UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: G-Unit on March 09, 2015, 04:14:24 PM
-
Lord Bell, founder of Bell Pottinger quoted in a book written by Owen Jones. He is commenting on the 'Hacked Off' campaign, and he says he doesn't care what the McCanns think. 'They paid me £500,000 to keep them on the front page of every newspaper for one year and that's what we did'.
I suppose he's saying that the quality of the coverage was immaterial, he was paid to provide quantity? At least the McCanns got the money back from Express Newspapers who paid just over that amount in an out of court settlement, didn't they?
(http://i.imgur.com/xY20tem.jpg?1)
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LOG2AwAAQBAJ&pg=PT133&lpg=PT133&dq=lord+bell+on+mccanns+500000&source=bl&ots=XjnYFyk6Oe&sig=lebZWYSZLDCYoz76gomGYlUJeJw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gcH9VJLMGOyN7AbN44GIDA&ved=0CD0Q6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=lord%20bell%20on%20mccanns%20500000&f=false
126
-
It surprised me that the McCanns considered PR to be so important that they were prepared to commit half a million pound to it
-
It surprised me that the McCanns considered PR to be so important that they were prepared to commit half a million pound to it
it wasn't pr...it was about keeping maddie in the public eye
-
it wasn't pr...it was about keeping maddie in the public eye
Lord Bell, chairman of PR giant Bell Pottinger.
What do PR firms do if not PR ?
-
it wasn't pr...it was about keeping maddie in the public eye
Indeed. Which is the advice given by the experts. i.e. Keeping them in the public eye is the best way to give a missing child the best chance of being recovered. Why anyone would want to criticise the parents of a missing child for taking that advice is inexplicable.
-
Indeed. Which is the advice given by the experts. i.e. Keeping them in the public eye is the best way to give a missing child the best chance of being recovered. Why anyone would want to criticise the parents of a missing child for taking that advice is inexplicable.
Can you cite the experts?
-
Well how about this
---------------------------------------------------------------
Lord Bell: "The McCanns paid me £500,000 in fees to keep them on the front page of every single newspaper for a year, which we did"
Stunning recent revelation from a book by Owen Jones, 'The Establishment And how they get away with it', which appeared in a review of Jones' book by Mark Diston & Lucy Orr (extract follows):
'And Lord Bell: "The McCanns paid me £500,000 in fees to keep them on the front page of every single newspaper for a year, which we did" - a fact that I'd never heard before. No doubt the campaign would have been less effective if "Advertisement" had been engraved above the missing child's photograph.'
A somewhat startling admission if true and, if it is, was it paid in advance and where did the money come from? The prescience of the McCanns would have been truly amazing had they known that Madeleine was not going to be found at the very least for a year! And what would Lord Bell (of Bell Pottinger fame, btw) have done had the child materialised the day/a month/6 months after he accepted his half mill - given the McCanns a pro-rated refund, or kept the story going until the end of the contracted period?
The review can be found here -
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/09/14/weekend_review_page_file_maureen_callahan_champagne_supernovas_owen_jones_the_establishment_sophie_hannah_the_monogram_murders_poirot_ghost_write/?mt=1425911557274
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Can you cite the experts?
I'm no good at links Starti - but if you google.. 'Keeping missing children in the public eye'... - you will find plenty of evidence that that is the accepted best practice. Years ago in the USA I believe they used to put missing children's photos on milk cartons - as a good way of 'advertising' them to as many members of the public as possible.
I think it's only common sense that keeping a missing person's profile as high as possible - for as long as possible in the public's mind has got to be the best way forward.
-
I'm no good at links Starti - but if you google.. 'Keeping missing children in the public eye'... - you will find plenty of evidence that that is the accepted best practice. Years ago in the USA I believe they used to put missing children's photos on milk cartons - as a good way of 'advertising' them to as many members of the public as possible.
I think it's only common sense that keeping a missing person's profile as high as possible - for as long as possible in the public's mind has got to be the best way forward.
No problem with missing children and runaways, not sure about supposed abductees.
-
So why would the McCanns pay 1/2 mill....if not to keep Maddie's profile high
-
Lord Bell, founder of Bell Pottinger quoted in a book written by Owen Jones. He is commenting on the 'Hacked Off' campaign, and he says he doesn't care what the McCanns think. 'They paid me £500,000 to keep them on the front page of every newspaper for one year and that's what we did'.
I suppose he's saying that the quality of the coverage was immaterial, he was paid to provide quantity? At least the McCanns got the money back from Express Newspapers who paid just over that amount in an out of court settlement, didn't they?
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LOG2AwAAQBAJ&pg=PT133&lpg=PT133&dq=lord+bell+on+mccanns+500000&source=bl&ots=XjnYFyk6Oe&sig=lebZWYSZLDCYoz76gomGYlUJeJw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gcH9VJLMGOyN7AbN44GIDA&ved=0CD0Q6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=lord%20bell%20on%20mccanns%20500000&f=false
Oh dear. You seem to have fallen for it! 8(0(*
Before dignifying this claim with any semblence of the "the trust" - could you just provide the entry from the leverson enquiry, and a note of where the fund made a payment of £500K?
Given the fund is audited by a very reputable firm, it should be easy to identify that very considerable sum.
-
Oh dear. You seem to have fallen for it! 8(0(*
Before dignifying this claim with any semblence of the "the trust" - could you just provide the entry from the leverson enquiry, and a note of where the fund made a payment of £500K?
Given the fund is audited by a very reputable firm, it should be easy to identify that very considerable sum.
Are you calling Lord Bell a LIAR ?
-
No problem with missing children and runaways, not sure about supposed abductees.
Who determines which category a missing child comes into ... and why are "supposed abductees" a problem for you?
-
Are you calling Lord Bell a LIAR ?
Well someone is! Why would he have been paid for by the McCann's?
ALEX WOOLFALL (Bell-Pottinger Group - engaged by Wark Warner)
Within two days after Madeleine’s disappearance, the holiday firm Mark Warner had sent a crisis management team to Portugal. It included Alex Woolfall from Bell Pottinger, the public relations company. Alex Woolfall is Head of Issues and Crisis Management for the Bell Pottinger Group. Woolfall, who has 20 years experience in PR, spent the next two weeks advising the family on how to keep the media interested.
-
Oh dear. You seem to have fallen for it! 8(0(*
Before dignifying this claim with any semblence of the "the trust" - could you just provide the entry from the leverson enquiry, and a note of where the fund made a payment of £500K?
Given the fund is audited by a very reputable firm, it should be easy to identify that very considerable sum.
I provided a link to the book 'The Establishment: And How They Get Away with it' which gives this information. If Owen Jones got his facts wrong I'm sure Lord Bell and the McCanns will soon be on his trail. I have never seen details of the Fund's income and expenditure, but would be grateful if someone knows where they can be found.
-
Is there any independent source which backs up this claim by the author since the sum of £500,000 represented quite an expenditure for the Madeleine fund considering a similar amount was also paid to Oakley International?
-
It appears as a quote by Bell in Jones' book.
If Bell had not said what is quoted, do you not think that Bell would have taken some corrective action ?
-
Is there any independent source which backs up this claim by the author since the sum of £500,000 represented quite an expenditure for the Madeleine fund considering a similar amount was also paid to Oakley International?
Having read the relevant passage from the book and followed the link £500,000 ... reference is made to other sums of £500,000 on at least one occasion (I didn't note cites) and not just in relation to Oakley which I thought was £300,000 anyway ... it appears to be a magic number.
I believe the author has recorded what he heard said and I think a peeved Lord Bell may have responded to a question in an ill advised manner, particularly for the head of a PR firm.
I think the remarks, particularly regarding the Dowler family would have met with opprobrium had it been widely known.
I don't know the chronology of the PR firms used, there is no secret about their use; there would be no requirement for one with the remit claimed by Lord Bell until well after the Murdoch settlements for libel won by the Drs McCann and their friends.
If true, I have no issue with money being spent to keep the search for Madeleine McCann in the public eye; but I wonder if it is quite as portrayed by Lord Bell, maybe as well as the front page apology it was part of the deal?
-
I did not follow this case for years after it appeared.
So, can anyone tell me if there was ever a period when Madeleine was front page across every newspaper (as claimed in the quote)?
-
I did not follow this case for years after it appeared.
So, can anyone tell me if there was ever a period when Madeleine was front page across every newspaper (as claimed in the quote)?
There was a huge amount of coverage in the press in the early days, but by August 2008 it had certainly gone negative against the McCanns in many papers.
-
There was a huge amount of coverage in the press in the early days, but by August 2008 it had certainly gone negative against the McCanns in many papers.
I think the negativity was engendered as a result of leaks to the Portuguese press which were picked up and repeated by the British press.
I can't give a date for the first instance but it was almost immediately after Madeleine's disappearance when rumours started about Sky TV being called before the GNR etc abounded, these are still believed by some.
Alleged inconsistencies in witness statements were publicised.
As was the allegation that the party were consummate boozers ... the tapas restaurant scene in Goncalo Amaral's documentary being an example.
It was alleged they were a party of 'swingers'.
This propaganda campaign of negativity ran alongside a sympathetic press and public with a natural concern for a missing child and her family ... but it certainly reached a crescendo when Dr Kate and Dr Gerry McCann were made arguidos in their daughter's disappearance.
-
One little thing wrong with Lord Bells supposed quote!
Why would the McCanns pay for someone bought in by Mark Warner?
-
I provided a link to the book 'The Establishment: And How They Get Away with it' which gives this information. If Owen Jones got his facts wrong I'm sure Lord Bell and the McCanns will soon be on his trail. I have never seen details of the Fund's income and expenditure, but would be grateful if someone knows where they can be found.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/FUND_INDEX.htm
or buy them from Companies House WebCheck; company number 6248215.
The ones on the link I posted have probably been tampered with @)(++(* (that's a sort of "in joke")
-
One little thing wrong with Lord Bells supposed quote!
Why would the McCanns pay for someone bought in by Mark Warner?
As I pointed out yesterday, the Wiki entry for Bell Pottinger clearly states that the McCanns had been their clients, which would indicate that they carried out work commissioned by the McCanns.
-
Lord Bell, founder of Bell Pottinger quoted in a book written by Owen Jones. He is commenting on the 'Hacked Off' campaign, and he says he doesn't care what the McCanns think. 'They paid me £500,000 to keep them on the front page of every newspaper for one year and that's what we did'.
I suppose he's saying that the quality of the coverage was immaterial, he was paid to provide quantity? At least the McCanns got the money back from Express Newspapers who paid just over that amount in an out of court settlement, didn't they?
(http://i.imgur.com/xY20tem.jpg?1)
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LOG2AwAAQBAJ&pg=PT133&lpg=PT133&dq=lord+bell+on+mccanns+500000&source=bl&ots=XjnYFyk6Oe&sig=lebZWYSZLDCYoz76gomGYlUJeJw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gcH9VJLMGOyN7AbN44GIDA&ved=0CD0Q6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=lord%20bell%20on%20mccanns%20500000&f=false
so any suggestion that the it is claimed that the fees were paid in advance is totally false
-
It is indeed best practice to keep the story of a missing child in the media, and the McCanns were keen to do that. They gave interviews and arranged photo shoots by agreement with reporters.
As many celebrities and MP's have discovered the media is a two-edged sword. It reports whatever it considers relevant. That three small children were left alone in an unlocked apartment each evening for example. That the resort manager said there was no evidence of a break-in. Ordinary people began to discuss the case using social media. Some supporting the McCanns behaviour and their account of 3rd May and some against.
The PJ and the British police advising them weren't convinced that Madeleine had been abducted, so they brought in the dogs Eddie and Keela. Although the dogs indicated something may have happened, no proof was found.
The results of the case against Snr. Amaral will soon emerge and they will no doubt give everyone lots to talk about. Hopefully the UK Media will report factually. When the judge ruled on the 36 points it was confusing because the headlines varied with some saying 'McCanns Lose' and others saying 'McCanns Win'. Thats why I try not to quote the press lol.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/553447/Kate-Gerry-McCann-key-court-victory-libel-battle-Goncalo-Amaral
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2925419/Kate-Gerry-McCann-hurt-former-police-chief-s-book-missing-Madeleine-judge-finds.html
-
As I pointed out yesterday, the Wiki entry for Bell Pottinger clearly states that the McCanns had been their clients, which would indicate that they carried out work commissioned by the McCanns.
But the reference to that just leads to an article about the Leveson inquiry. I can't see anything in that article to substantiate that the McCanns were clients.
-
Read the Wiki entry. The mCCanns are listed under the category of past clients.
-
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/FUND_INDEX.htm
or buy them from Companies House WebCheck; company number 6248215.
The ones on the link I posted have probably been tampered with @)(++(* (that's a sort of "in joke")
Thanks Alice. I was wondering if any experts on here had more detailed information as they seem to think the accounts are very transparent. Enid found them quite difficult to 'see through' as I recall.
-
so any suggestion that the it is claimed that the fees were paid in advance is totally false
Sorry, who said they were paid in advance? I missed that I think.
-
Sorry, who said they were paid in advance? I missed that I think.
see stephens post....and as he was claiming all yesterday evening
-
see stephens post....and as he was claiming all yesterday evening
Thanks davel, I did miss that ?{)(**
-
Thanks davel, I did miss that ?{)(**
nice to see such pleasantness for a change 8)--))
-
see stephens post....and as he was claiming all yesterday evening
So where does it state I was wrong ?
The McCann's paid out £500,000.
-
So where does it state I was wrong ?
The McCann's paid out £500,000.
You claimed it was paid in advance. And made a right fool of yourself.
No doubt you have "forgotten" that. ?{)(**
-
Thanks Alice. I was wondering if any experts on here had more detailed information as they seem to think the accounts are very transparent. Enid found them quite difficult to 'see through' as I recall.
Who is Enid? It really is not that hard to read a very straightforward set of accounts, so if she is finding it hard to "see through" them maybe she needs to go to specsavers. ?{)(**
-
You claimed it was paid in advance. And made a right fool of yourself.
No doubt you have "forgotten" that. ?{)(**
Are you trying to goad me jean ?
So where has it been proved I was wrong ?
-
Oh dear. You seem to have fallen for it! 8(0(*
Before dignifying this claim with any semblence of the "the trust" - could you just provide the entry from the leverson enquiry, and a note of where the fund made a payment of £500K?
Given the fund is audited by a very reputable firm, it should be easy to identify that very considerable sum.
Why would the auditors worry?
They will not be interested in much beyond:
Has the company operated in accordance with its Articles of Association?.
Have the accounts been prepared in accordance with the Companies Act 2006?
Do they give a true and fair view of the company’s financial affairs?.
Is the directors’ report consistent with the accounts?.
Has the company kept adequate accounting records?.
Were the auditors provided the with all the information they needed to fulfill their obligations?.
Was the company laundering money?.
If spending £500k was permissible within the above it would go unremarked.
-
Are you trying to goad me jean ?
So where has it been proved I was wrong ?
Can you provide a cite that £500,000 was paid in advance?
-
Who is Enid? It really is not that hard to read a very straightforward set of accounts, so if she is finding it hard to "see through" them maybe she needs to go to specsavers. ?{)(**
Bennetts court escort, Enid O Dowd.
-
Thanks Alice. I was wondering if any experts on here had more detailed information as they seem to think the accounts are very transparent. Enid found them quite difficult to 'see through' as I recall.
Enid is kind of persona non grata around here. Usually referred to as Enid Blyton by the faithful.
I kind of wonder about the lump sum of 975k for Merchandising and Campaign Costs in the 2009 accounts.
Personally I don't care what it was spent on but perhaps someone knows the full break down. After all it is transparent we are consistently told. What we need is Joe 90 glasses 8(>((
-
So where does it state I was wrong ?
The McCann's paid out £500,000.
Lord Bell is quoted in an exchange in a book that they did.
That is the only detail available to us.
Now all we need is the requisite back up proof, perhaps starting with the date of instruction.
However the allegation that they paid for PR to keep Madeleine McCann centre stage in the public conscience is hardly remarkable and not an accusation the majority of people would find troubling, although the tariff seems quite steep ... and think of the fun we could be having if Max Clifford had undercut him.
Now I would have been mightily impressed if Lord Bell had made the claim that his firm was responsible for the lobbying and publicity which had led to the re-opening of Madeleine's case.
However it appears they managed that monumental task without the assistance of him or his firm.
-
nice to see such pleasantness for a change 8)--))
It's not new for me I am always pleasant and polite 8)-)))
-
Who is Enid? It really is not that hard to read a very straightforward set of accounts, so if she is finding it hard to "see through" them maybe she needs to go to specsavers. ?{)(**
If you follow Alice's link you can look at them yourself and then tell us what you have learned.
-
Bennetts court escort, Enid O Dowd.
Ah yes, I remeber now. Isn't she meant to be an accountant?
If she cant understand those accounts maybe she needs to find another job ?{)(**
-
Ah yes, I remeber now. Isn't she meant to be an accountant?
If she cant understand those accounts maybe she needs to find another job ?{)(**
Perhaps you can explain them to us then? You did say it's easy earlier.
-
Perhaps you can explain them to us then? You did say it's easy earlier.
Happy to have a go.
Which years accounts and what exactly do you want to know?
-
Happy to have a go.
Which years accounts and what exactly do you want to know?
Oh Go on JP...ALL of them...;)
-
Happy to have a go.
Which years accounts and what exactly do you want to know?
Firstly, I would like to say that Enid O'Dowd is a Fellow Chartered Accountant (FCA), no 'suppose' there. Secondly, I don't want to know anything. The accounts contain the minimum information required by law.
Some people would like the accounts to contain more than the legal minimum, however. It would certainly make it easier in the present discussion for example if the accounts had a breakdown of expenditure showing more than just 'Merchandising and Campaign Costs' and 'Administrative Expenses'. I know that money from the fund was used in 2008 and 2009 for legal action in Portugal to ban Amaral's book because the Director's notes say so, but I don't know how much of the Merchandising and Campaign Costs that involved. I don't really care, but some people do and argue that the transparency and best practice promise has not been fulfilled.
-
Firstly, I would like to say that Enid O'Dowd is a Fellow Chartered Accountant (FCA), no 'suppose' there. Secondly, I don't want to know anything. The accounts contain the minimum information required by law.
Some people would like the accounts to contain more than the legal minimum, however. It would certainly make it easier in the present discussion for example if the accounts had a breakdown of expenditure showing more than just 'Merchandising and Campaign Costs' and 'Administrative Expenses'. I know that money from the fund was used in 2008 and 2009 for legal action in Portugal to ban Amaral's book because the Director's notes say so, but I don't know how much of the Merchandising and Campaign Costs that involved. I don't really care, but some people do and argue that the transparency and best practice promise has not been fulfilled.
The accounts for the Find Madeleine Fund are published annually and meet legal requirements.
The Goncalo Amaral Fund publishes neither basic information about money in or money out. There may be no legal requirement to publish information about these donations ... and why should I be surprised there doesn't appear to be a moral consideration either ... particularly each time another demand is made on peoples' charity to replenish them.
I can see now why African Princes are so wired into the internet.
-
The accounts for the Find Madeleine Fund are published annually and meet legal requirements.
The Goncalo Amaral Fund publishes neither basic information about money in or money out. There may be no legal requirement to publish information about these donations ... and why should I be surprised there doesn't appear to be a moral consideration either ... particularly each time another demand is made on peoples' charity to replenish them.
I can see now why African Princes are so wired into the internet.
I was replying to Jean-Paul's offer to look at the Madeleine Fund's accounts, as he seemed to think he could analyse them better than Enid O'Dowd did. He also seemed to cast doubt on her qualifications so I provided them.. I said that the Madeleine Fund meets the legal requirements didn't I? I also said that some people think that best practice and transparency requires more than the legal minimum information. I think there is another thread discussing Amaral's Fund and what the African Prince scams have to do with anything I don't know (but I'm sure you will enlighten me).
-
I was replying to Jean-Paul's offer to look at the Madeleine Fund's accounts, as he seemed to think he could analyse them better than Enid O'Dowd did. He also seemed to cast doubt on her qualifications so I provided them.. I said that the Madeleine Fund meets the legal requirements didn't I? I also said that some people think that best practice and transparency requires more than the legal minimum information. I think there is another thread discussing Amaral's Fund and what the African Prince scams have to do with anything I don't know (but I'm sure you will enlighten me).
Just as a matter of interest ... £500,000 being a considerable sum ... do you know if there is any mention of the date of payment and any record of payment.
I would imagine if the fund paid out that amount it would be mentioned, possibly Enid O'Dowd might have noticed it and made comment elsewhere.
-
Just as a matter of interest ... £500,000 being a considerable sum ... do you know if there is any mention of the date of payment and any record of payment.
I would imagine if the fund paid out that amount it would be mentioned, possibly Enid O'Dowd might have noticed it and made comment elsewhere.
No. Mostly the Fund expenditure mentions only two categories 'Merchandising and Campaign Costs' and 'Administrative Expenses'. Enid provides a list of known professionals hired by the Fund, but no mention of Bell Pottinger, only of Alex Woolfall, and his connection with Mark Warner is mentioned perhaps suggesting that they paid him?
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id405.html
-
No. Mostly the Fund expenditure mentions only two categories 'Merchandising and Campaign Costs' and 'Administrative Expenses'. Enid provides a list of known professionals hired by the Fund, but no mention of Bell Pottinger, only of Alex Woolfall, and his connection with Mark Warner is mentioned perhaps suggesting that they paid him?
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id405.html
So nothing at all regarding a £500,000 payment ... which surely must have made quite a noticeable dent.
Which leads me to conclude that I would prefer external verification of Lord Bell's remark.
-
So nothing at all regarding a £500,000 payment ... which surely must have made quite a noticeable dent.
Which leads me to conclude that I would prefer external verification of Lord Bell's remark.
Why would Lord Bell lie ? Who would claim to have been paid half a million pounds with the tax implications that would bring if he hadn't actually been paid that ?
-
Why would Lord Bell lie ? Who would claim to have been paid half a million pounds with the tax implications that would bring if he hadn't actually been paid that ?
Don't you know that everybody except the McCanns lie, even when they have no reason to.
-
So nothing at all regarding a £500,000 payment ... which surely must have made quite a noticeable dent.
Which leads me to conclude that I would prefer external verification of Lord Bell's remark.
Well, neither he nor the McCanns have denied it as far as I know. Also, the McCanns were being helped by others so one of them may have paid Bell Pottinger for it's services, who knows? Anyway, the expenditure on 'Merchandising and Campaign Costs' is as follows;
2007/08 £ 673,366 2008/09 £ 974,786 2009/10 £ 421,236 2010/11 £ 487,193 2011/12 £ 476,813 2012/13 £115,109 2013/14 £ 63,638
A more detailed breakdown was provided in 2007/2008 and in 2013/14 only. The link shows the breakdown for 2013/14 if you care to look - page 11;
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/FUND_2014.htm
-
Just as a matter of interest ... £500,000 being a considerable sum ... do you know if there is any mention of the date of payment and any record of payment.
I would imagine if the fund paid out that amount it would be mentioned, possibly Enid O'Dowd might have noticed it and made comment elsewhere.
Why?
For all anyone knows from what is in the public domain it may be included in the 975 grand "Merchandising and Campaign Costs" in fy 2008/9 or part of it may be the vaguely identified 250 grand in fy 2007/2008.
As you believe the accounts are so transparent tell us how much was spent on Merchandising?
-
If this is even true, can anyone tell me why The McCanns shouldn't have done this?
-
If this is even true, can anyone tell me why The McCanns shouldn't have done this?
I think it was a legitimate use of funds ... if it were true (while Madeleine's parents had a worse press than the Wests, it was bound to adversely impact on their campaign on her behalf) ... but I have seen nothing which substantiates it.
-
If this is even true, can anyone tell me why The McCanns shouldn't have done this?
If it were their own money or fund money which was spent within the constraints of the company's articles of association no reason whatever for not doing so.
-
I think it was a legitimate use of funds ... if it were true (while Madeleine's parents had a worse press than the Wests, it was bound to adversely impact on their campaign on her behalf) ... but I have seen nothing which substantiates it.
Of course it would have been a legitimate use of funds. The whole idea was to keep the profile of Madeleine in the public eye.
But as you say, no one has yet proved that it happened.
So why this Thread? It wouldn't have been illegal.
-
Of course it would have been a legitimate use of funds. The whole idea was to keep the profile of Madeleine in the public eye.
But as you say, no one has yet proved that it happened.
So why this Thread? It wouldn't have been illegal.
Because it relates to Madeleine McCann?
-
Of course it would have been a legitimate use of funds. The whole idea was to keep the profile of Madeleine in the public eye.
But as you say, no one has yet proved that it happened.
So why this Thread? It wouldn't have been illegal.
I started the thread because it related to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, and also because I didn't know that her parents had paid to keep the story in the newspapers until I saw Lord Bell's quote in Owen Jones' book.
Some people will be interested and others won't c'est la vie ?{)(**
-
Don't you agree that it's a tad hypocrital to be complaining at Leveson of press intrusion while paying someone to have your name on a daily basis in the same newspapers you are criticising ?
-
Don't you agree that it's a tad hypocrital to be complaining at Leveson of press intrusion while paying someone to have your name on a daily basis in the same newspapers you are criticising ?
Like others before them (Princess Diana comes to mind) the McCanns discovered that the media is a double edged sword. They print what you want but they also reserve the right to print stories which you don't want.
-
You are free to state your purpose just as I am free to state my opinion.
I hope the discussion eased your mind regarding any concerns you may initially have had regarding the Drs McCann employing a firm at a cost of £500,000.
I have seen no confirmation of this ... but even so, the consensus would appear to be that there was nothing to prevent them doing so for the alleged reason stated.
-
I started the thread because it related to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, and also because I didn't know that her parents had paid to keep the story in the newspapers until I saw Lord Bell's quote in Owen Jones' book.
Some people will be interested and others won't c'est la vie ?{)(**
Nothing wrong with that if everyone is interested. Which they obviously are. I just don't see the point of bashing The McCanns for what could well have been the exact purpose of the Fund.
The McCanns cannot be accused of doing anything illegal or immoral on this point.
-
No. Mostly the Fund expenditure mentions only two categories 'Merchandising and Campaign Costs' and 'Administrative Expenses'. Enid provides a list of known professionals hired by the Fund, but no mention of Bell Pottinger, only of Alex Woolfall, and his connection with Mark Warner is mentioned perhaps suggesting that they paid him?
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id405.html
Is O'dowd currently practicing as a chartered accountant? Her analysis was from a McCann bashing perspective - I recall now that she was Bennett's star witness at his trial. And her main critisism was that the McCanns used an 0845 number for the telepone line rather than an 0800 number.
All discussion of an expenditure of £500,000 is based on a quote attributed to Tim Bell and reported in a book by a journalist with an agenda.
So before getting excited about it we would need some verifiction.
-
Is O'dowd currently practicing as a chartered accountant? Her analysis was from a McCann bashing perspective - I recall now that she was Bennett's star witness at his trial. And her main critisism was that the McCanns used an 0845 number for the telepone line rather than an 0800 number.
All discussion of an expenditure of £500,000 is based on a quote attributed to Tim Bell and reported in a book by a journalist with an agenda.
So before getting excited about it we would need some verifiction.
I have no idea if Enid O'Dowd is practicing or not. If you don't like her analysis of Madeleine's Fund accounts please feel free to produce your own. The complete printouts of them as filed at Companies House can be found by following my link provided earlier. If you don't believe that Owen Jones quoted Lord Bell correctly, Lord Bell can be contacted at the House of Lords - ask him. If you don't do any reading or research how can you have an opinion I wonder?
Just for the record I'm not a 'McCann basher' or a McCann supporter. I have an interest in the case and I like debate. I think debate is only meaningful if it is based on verifiable sources. I do my best to find sources for what I say and try not to rely on my own personal opinions.
-
Is O'dowd currently practicing as a chartered accountant? Her analysis was from a McCann bashing perspective - I recall now that she was Bennett's star witness at his trial. And her main critisism was that the McCanns used an 0845 number for the telepone line rather than an 0800 number.
All discussion of an expenditure of £500,000 is based on a quote attributed to Tim Bell and reported in a book by a journalist with an agenda.
So before getting excited about it we would need some verifiction.
I would imagine that if someone can find an email address Lord Bell may well respond
-
I would imagine that if someone can find an email address Lord Bell may well respond
There you go, everything you need to know - http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/lord-bell/3531
-
There you go, everything you need to know - http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/lord-bell/3531
No, go on. You do it.
-
No, go on. You do it.
Why? Its of no importance to me, though it seems to be to some.
-
No, go on. You do it.
I have
-
Why? Its of no importance to me, though it seems to be to some.
It was Stephen who started the thread so it is important to him....There are several reasons why I would like to know the answer...the first being how much can we trust what we read...now that is a very important question
-
I have no idea if Enid O'Dowd is practicing or not. If you don't like her analysis of Madeleine's Fund accounts please feel free to produce your own. The complete printouts of them as filed at Companies House can be found by following my link provided earlier. If you don't believe that Owen Jones quoted Lord Bell correctly, Lord Bell can be contacted at the House of Lords - ask him. If you don't do any reading or research how can you have an opinion I wonder?
Just for the record I'm not a 'McCann basher' or a McCann supporter. I have an interest in the case and I like debate. I think debate is only meaningful if it is based on verifiable sources. I do my best to find sources for what I say and try not to rely on my own personal opinions.
You'll learn 8(0(*. The perception from the supporters side is "if you ain't with us you're agin us". Trying to say anything different is like plaiting fog.
-
You'll learn 8(0(*. The perception from the supporters side is "if you ain't with us you're agin us". Trying to say anything different is like plaiting fog.
you were obviously asleep when I posted my gracious post to G
-
you were obviously asleep when I posted my gracious post to G
Not at all. It was atypical, pleasant gesture though it was.
One swallow does not a summer make or some such.
-
Back on Topic…………………….
When was this supposed year, that the McCanns used Bell Pottinger?
Bell Pottinger’s man was only in PDL for 10 days, as crisis adviser and then came, Sheree Dodd, a former spokeswoman for the Government, and former treasury special advisor Justine McGuinness and C Mitchell, who eventually worked full time for McCanns
--------------------------------
14/09/2007
McCann's hire PR agency
Kate and Gerry McCann have hired a new PR agency to help manage an increasingly sceptical media. Hanover, the agency owned by John Major's former press secretary Charles Lewington have been given the brief.
The McCanns are currently fighting to clear their name after allegations were allegedly made by the Portugese police regarding the disappearance of their missing four-year-old daughter.
The poor treatment of the MacCann's in the press is apparently something Lewington, managing director of Hanover, feels very strongly about and wants to help.
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post225058.html#p225058
--------------------------------------------------------
This article will also examine aspects of the background of Ian Horrocks, the ex-detective, hailed as one of Britain’s foremost investigators,
who was sent out to the Algarve by Rupert Murdoch’s Sun newspaper in February 2012 and delivered reports to the Sun and SKY NEWS backing the McCanns’ abduction claims and heavily criticising the Portuguese police.
http://whathappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/a-biography-of-hamish-campbell-man_28.html
--------------------------------------
(Lord King is a strong ally of Rupert Murdoch. Is there a possibility, that, the above is where the press coverage came from for a year?) …re: £500,000)
A message has been sent to Lord Bell, so hopefully we will know the truth soon. However I don't think it is important really, because campaign, press coverage has to be paid for by someone
-
Back on Topic…………………….
When was this supposed year, that the McCanns used Bell Pottinger?
Bell Pottinger’s man was only in PDL for 10 days, as crisis adviser and then came, Sheree Dodd, a former spokeswoman for the Government, and former treasury special advisor Justine McGuinness and C Mitchell, who eventually worked full time for McCanns
--------------------------------
14/09/2007
McCann's hire PR agency
Kate and Gerry McCann have hired a new PR agency to help manage an increasingly sceptical media. Hanover, the agency owned by John Major's former press secretary Charles Lewington have been given the brief.
The McCanns are currently fighting to clear their name after allegations were allegedly made by the Portugese police regarding the disappearance of their missing four-year-old daughter.
The poor treatment of the MacCann's in the press is apparently something Lewington, managing director of Hanover, feels very strongly about and wants to help.
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post225058.html#p225058
--------------------------------------------------------
This article will also examine aspects of the background of Ian Horrocks, the ex-detective, hailed as one of Britain’s foremost investigators,
who was sent out to the Algarve by Rupert Murdoch’s Sun newspaper in February 2012 and delivered reports to the Sun and SKY NEWS backing the McCanns’ abduction claims and heavily criticising the Portuguese police.
http://whathappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/a-biography-of-hamish-campbell-man_28.html
--------------------------------------
(Lord King is a strong ally of Rupert Murdoch. Is there a possibility, that, the above is where the press coverage came from for a year?) …re: £500,000)
A message has been sent to Lord Bell, so hopefully we will know the truth soon. However I don't think it is important really, because campaign, press coverage has to be paid for by someone
Thanks for that research Anna.
I concur with what you have stated in (i). £500,000 is a lot of money for us but as far as the Murdoch empire is concerned it is small change and I think it may be an explanation.
Just need to wait and see if Lord Bell enlightens us.
The McCanns have been scrutinised to such an extent I think any payment to anyone for that amount from the fund would have been noted before now.
Interesting that the remit of Operation Grange was in the public domain as a result of a freedom of information request (I knew that, but so much get lost in the mine of information). I don't see how making sure possible perpetrators being forewarned so early in proceedings is helpful to Madeleine's case; I confess myself at a loss as to why people think their prejudices are more important than a police investigation into a missing child.
-
You'll learn 8(0(*. The perception from the supporters side is "if you ain't with us you're agin us". Trying to say anything different is like plaiting fog.
I'm reading posts which seem to be saying 'so and so is true because I say so'. I'd heard that some people who whole-heartedly support the McCanns have no factual basis for their views, tending to rely on 'if I say it often enough it will be true', but it still surprised me.
-
I'm reading posts which seem to be saying 'so and so is true because I say so'. I'd heard that some people who whole-heartedly support the McCanns have no factual basis for their views, tending to rely on 'if I say it often enough it will be true', but it still surprised me.
That is an interesting post. Sometimes when stating the obvious such as "Madeleine McCann is missing" or "Goncalo Amaral made many television appearances to discuss her disappearance" cites aren't really necessary.
No doubt you will also have become familiar with many of Stephen's contributions, which I wouldn't really class as being particularly McCann friendly.
It will be even more pertinent to the evenness of the debate if you would kindly do what you appear to be accusing ... "some people who whole-heartedly support the McCanns " of and provide cites to examples of ..." 'if I say it often enough it will be true' "
You have asked me for a cite to "prove" the window to Madeleine's bedroom was open and the shutter raised - and two when you have complained to a poster here don't appear to support your argument unless Faithlilly is a master of disguise and subterfuge.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=18.0
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6063.msg225002#msg225002
The accusation that some posters "have no factual basis for their views" is thought provoking; if it is a sincerely held belief ... oh dear ... it is a revealing one which tends to support my opinion that this particular thread might very well have been set up to do a bit of McCann bashing.
However ... back to the nitty gritty ... how about a few cites from you in support of your contentions?
-
That is an interesting post. Sometimes when stating the obvious such as "Madeleine McCann is missing" or "Goncalo Amaral made many television appearances to discuss her disappearance" cites aren't really necessary.
No doubt you will also have become familiar with many of Stephen's contributions, which I wouldn't really class as being particularly McCann friendly.
It will be even more pertinent to the evenness of the debate if you would kindly do what you appear to be accusing ... "some people who whole-heartedly support the McCanns " of and provide cites to examples of ..." 'if I say it often enough it will be true' "
You have asked me for a cite to "prove" the window to Madeleine's bedroom was open and the shutter raised - and two when you have complained to a poster here don't appear to support your argument unless Faithlilly is a master of disguise and subterfuge.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=18.0
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6063.msg225002#msg225002
The accusation that some posters "have no factual basis for their views" is thought provoking; if it is a sincerely held belief ... oh dear ... it is a revealing one which tends to support my opinion that this particular thread might very well have been set up to do a bit of McCann bashing.
However ... back to the nitty gritty ... how about a few cites from you in support of your contentions?
I'm pleased you find my post interesting Brietta. Which of my 'contentions' would you like cites for?
-
I'm pleased you find my post interesting Brietta. Which of my 'contentions' would you like cites for?
Perhaps it would be better if everyone provided cites or accepted that the post was merely opinion
-
Perhaps it would be better if everyone provided cites or accepted that the post was merely opinion
Agreed. There is room for opinion as Brietta said, but if it's posted as if it was fact there's no way of answering it.
-
Thanks for the replies, I had seen the links. I was only using your original quotes as illustrations to a question by Brietta, no criticism meant ?{)(**
-
Thanks for the replies, I had seen the links. I was only using your original quotes as illustrations to a question by Brietta, no criticism meant ?{)(**
None taken 8(0(*
-
Has the issue of Bell Pottinger been discussed?
4. Government Agents ~ The True Story of Madeleine McCann.
36:00 minutes into the video. https://youtu.be/AdmqpzVblFM?t=2166
-
Lord Bell, founder of Bell Pottinger quoted in a book written by Owen Jones. He is commenting on the 'Hacked Off' campaign, and he says he doesn't care what the McCanns think. 'They paid me £500,000 to keep them on the front page of every newspaper for one year and that's what we did'.
That is not perfectly clear who paid who. Is he saying it was the McCanns who paid or was it Mark Warner for Richard D Hall says it was MW who engaged Bell Pottinger?
-
It is perfectly clear
Despite mark warner employing bell pottinger the mccanns paid bell half a million
End of story
-
It is perfectly clear
Despite mark warner employing bell pottinger the mccanns paid bell half a million
End of story
That could have put Bell Pottinger in a conflict of interest situation if for any reason Mark Warner is a contributor to the issue and then to be paid by the McCanns as well. Any story that might point the finger back to the negligence and or cover up resorted to by MW is deliberately not given any publicity in the newspapers.
-
That could have put Bell Pottinger in a conflict of interest situation if for any reason Mark Warner is a contributor to the issue and then to be paid by the McCanns as well. Any story that might point the finger back to the negligence and or cover up resorted to by MW is deliberately not given any publicity in the newspapers.
Whatever,carry on researchng
-
Whatever,carry on researchng
In the thread discussing the topic there didn't seem to be a consensus that a payment was ever made.
-
In the thread discussing the topic there didn't seem to be a consensus that a payment was ever made.
Why would he lie? Why was he allowed to say it if it was a lie?
-
Why would he lie? Why was he allowed to say it if it was a lie?
It is more boasting rather than lying. The practicality of what he is boasting would be in question. Would Kate and Gerry want to pay for all the negative and hurtful publicity they got as well? Would you pay it up front or wait till the year was up? How many missed days were allowed before the contract was broken? How many papers not having a headline about Madeleine were allowed before the contract was broken?
'They paid me £500,000 to keep them on the front page of every newspaper for one year and that's what we did'. How could that be confirmed?
-
It is more boasting rather than lying. The practicality of what he is boasting would be in question. Would Kate and Gerry want to pay for all the negative and hurtful publicity they got as well? Would you pay it up front or wait till the year was up? How many missed days were allowed before the contract was broken? How many papers not having a headline about Madeleine were allowed before the contract was broken?
'They paid me £500,000 to keep them on the front page of every newspaper for one year and that's what we did'. How could that be confirmed?
All I'm saying is there was a deafening silence from the McCanns on the issue, that's all.
-
All I'm saying is there was a deafening silence from the McCanns on the issue, that's all.
I've heard the boast but now I'm concerned about the implications of the conflict of interest between the Madeleine McCann missing and Mark Warner employing Bell Pottinger to fix some sort of crisis. Did MW actually have a crisis on their hands?
-
In the thread discussing the topic there didn't seem to be a consensus that a payment was ever made.
Stop thrashng a dead duck
Its a fact bell was paid, he said so, he was quoted in a book written by a joirnalist, still nto convinced? Write to the author and to bell
“You are always in danger of deluding yourself, into believing you’re doing good things, when you’re actually looking after number one.” And Lord Bell: “The McCanns paid me £500,000 in fees to keep them on the front page of every single newspaper for a year, which we did” – a fact that I’d never heard before. No doubt the campaign would have been less effective if “Advertisement” had been engraved above the missing child’s photograph.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/09/14/weekend_review_page_file_maureen_callahan_champagne_supernovas_owen_jones_the_establishment_sophie_hannah_the_monogram_murders_poirot_ghost_write/
-
Stop thrashng a dead duck
Its a fact bell was paid, he said so, he was quoted in a book written by a joirnalist, still nto convinced? Write to the author and to bell
“You are always in danger of deluding yourself, into believing you’re doing good things, when you’re actually looking after number one.” And Lord Bell: “The McCanns paid me £500,000 in fees to keep them on the front page of every single newspaper for a year, which we did” – a fact that I’d never heard before. No doubt the campaign would have been less effective if “Advertisement” had been engraved above the missing child’s photograph.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/09/14/weekend_review_page_file_maureen_callahan_champagne_supernovas_owen_jones_the_establishment_sophie_hannah_the_monogram_murders_poirot_ghost_write/
You are still not addressing the key issue of the conflict of interest.
-
Stop thrashng a dead duck
Its a fact bell was paid, he said so, he was quoted in a book written by a joirnalist, still nto convinced? Write to the author and to bell
“You are always in danger of deluding yourself, into believing you’re doing good things, when you’re actually looking after number one.” And Lord Bell: “The McCanns paid me £500,000 in fees to keep them on the front page of every single newspaper for a year, which we did” – a fact that I’d never heard before. No doubt the campaign would have been less effective if “Advertisement” had been engraved above the missing child’s photograph.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/09/14/weekend_review_page_file_maureen_callahan_champagne_supernovas_owen_jones_the_establishment_sophie_hannah_the_monogram_murders_poirot_ghost_write/
I've never found anything to corroborate that alleged statement by Lord Bell.
Which year would he have been referring to?
-
I've never found anything to corroborate that alleged statement by Lord Bell.
Which year would he have been referring to?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6114.0;nowap
He is actually quoted by the author a guardian journalist
Its also a thread you read and posted on
Have you any evidence o.... j.... lied?
What evidence do you demand? Sight of bank statements?
-
You are still not addressing the key issue of the conflict of interest.
Im not interested as i dint see it as an issue
A journalist from a respected uk newspaper wrote a book, quoted mr bell, now we have all the sirens screeching it cant be true, why not?
-
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6114.0;nowap
He is actually quoted by the author a guardian journalist
Its also a thread you read and posted on
Have you any evidence owen jones lied?
It isn't really a question of doubting O.... J....' veracity, more about wondering if the title "Lord" in front of Tim Bell's name necessarily verifies his ...
Quote
On 19 November 1977 Bell was fined £50 for indecency. He had exposed himself while masturbating at his Hampstead bathroom window on 21 October in full view of female passers-by.
End quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Bell,_Baron_Bell
Elsewhere described as ... a conviction for ‘wilfuly, openly and obscenely’ exposing himself ‘with intent to insult a female’ under Section 4 of the 1824 Vagrancy Act.
-
It isn't really a question of doubting O... J....' veracity, more about wondering if the title "Lord" in front of Tim Bell's name necessarily verifies his ...
Quote
On 19 November 1977 Bell was fined £50 for indecency. He had exposed himself while masturbating at his Hampstead bathroom window on 21 October in full view of female passers-by.
End quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Bell,_Baron_Bell
Elsewhere described as ... a conviction for ‘wilfuly, openly and obscenely’ exposing himself ‘with intent to insult a female’ under Section 4 of the 1824 Vagrancy Act.
Does that mean he lied about the half a million?
-
Does that mean he lied about the half a million?
His conviction wasn't for perjury ... it was for something entirely different and I am sure his lawyers would have put up a spirited defence in court at the time.
However ... I have seen the quotation attributed to the man himself by others, complete with quotation marks ... but nowhere have I seen him saying it direct to camera, so to speak. Have you?
-
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6114.0;nowap
He is actually quoted by the author a guardian journalist
Its also a thread you read and posted on
Have you any evidence owen jones lied?
What evidence do you demand? Sight of bank statements?
It doesn't bother me if they did indeed pay that amount to Bell Pottinger.
And, no, I'm not suggesting the author lied.
Lord Bell may well have said it. I'm not suggesting that he was lying, either, but he could have been confused.
Bell Pottinger was indeed involved in the beginning, but paid for by Mark Warner.
14.34 Martin Evans tweets:
Twitter McCanns took media advice from Bell Pottinger and PR man Clarence Mitchell which they found invaluable
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/8911828/Leveson-Inquiry-as-it-happened-November-23.html
Back in September 2007, Hanover was brought in for a couple of months to handle the media crisis.
http://www.prweek.com/article/768338/hanover-calls-time-mccanns
Stories about Madeleine increased media revenue, and the tabloids were tripping over themselves trying to get their own "Maddie" blurb written by the deadline, so I don't see why they would have needed to pay to keep her in the news.
I'm not sure of the source for the moment, but Gerry was apparently advised that it would be better if the media actually cut back on its coverage until there was something newsworthy.
I've found this, though:
The McCanns open by saying that it has not been helpful for information about Madeleine to be in the public eye constantly, as it has led to "misinformation" and "confusion".
Kate McCann says there was one stage when their daughter was on the front page of every national newspaper every day. Gerry adds:
Quote We have acknowledged that the media have been very helpful on occasions, particularly when we have launched appeals.
And the McCanns later famously sued the Express papers in March 2008, which eventually calmed down the lurid half-truths in the tabloids.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/7303801.stm
So... I'm still left scratching my head as to which year he may have been talking about.
NB: Lord Bell says some strange things sometimes.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/apr/15/bbc-adrian-chiles-germanwings-joke-lord-bell
-
It doesn't bother me if they did indeed pay that amount to Bell Pottinger.
And, no, I'm not suggesting the author lied.
Lord Bell may well have said it. I'm not suggesting that he was lying, either, but he could have been confused.
Bell Pottinger was indeed involved in the beginning, but paid for by Mark Warner.
14.34 Martin Evans tweets:
Twitter McCanns took media advice from Bell Pottinger and PR man Clarence Mitchell which they found invaluable
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/8911828/Leveson-Inquiry-as-it-happened-November-23.html
Back in September 2007, Hanover was brought in for a couple of months to handle the media crisis.
http://www.prweek.com/article/768338/hanover-calls-time-mccanns
Stories about Madeleine increased media revenue, and the tabloids were tripping over themselves trying to get their own "Maddie" blurb written by the deadline, so I don't see why they would have needed to pay to keep her in the news.
I'm not sure of the source for the moment, but Gerry was apparently advised that it would be better if the media actually cut back on its coverage until there was something newsworthy.
I've found this, though:
The McCanns open by saying that it has not been helpful for information about Madeleine to be in the public eye constantly, as it has led to "misinformation" and "confusion".
Kate McCann says there was one stage when their daughter was on the front page of every national newspaper every day. Gerry adds:
Quote We have acknowledged that the media have been very helpful on occasions, particularly when we have launched appeals.
And the McCanns later famously sued the Express papers in March 2008, which eventually calmed down the lurid half-truths in the tabloids.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/7303801.stm
So... I'm still left scratching my head as to which year he may have been talking about.
NB: Lord Bell says some strange things sometimes.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/apr/15/bbc-adrian-chiles-germanwings-joke-lord-bell
I find the issue incomprehensible.
- why on earth would it have been necessary to pay Bell- Pottinger to keep Madeleine front page news?
- whether true or not ... what on earth is the objection to the McCanns taking action to find their missing daughter?
-
I find the issue incomprehensible.
- why on earth would it have been necessary to pay Bell- Pottinger to keep Madeleine front page news?
- whether true or not ... what on earth is the objection to the McCanns taking action to find their missing daughter?
Sorry but I haven't followed your questions fully, but "why on earth would it have been necessary to pay Bell- Pottinger to keep Madeleine front page news?" is a little bit like exposing the conflict of interest.
It could be an advantage for Mark Warner to have the focus on the McCanns rather on itself so they pay the fee not the McCanns. One would think whoever is paying the fee is getting the advantage. If the publicity was damaging the search for Madeleine why would the McCanns keep paying for a service that is no longer wanted.
We tend to think it was Clarence Mitchell "controlling what comes out in the media" but maybe it was really Bell Pottinger just keeping the heat on the McCanns and keeping the Mark Warner company looking "most helpful".
It seems to be the thing I notice is the way the Ocean Club 'support' the McCanns with accommodation and creche services presumably on the house (without cost to the McCanns) for the next few months.
-
It isn't really a question of doubting Owen Jones' veracity, more about wondering if the title "Lord" in front of Tim Bell's name necessarily verifies his ...
Quote
On 19 November 1977 Bell was fined £50 for indecency. He had exposed himself while masturbating at his Hampstead bathroom window on 21 October in full view of female passers-by.
End quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Bell,_Baron_Bell
Elsewhere described as ... a conviction for ‘wilfuly, openly and obscenely’ exposing himself ‘with intent to insult a female’ under Section 4 of the 1824 Vagrancy Act.
Have the Mccanns denied giving him 500 k for this reason? Ive not come across any reference to them doing so. Have the Mccanns or anyone rlse criticised him or accused him of lying (internet posters with no proof do not count) .So why did you think it appropriate to take it upon yourself to answer the conundrumrum with a reference to MR Bells (if his title offends you because of his past acts) conviction....but thanks for enlightening us all about something probably most of us knew nothing about. Does it matter? Is it relevant to the truth in any particular case? If it is then some might argue david cameron sticking his willy into extremely questionable places (which surely is more disgusting) must surely suggest that he is a cinsummate liar, no?
@)(++(*
Btw his comments were related to discussion of hacked off's campaign and not about the mccanns specifically....whenhesaid he doesnt care what they think (as they were prime
members andgerry mccann very vocal about it) because they proceeded to pay him half a million quid to keep their story in the news every day (ergo hypocritical one assumes).....it does belie that this actually happened
-
It doesn't bother me if they did indeed pay that amount to Bell Pottinger.
And, no, I'm not suggesting the author lied.
Lord Bell may well have said it. I'm not suggesting that he was lying, either, but he could have been confused.
Bell Pottinger was indeed involved in the beginning, but paid for by Mark Warner.
14.34 Martin Evans tweets:
Twitter McCanns took media advice from Bell Pottinger and PR man Clarence Mitchell which they found invaluable
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/8911828/Leveson-Inquiry-as-it-happened-November-23.html
Back in September 2007, Hanover was brought in for a couple of months to handle the media crisis.
http://www.prweek.com/article/768338/hanover-calls-time-mccanns
Stories about Madeleine increased media revenue, and the tabloids were tripping over themselves trying to get their own "Maddie" blurb written by the deadline, so I don't see why they would have needed to pay to keep her in the news.
I'm not sure of the source for the moment, but Gerry was apparently advised that it would be better if the media actually cut back on its coverage until there was something newsworthy.
I've found this, though:
The McCanns open by saying that it has not been helpful for information about Madeleine to be in the public eye constantly, as it has led to "misinformation" and "confusion".
Kate McCann says there was one stage when their daughter was on the front page of every national newspaper every day. Gerry adds:
Quote We have acknowledged that the media have been very helpful on occasions, particularly when we have launched appeals.
And the McCanns later famously sued the Express papers in March 2008, which eventually calmed down the lurid half-truths in the tabloids.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/7303801.stm
So... I'm still left scratching my head as to which year he may have been talking about.
NB: Lord Bell says some strange things sometimes.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/apr/15/bbc-adrian-chiles-germanwings-joke-lord-bell
Why would he be confused? Does he have alzheimers?
And no, I dont care a jot either what the mccanns spent their donations on, if theyre honest about it
-
Have the Mccanns denied giving him 500 k for this reason? Ive not come across any reference to them doing so. Have the Mccanns or anyone rlse criticised him or accused him of lying (internet posters with no proof do not count) .So why did you think it appropriate to take it upon yourself to answer the conundrumrum with a reference to MR Bells (if his title offends you because of his past acts) conviction....but thanks for enlightening us all about something probably most of us knew nothing about. Does it matter? Is it relevant to the truth in any particular case? If it is then some might argue david cameron sticking his willy into extremely questionable places (which surely is more disgusting) must surely suggest that he is a cinsummate liar, no?
@)(++(*
Btw his comments were related to discussion of hacked off's campaign and not about the mccanns specifically....whenhesaid he doesnt care what they think (as they were prime
members andgerry mccann very vocal about it) because they proceeded to pay him half a million quid to keep their story in the news every day (ergo hypocritical one assumes).....it does belie that this actually happened
If it actually happened ... when did he say it and where is the cite for that? I have looked and have seen others making the allegation, but not him.
-
If it actually happened ... when did he say it and where is the cite for that? I have looked and have seen others making the allegation, but not him.
The fact that he is QUOTED should be evidence enough, whoever he said those conments to will be the source of the quote
Not sure what your problem is with either provenance or subject
If YOU think its a lie, go find the evidence, as I said, no one has ever denied Owens book
Content
And have a think why you think it might be a lie ...ordinarily youd be praising the mccanns for paying for publicity to find their child, so Im a bit confused
-
The fact that he is QUOTED should be evidence enough, whoever he said those conments to will be the source of the quote
Not sure what your problem is with either provenance or subject
If YOU think its a lie, go find the evidence, as I said, no one has ever denied Owens book
Content
And have a think why you think it might be a lie ...ordinarily youd be praising the mccanns for paying for publicity to find their child, so Im a bit confused
In other words ... you are unable to point the way to a cite which shows unequivocally that McAlpine made the statement attributed to him.
-
I have feeling it is real crucial to find out whether it was the McCanns or Mark Warner on behalf of the McCanns paying the fee. It would seem not to be impossible to see the accounts showing the payment,date and the source, but I'm unsure how to go about it. But surely SY can look into it if in the last resort we can't work out how to do it.
I'm not saying he is lying but he may have made a Freudian slip attributing the payment from the wrong source.
-
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6114.0;nowap
He is actually quoted by the author a guardian journalist
Its also a thread you read and posted on
Have you any evidence owen jones lied?
What evidence do you demand? Sight of bank statements?
I think this is the level of proof I would like: "bank statements" showing the transfer dates amounts and origin (payor).
-
In other words ... you are unable to point the way to a cite which shows unequivocally that McAlpine made the statement attributed to him.
You would need to write to the author of the book to ask for proof NOT ME
And why are you talking of Mcalpine!! Wasnt he talked about vis a vis child abuse? Wtf
Brietta its LORD BELL under discussion and how mich money the mccanns paid him deary me
-
I have feeling it is real crucial to find out whether it was the McCanns or Mark Warner on behalf of the McCanns paying the fee. It would seem not to be impossible to see the accounts showing the payment,date and the source, but I'm unsure how to go about it. But surely SY can look into it if in the last resort we can't work out how to do it.
I'm not saying he is lying but he may have made a Freudian slip attributing the payment from the wrong source.
Why?
I don't see why it's of any importance whatsoever whether they did or they didn't.
My only point is that I doubt that it ever happened, for the reasons I pointed out earlier.
-
Why?
I don't see why it's of any importance whatsoever whether they did or they didn't.
My only point is that I doubt that it ever happened, for the reasons I pointed out earlier.
Will we be able to see the motive of why someone determined at an early stage it was important to keep Madeleine on front pages of the newspapers for a year? Was this to find Madeleine or was there ulterior reasons?
-
I think this is the level of proof I would like: "bank statements" showing the transfer dates amounts and origin (payor).
In that case youd also have to ask for all the mccanns bank statements
Cant accuse people of lyng or being confused unless they prove they werent either of those
Likewise cant accept what the mccanns say about their financial affairs either just cos they said so, works both ways
-
In that case youd also have to ask for all the mccanns bank statements
Cant accuse people of lyng or being confused unless they prove they werent either of those
Likewise cant accept what the mccanns say about their financial affairs either just cos they said so, works both ways
It isn't the McCann statements I was after but Mark Warner's and Bell Pottinger's.
-
It isn't the McCann statements I was after but Mark Warner's and Bell Pottinger's.
How would you know where money came from.
-
How would you know where money came from.
On my statements it usually shows who the transaction was from or to who it was for.
-
On my statements it usually shows who the transaction was from or to who it was for.
You are from New Zealand.
-
You are from New Zealand.
Yes. I use Internet banking. You fill in the details so you can follow what has happened in the past.
-
Yes. I use Internet banking. You fill in the details so you can follow what has happened in the past.
My meaning that it doesn't necessarily follow in other countries.
-
My meaning that it doesn't necessarily follow in other countries.
One would like to think so.