Visits to the play area after tea. What is the truth?

[Mr Gray]

Is it 'sensible' to accept that the UK media don't check their stories and therefore mislead their readers?

is it a national disgrace that the timings were not totally accurate....I think thats a totally bizarre claim..


I think its  a national disgrace that the co ordinator on the case was an arguido and eventuallly convicted of perjury...how accurate was the reporting in the portuguese press...was taht more accurate

[G-Unit]

is it a national disgrace that the timings were not totally accurate....I think thats a totally bizarre claim..


I think its  a national disgrace that the co ordinator on the case was an arguido and eventuallly convicted of perjury...how accurate was the reporting in the portuguese press...was taht more accurate

Well if you think it's fine to pay over £2 to read inaccurate stories that's your choice. I prefer to find out the truth and that's not to be found in newspapers in my opinion. I think I'm the 'sensible' one.

[Mr Gray]

Well if you think it's fine to pay over £2 to read inaccurate stories that's your choice. I prefer to find out the truth and that's not to be found in newspapers in my opinion. I think I'm the 'sensible' one.

I don't think you are.  I don't pay anything to read newspapers.. And I have enough sense to understand that every detail may not be totally accurate.  Your idea this makes the Guardian a national disgrace is totally irrational

[Vertigo Swirl]

There's plenty of evidence imo.

Imo it's bleedin obvious Maddie wasn't abducted for starters.

And yet you can’t even come close to proving it. 

[Vertigo Swirl]

I think anyone in the UK who criticises the Portuguese press is ignoring the fact that the press in the UK is (imo) a national disgrace. If anyone has used Madeleine McCann as a cash cow it's the UK media.

Perhaps you’d like to give some examples of news platforms that aren’t a “national disgrace”?  Who do you consider has the most accurate press reporting in the world?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Well if you think it's fine to pay over £2 to read inaccurate stories that's your choice. I prefer to find out the truth and that's not to be found in newspapers in my opinion. I think I'm the 'sensible' one.

And yet you use cites from newspapers all the time, slight double standard there methinks.

[G-Unit]

And yet you use cites from newspapers all the time, slight double standard there methinks.

Where there's a quote from a named source, yes.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Where there's a quote from a named source, yes.

you trust the disgraceful press to quote accurately??  Surely not!!

[Vertigo Swirl]

Perhaps you’d like to give some examples of news platforms that aren’t a “national disgrace”?  Who do you consider has the most accurate press reporting in the world?

Well?

[G-Unit]

Well?

I have no idea.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I have no idea.

Exactly.

[G-Unit]

Exactly.

I have no idea if there are any reliable news platforms or which one in the world is the most accurate, and why should I? It's not something I've thought about because it's not something I care about.

I do have an opinion on the British press because I've seen the virtually unbelievable mess they made of reporting the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

They attacked the PJ unmercifully; they reported an 'abduction' which was only ever an opinion not a fact; they printed unsubstantiated stories they got from unreliable sources on both sides and they repeatedly got the basic (checkable) facts wrong.

They also seriously hampered the investigation in Portugal by printing appeals for 'sightings' which meant the police were bombarded with completely ridiculous claims by people who thought they might have seen Madeleine in the most unlikely places worldwide.

Finally their utter bias was and is clear. Using words like desperate, heartbroken, suffering, devout and brave to describe the McCanns was a clear attempt to persuade people that they were innocent.

There was hardly any objective reporting at all. It isn't the place of the press to decide which crime was committed or who is innocent or guilty, but they didn't care, presumeably because they were making plenty of money.

[Mr Gray]

I have no idea if there are any reliable news platforms or which one in the world is the most accurate, and why should I? It's not something I've thought about because it's not something I care about.

I do have an opinion on the British press because I've seen the virtually unbelievable mess they made of reporting the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

They attacked the PJ unmercifully; they reported an 'abduction' which was only ever an opinion not a fact; they printed unsubstantiated stories they got from unreliable sources on both sides and they repeatedly got the basic (checkable) facts wrong.

They also seriously hampered the investigation in Portugal by printing appeals for 'sightings' which meant the police were bombarded with completely ridiculous claims by people who thought they might have seen Madeleine in the most unlikely places worldwide.

Finally their utter bias was and is clear. Using words like desperate, heartbroken, suffering, devout and brave to describe the McCanns was a clear attempt to persuade people that they were innocent.

There was hardly any objective reporting at all. It isn't the place of the press to decide which crime was committed or who is innocent or guilty, but they didn't care, presumeably because they were making plenty of money.

Your post really  exposes your absolute bias and lack of objectivity.  Based on your obsession with this one case the press are a national disgrace... That's totally irrational.
I read about the helicopter crash... I don't expect ALL the details to be totally accurate... It's not a legal document

[G-Unit]

Your post really  exposes your absolute bias and lack of objectivity.  Based on your obsession with this one case the press are a national disgrace... That's totally irrational.
I read about the helicopter crash... I don't expect ALL the details to be totally accurate... It's not a legal document

This case is enlightening because the actual facts are available to compare with the 'facts' the newspapers printed. As is the sworn evidence of the journalists who wrote those 'facts'.

That makes it a very good case study of the practices of the press.

[Mr Gray]

This case is enlightening because the actual facts are available to compare with the 'facts' the newspapers printed. As is the sworn evidence of the journalists who wrote those 'facts'.

That makes it a very good case study of the practices of the press.

And you have decided they are a national disgrace... Mainly I think because you don't like them being sympathetic to the mccanns.  I think that exposes your total lack of objectivity