The archiving report ...

[sadie]

Actually Sadie the advice from all the experts regarding missing children is that to give them the best chance of being found you have to basically 'advertise' them - as you would any other product you wanted the public to know about.     

One of the best examples of that IMO is having their faces on milk cartons - imagine the millions of people who would see them that way.   I'm not sure that has ever been done in the UK - if not I wonder why not - as it seems a brilliant idea to me.   Other ways are to see their faces on billboards or projected onto buildings by laser.   'Marketing' may sound a harsh term to use, but if that is the best approach, and more likely to get results than any other way - then any parent of a missing child is going to want to do it.

I read an article once from 'the experts' giving exactly this advice.  When I get time I'll see if I can find it.

I couldn't agree more Benice .... and marketting is the correct term for it.

Unfortunately with some of the [ censored word ]s minds, they twist it into something sinister.  Stephen above is on about MONEY for instance.  (sadie rolls eyes in disgust) 

Cant he see the bigger picture?

[Redblossom]

If that is what he said, it is an unfortunate choice of words, but we all use the wrong words occasionally.

What he meant was publicize ... very likely he had been given advice by people who specialize in publicizing things and they would commonly use the term marketting, because much of their publicizing was about marketting.

Unfortunately seems he latched on to their words.

We all do that sort of thing from time to time



You are making something out of nothing here

So how do the two gel, Gerrys marketing ploy using Madeleines eye defect, and everyone has seen the  LOOK campaign, and  Kate Mccann saying they never really made much of it?

Confusing isnt it?

[sadie]

So how do the two gel, Gerrys marketing ploy using Madeleines eye defect, and everyone has seen the  LOOK campaign, and  Kate Mccann saying they never really made much of it?

Confusing isnt it?

I haven't read kates words in context, so cant really comment.

But, in any case, you cant compare the words of two people and expect exactly the same emotions / thoughts / responses from them both.  Doesn't happen, Red

[AnneGuedes]

One of the best examples of that IMO is having their faces on milk cartons - imagine the millions of people who would see them that way. 

You know whose face inaugurated this ? And what happened after ?

[AnneGuedes]

So how do the two gel, Gerrys marketing ploy using Madeleines eye defect, and everyone has seen the  LOOK campaign, and  Kate Mccann saying they never really made much of it?

Confusing isnt it?

Actually I'm pretty sure Mrs McCann was right saying it was hardly noticeable. Madeleine's eyes aren't clear, so only looking very close and knowing what you have to find.
On the toddler photo, the coloboma is visible. Paradoxically they published a photo which didn't look like Madeleine when she disappeared in order to exhibit a default that nobody would notice !
But as well why would you publish a looking like photo when you can publish a not looking like one ?

[Chinagirl]

Actually I'm pretty sure Mrs McCann was right saying it was hardly noticeable. Madeleine's eyes aren't clear, so only looking very close and knowing what you have to find.
On the toddler photo, the coloboma is visible. Paradoxically they published a photo which didn't look like Madeleine when she disappeared in order to exhibit a default that nobody would notice !
But as well why would you publish a looking like photo when you can publish a not looking like one ?

And you KNOW what Madeleine looked like when she disappeared, do you, Anne, so that you can state, so categorically, that they published a photo that did not look like Madeleine?

If you were a suspect in this case, that would have been a highly incriminating comment!

[AnneGuedes]

And you KNOW what Madeleine looked like when she disappeared, do you, Anne, so that you can state, so categorically, that they published a photo that did not look like Madeleine?

If you were a suspect in this case, that would have been a highly incriminating comment!

What are you talking about, Chinagirl ? Haven't you seen the photos of Madeleine on the PDL court and on the PDL playground ?

[Chinagirl]

I have probably seen all the photos of Madeleine that have been published, and have no difficulty in accepting that they are all of Madeleine.  I don't know what you are getting at that any of them are not how she looked when she disappeared.  I have never met her, and presume neither have you, so how do you know that one (or some) of them don't look like her?  Surely you are not implying that some other child is being passed off as Madeleine?

[Benice]

IMO It's obvious why they used the now iconic photograh of Madeleine.    It was chosen because it showed her full face - with every aspect of her individual facial features clearly defined - i.e. the colour of her eyes, the shape of her eyebrows, her nose, her chin, and her hair etc.   So for identification purposes therefore - they thought that was the best one to use.
IMO.

[Carana]

IMO It's obvious why they used the now iconic photograh of Madeleine.    It was chosen because it showed her full face - with every aspect of her individual facial features clearly defined - i.e. the colour of her eyes, the shape of her eyebrows, her nose, her chin, and her hair etc.   So for identification purposes therefore - they thought that was the best one to use.
IMO.

That seems logical to me as well. They needed a photo that would help distinguish her from other little blonde girls.

[AnneGuedes]

That seems logical to me as well. They needed a photo that would help distinguish her from other little blonde girls.

But it didn't. See the hundreds of false sightings 100% sure ! Even a little boy.
And remember Bridget OD not sure whether Madeleine was among pink and blond little girls.

[sadie]

But it didn't. See the hundreds of false sightings 100% sure ! Even a little boy.
And remember Bridget OD not sure whether Madeleine was among pink and blond little girls.

Most peple do not have very deserning abilities at facial recognition.  If certain features are the same then without looking at the other features, in their mind, they identify it as the person.

People want to help.  Even if they believe it is the missing person and are wrong, better to have reported rather than to have not bothered.

Cos some of them may well be correct.

[AnneGuedes]

Variations of the dark brutal man with a fair scared child cliché !  Ah and always 100% sure !

[Redblossom]

I haven't read kates words in context, so cant really comment.

But, in any case, you cant compare the words of two people and expect exactly the same emotions / thoughts / responses from them both.  Doesn't happen, Red

Ths has nothing whatsoever to do with emotions and thoughts, its to do with FACTS

fact 1 - Gerry thought  it was a good marketing ploy to  use Maddies eye defect  in advertising even when warned by police not to and even when he thought  there was a chance to an abductor damaging it, source as given, Vanity Fair interview, and we all kniw what a massive LOOK campaign comprised of, the EYE

fact 2 -  Kate Mccann said theynever made anything much of this, total contradiction

MORGAN: Madeleine had a very distinctive eye pattern, didn't she? Tell me about that, Kate, in case people see somebody they think may be Madeleine. Tell me about her eye.

K. MCCANN: If I'm honest, we haven't put too much emphasis on her eye, because I think you have to be very close to her to see it. But her eyes are slightly different colors, and one of them has this brown fleck in it. But you do notice, particularly on photographs, but --

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1105/11/pmt.01.html

[sadie]

Of course it is to do withn the different thoughts of two individual people. 
My hubby and I are always describing the same thing with different emphasis, depending on the way each sees it .. and the way one sees things depends on their emotions

Somewhere recently on thgis forum, it was said that Amaral was the first to publicize the eye defect.  Is that correct?