Media Manipulation

I've previously written about my qualms with the way the Madelaine McCann story has been given huge amounts of media coverage, but I held back on the cyncism about the parents, mainly because other people had written about it elsewhere. Then last the London Lite newspaper led with the story about blood being found in the apartment in which the McCanns were staying. The article on the frontpaper said that the police were now concentrating their enquiry on the family and their group of friends and it was looking less likely that she was abducted. The picture editor had earned their money as the photograph of the McCanns was not of them looking distraught as previously, but incredibly shifty, almost as if their eyes had been narrowed in PhotoShop to make them look suspicious. So the story on the front page was, as near as it could without risking a libel case, accusing the parents.

"An interesting turn of events", I thought, turning to page 11 where the story continued. But on page 11, the picture was muddied further with mention of the possible abduction again, another possible suspect and British police criticising the Portugese investigation. It was so contradictory to what was on the front page. All that really could be concluded from it is that still nobody knows anything.

Now I'm not going to defend the McCanns at all (regardless of what happened to Madelaine, I have problems with them hiring a Campaign Manager and taking money from the public), but really I'm disgusted (again) with the Lite's coverage of the story. If I hadn't read the rest of the article inside the paper (and so many people do just read the first few paragraphs), then that was them pretty much condemned as guilty.