's meaningless.
The Maddy story was hot partly because she was a symbol of every parent's worst nightmare. And importantly, it happened in the summer when competing news is thin on the ground.
Is wearing a t-shirt in a country she is unlikely to have ever been back to actually helping?
As much as it pains me, and beleive me it pains me, I agree with a lot of what Jason has said in this thread.
Now I am going off to slit my wrists.
I suppose I'm a traditionalist in believing that the broadcast and print media have a responsibility to report not only the news that everyone wants to read / hear about, but to report news that not many people want to read / hear about in a format that will encourage them to read / hear more about it.
In that sense they've failed, because they're selling the Maddie story as opposed to a number of more important issues, simply because it's easier to sell. I highlighted Darfur and the impending famine in Zimbabwe as examples, but to be honest I'd say that things such as the impact of US-Indian nuclear cooperation on non-proliferation and the struggling Japanese government are more important than the disappearance of a single child.
Or maybe I'm just not very emotional.
Not stories that have global implications.
It seems there are some on here who are quick to condemn the press for highlighting Maddie because she's white and middle class, but silent about them ruining the lives of an innocent man, Murat, and casting the most severe libel on the grieving parents.
Fcukin' weirdos.
I'm actually just pointing out the hypocrisy of people for pretending how much they care for every missing child (when the fact is they obviously don't or they would have been campaigning for missing children long before this) just because they are wearing a Maddie McCann t-shirt.
As for the papers, I'm not sure how getting outraged about a paper in Portugal posting rubbish will change the fact that they printed it.
Much like wearing a t shirt isn't going to bring this young girl home, and actually represents a tremendous waste of resources that could be used to perhaps actually search for her, or for a child who getting this ridiculously disparate level of attention.
As I said a while ago in this thread:
jasonrh said:
Of course the weirdos are the horrible insensitive people who point out how this is basically all about showing you care by doing absolutely feck all - a classic case of what is wrong with our current culture.
But it makes you feel good, and that's what counts.
The point is, people aren't always aware of every missing child, are they! Of course we know there are missing children, but the media should highlight them and give them a name. No one can do anything without the backing of the media.
If someone brought out t-shirts about missing children in general, I'll bet some people would buy them and wear them if it made them feel that in some small way they were helping.
You can't generalise and declare that "everyone" is a hypocrite. Apart from being offensive, it's as ridiculous as saying that all lawyers are crooked, or that all Americans are gun happy Christian extremists.
I've just read about Murat, after reading your post. Even if I had known about the story, it wouldn't have been less than expected.
The libel they cast over them is appalling, but should they not be putting all of their efforts into finding their missing daughter, rather than making money from a newspaper.
How can they find their missing daughter without money?
And how would you suggest tackling the person who has libelled them then?
This "making money" thing is cynical in the extreme.
Making money? They are using the courts to right a wrong and I am sure any money they might be awarded will go to a good cause...like helping to find their missing daughter.
I don't see how anybody can know that it will all go to that cause. I'd love to believe that it will, but I don't.
But what evidence do you have either way?
You don't have any - the McCann's are suing the person who accused them of killing their daughter. The rest of it is media hype and cynicism, with no evidence to support it.
Well, I've been waiting for JasonRH to find some after you asked him earlier in the thread.
Without that, you're right.
To be honest mate I couldn't give a toss if they spent it on fairy cakes....the fact is they have been wrongly accused of murdering their own daughter and a punishment needs handing out.
That is the point that seems to be flying over your head.
Absolute nonsense.
If one really cared (instead of play-pretend caring because it makes one feel like they care), then one would look beyond the headlines and help those in cases where there was less attention.
It isn't like missing children are a state secret.
The fact you say that if someone brought out a t shirt people would buy them to help illustrates my point that many who are pretending to so passionately care actually can't be arsed unless it is plastered all over the front pages and t shirts are released.
That is the way our culture has become. It is like the silly phenomenon of wearing little coloured ribbons for different causes. Yes, wearing a little polka-dot ribbon is going to stop world hunger. It isn't at all just a self-righteous way to pretend one is 'making a difference' while one is in fact being a staggering hypocrite.
The generalisation thing is a complete straw man argument. The nature of a generalisation is that there will be exceptions, but that it generally holds true. Hence the use of the word "general" in the word "generalisation". Your comparisons to false stereotypes about lawyers and Americans show that either you don't understand this concept or that you are trying to be deliberately obtuse.
Once again - those who are doing things like wearing a McCann t shirt to show how much they 'care' about missing children, while in fact doing feck all for her, and doing absolutely diddly squat (in fact not even wearing a t shirt) for other children are hypocrites.
If you really cared, instead of just doing something for one's own personal feeling of showing mock-grief or showing how much you symbolically 'care' about an issue without having to actually lift a finger, then you wouldn't need t shirts and media blitzes.
It screams of style over substance and self-righteous hypocrisy.
It is staggeringly rare to sue for defamation and only ask for specific performance, especially considering it is nigh on impossible for a court to guarantee said performance especially in the case of a party being located in a foriegn nation AND being a journalistic outfit and thus there being speech issues.
The punishment for not complying with a court order for specific performance? You guessed it - monetary damages.
If you can find me a case of an international defamation suit against a journalist that sought specific performance and not any monetary damages then I would love to see it.
Without reports to the contrary, it is safe to assume that they are following general practices in their case, is it not?
Of course it's not. I said a few posts above that it's appalling.
My main problem is that they will have to take a fair amount of time away from looking for their daughter, to take part in a court case that could go on for a long time.
And for what? Money, or an apology? If it's an apology they're after....feck it, why bother? It's not going to bring the kid back unfortunately. They should be concentrating more on finding the prick who took her.
I don't know how I'd act if it was me, but I can guarantee I wouldn't give a shit what was written in a paper about me if it did happen.
Not proof, but it will suffice in my view.
If you don't know how you would act how can you guarentee you wouldn't give a shit about a newspaper accusing you of murder?
I don't suppose the McCanns are doing much actual searching Reddish so a few days may be well spent in a court room to ensure a wrong is righted.
Jason, I am wearing my little polka-dot ribbon for you.
Save Jason.
See, Marching cares.
Hmm... I find that hard to believe personally.
This is me being cynical again, but one can never be "sure".
There can be fewer worse things than losing a child, and most parents would do anything to keep it in the public's mind. The alternative is for people to forget.
I think that time behind bars has made you hard and cynical - unsurprisingly I suppose.
What they do or don't do with any money they may or may not win, is nobody's business but their own.
Considering how they have themselves made their possible court action a public issue, then people surely have the right to comment on their motives or the eventual resolution of the case.
If they wanted it to remain a private matter then they could have done so by simply acting without the need to make publicity statements regarding their lawsuit.
When you thrust yourself into the public arena, you open yourself up for public comment.
I don't agree with some of the comments in this thread, but I do think that it is a matter of reasonable discussion since the family has made it a public issue.
The very nature of the case, that of libel/slander/defamation of character, decrees that it has to be made public. Bit pointless trying to clear your name if no-one knows.
The father is a doctor. If you were a doctor, and someone accused you of being a killer, I can bloody guarantee you'd do everything in your power to protect your professional reputation - let alone their personal one.
Some of the stuff I have read online about the McCanns has turned my stomach. The vilest, bitterest shite I have ever seen.
There is a big difference between suing and releasing press statements about possibly suing.
The act of suing, especially given the nature of the case, would get their action out there.
Making press statements about it opens you up even more to public comment.
you have kids Reddish?
I agree. But as long as we're in the business of ascribing motives and modes of behaviour to people we only know through newspaper reports and TV interviews, thinking that they're liars and profiteers is as reasonable as thinking they're nice, decent people. I make no claim to believe either alternative, as a) I don't know and can't judge, b) I don't care to find out.
Even if that's true, you have to make allowances for people who probably haven't slept properly since May and whose emotions are likely to be far from rational.