Was Lord Bell really paid £500,000 to keep the Maddie story front page news?

[John]

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?

[jassi]

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 ?

[Brietta]

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?

[ShiningInLuz]

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)?

[Alfred R Jones]

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. 

[Brietta]

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.

[DCI]

One little thing wrong with Lord Bells supposed quote!

Why would the McCanns pay for someone bought in by Mark Warner?

[Alice Purjorick]

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")

[jassi]

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.

[Mr Gray]

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

so any suggestion that the it is claimed that the fees were paid in advance is totally false

[G-Unit]

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

[Carana]

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.

[jassi]

Read the Wiki entry. The mCCanns are listed under the category of past clients.

[G-Unit]

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.

[G-Unit]

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.