Well that's true, Carana, but you're looking at it from the angle of someone who is following the case very closely and has a lot of background information in mind when viewing the programme.
I was trying to put myself in the shoes of the average viewer, who will of course be very aware of the case but probably won't know a lot of detail. (I didn't pay very close attention to it until about 12 months ago. Before then, I had read only headlines. Only when I started reading more did I learn of the existence of so-called 'Smithman', for example, and other things that we on this site take for granted).
The fact that we and SY know the reason why two e-fits were composed - different impressions resulting from descriptions given by members of a group - does not make the interpretation or recognition of those images any easier for the public. They are being faced with visual information that is essentially quite contradictory.
If you are going to get a strong message across to the public it has to be done clearly and simply. In advertising for example, the message has to be strongly made and relatively simple. That is not to insult the audience, who have a sophisticated relationship with the media today. You can be sophisticated -with graphics; with a certain selling point or interesting angle that you are going to take. But you still have to be clear in your message, and, especially in a short bit, that normally means sticking to one point and elaborating on it, and leaving out the rest.
Perhaps SY thought they were doubling their chances of finding Smithman by releasing a 'double' image - but in effect they were just clouding people's minds. IMO.
There was an interesting comment by.... by... (her name escapes me for the moment, I'll add it when I find it Jacqui? From the police). From what I remember, she was saying that it would be unusual to present so many faces to the public, but that it was a special opportunity.
Personally, if I'd been there (or even not), that Crimewatch programme would have made me try to think back - again - in case there was something that I hadn't noticed or didn't seem relevant at the time. It might have been a situation, but it might also have been a face that I knew from elsewhere.
What if someone who wasn't in PdL at the time recognised one of those faces? Much of any incoming info will just be to eliminate potential people. If Smithman recognises himself and is just an innocent person carrying a child, then it would help to come forward. During the mega media frenzy and the police leaks, some people may have hesitated.
