Missing Madeleine McCann: Did class affect how newsworthy the story was?
A few of our users feel that class has effected how newsworthy Madeleine McCann going missing became, as we reported yesterday Madeleine McCann is one of the most known missing children.
As we know Gerry and Kate McCann both have blossoming careers is medicine, which is obviously a high profile job, but has this really affected the media coverage of Madeleine McCann story.
Are some people right in saying that class has affected Madeleine McCann going missing or is it a load of rubbish?
Get the latest news in our RSS Feed, Newsletter or follow us on Twitter.
In the sense that the media now provides endless opportunities for the public to make their own views known - anonymously - and anonymity is the crucial factor here, then I would agree that a class war has emerged over this whole controversial issue. Bitter class hatred still exists in England, but as in the United States it is no longer the issue of birth or privelege that creates such a gulf - it is now education and/or wealth. Those with the education and the intelligence to be able to handle such publicity in a positive manner - people like the McCanns - are perceived by some at the bottom of the pile as corrupt and manipulative. Before the introduction of newspaper viewpoints and website response sites it meant that only a few voices were aired in the public domain and those had to be accompanied by names and addresses.
Give the public an anonymous response site and all hell now breaks loose. Newspapers and the TV companies have had a whale of a time….it was a great money spinner for a while. A pathetic few hardliners are still hacking away at the law trying to put the McCanns behind bars.
I would strongly disagree with Patricia’s – anonymous – comment. She/he uses her right to (anonymously) comment on this case, but at the same time finds it problematic when “some at the bottom of the pile” do the same. Talk about hypocrisy.
Should this right – to publicly express one’s opinion – be reserved to the “educated and wealthy”? I hope not.
It is not about “education”, is it? Because educated people should know better and shouldn’t leave three small children unsupervised in an unlocked apartment. And here is where the “class” thing gets interesting. How would people like Patricia react if those “at the bottom of the pile” did such thing?
I don’t believe that “class” has made this story more “newsworthy”. But I believe the media would have questioned the child negligence in a different way.
Martina
Do I have the right of reply? It isn´t me who makes the rules, this site does not demand my name or address or telephone number only my email which it keeps to itself. I have no influence over this response site other than the right to respond to what I consider sometimes, to be slanderous and innacurate comments, not seized upon by the moderators.
Your phrase éducated people´should know better highlights precisely the point I am making. The McCanns are perceived as people who should know better, and be incapable of making mistakes. Not true.
Doctors are not superbeings,in their personal lives they are full of flaws like the rest of us. In their professional lives they can also make serious errors of judgement, and they face the consequences. But the´McCanns have been found not guilty of child neglectby by those whose job it is to examine and decide upon such a charge, people who know better than you or I what the law defines as child neglect.
What I am trying to say is that it isn´t education or wealth that makes one man better than another. But that education can help in coping with traumatic times in ones life and that education enables and empowers.
And nowhere did I say that the right to express an opinion should be reserved for the educated and/or the wealthy.
What I am criticising is the anonymity given to such sites as this. I hope the Editor is listening.
“Educated people should know better” doesn’t mean being “incapable of making mistakes” – that is solely YOUR interpretation of my words, I have never said that.
Leaving your children in the care of strangers during the day and alone in the evenings (on a family holiday) is not a mistake Patricia. It’s a lifestyle.
And it’s not a question of abductors and predators either – it’s a question of possible accidents and the trauma of a child waking up alone in a foreign country.
But somehow I think that you are the one who seems to give education far more power than it actually has – like “education can help coping with traumatic times”. Losing a child (or a loved one) is not an intellectual project.
To my knowledge the case of child neglect has never been examined by anybody – so speaking about the McCanns “being found not guilty of child neglect” is simply not true.
Back to the “class issue”. I do believe that if the case was about a single parent on the dole leaving three small children alone in an unlocked apartment while having a dinner/drink with friends in a pub down the road then it would have caused an immediate fury in the media. And I don’t believe that the government would have got involved and I don’t believe the case would have been controlled by a former director of its Media Monitoring Unit.
A thoughtful reply Martina, thankyou. I would like to answer your several points.
1. You did say educated people should know better. I think my interpretation of these words was a fair one.
2. The McCanns have a lifestyle as you describe it, which is common to many working professional people. However they have openly admitted themselves that their actions at the Warner resort were naive in the extreme and that they were horrendously mistaken in feeling so secure there.
3. The UK authorities have interviewed the McCanns in England and examined the case of child neglect brought against them by others. They have quite clearly said that there is no case to answer. If you Google the legal definition of child neglect you will find that it constitutes Consistent Neglect. Consistency is the issue here.
4. I totally agree that losing a child is not an intellectual project. My point was that education empowers the individual, and can assist in coping with the aftermath of publicity and the need to be proactive in the search that followed in this case.
5. I absolutely agree that if this case had been about a single mother on the dole leaving her children unattended whilst she went for a drink then the media would have caused a furore. (Probably because single mothers are perceived as being capable of consistent child neglect - statistical experience would tend to support these assumptions.) But it wasn´t and they didn´t. Something else very interesting however did happen.
A debate began to open up. A debate about class if you will. Nobody seems to be quite sure what to call it. Cultural divide perhaps? Lifestyles?But it certainly brought out the worst and the best in people from what I have read.
To try and summarise. ´How should parents behave on family holidays in foreign countries? Huge differences of opinion here, but does this matter? Not really. This case angered many but in particular those whose inherent mistrust and hostility toward the professional middle classes compelled them toward an almost uncontrolled flood of fury and abuse in the media. They spoke with a profound sense of self righteousness.
And the case was opened and the case was found to be non answerable i.e. there is no case to answer. Legal definitions are in the end what we must all abide by. If there is now a change in the law then some good may have come of it all. Perhaps a new attitude toward the behaviour of parenting in a foreign country.
The child neglect:
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91210-1293569,00.html?&lid=NEWS_TAB_MCCANNS_ESCAPE_CHILD_NEGLECT_CHARGES&lpos=TAB_CONTENT
Retired solicitor Tony Bennett has failed in his bid to issue a summons against the pair.
The summons claimed the two doctors neglected their three children by leaving them in their holiday apartment in Portugal when they went out for dinner in the evenings.
It was during the evening of May 3 that Madeleine disappeared.
But Leicester Magistrates’ Court has decided to turn down the summons request.
The decision was announced by the judicial communications office at the High Court.
A spokesman told Sky News: “After careful consideration, the request to issue a summons against Gerald and Kate McCann for alleged offences contrary to section 1 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 has been refused as it is clear this court does not have the necessary jurisdiction.
“All applications are considered in two stages.
“The first stage is whether the court has the jurisdiction to issue a summons, the second is if there is sufficient evidence.
“As with this application, if the first stage is not passed the second stage is not considered.”
Mr Bennett, of Chippingfield, Harlow, said before the court’s decision: “I’d already got some concerns about the case. I’ve researched it quite thoroughly over the last six to eight weeks.”
The way I understand this Patricia is that the case was not “examined” as you say, but simply dismissed because: this court does not have the necessary jurisdiction.
Now I’m not a native speaker and my English is obviously limited – but that is how I understand the article.
The consistency is to be questioned – how often is often enough? The McCanns and their friends said openly that leaving the children alone was something they had tried on their previous holiday together – and it worked. That is why they carried on leaving them alone in Portugal. And Patricia – it doesn’t really matter how safe and secure the Warner resort seemed – the possibility of an accident or a child waking up has nothing to do with that.
And I strongly disagree about “single parents” being “capable of consistent child neglect”, can you point me to the statistics you mention?
The lifestyle:
Patricia – as far as I know Kate McCann only worked few hours a week and thus can hardly be described as a “working professional”. But having both successful career AND children is very demanding and I think that Kate staying at home with her children is very admirable. And no, I do not believe that most “working professionals” have the same habit of leaving their children alone.
I am not personally influenced by the British class syndrome – I live in Denmark where the political consensus is indeed based on exactly the opposite: to limit the class division in society. So I might be seeing this case in a different way.
I do not see the debate you mention as a “debate about class”. I believe that those people, who are dissatisfied with the media coverage, are commenting on the level of PR control, spin, political influence and the rather xenophobic attitude towards the Portuguese police force. Yes, this case has indeed angered many – but the anger is not against working professionals, it is against parents who were directly responsible for the fate of their daughter. Parents, whose education enabled them to be proactive in the search of their daughter by setting up a fund they used for paying their mortgage, by going to visit Spain when a credible sighting was just reported in Belgium, by refusing to answer important questions the police had asked them.
Martina there is some confusion here in that I was not specifically referring to the Tony Bennett attempt to issue a summons, but to the initial examination by the Leicestershire authorities on the possibility of bringing charges of child neglect against them. I am fully aware of the legalities of the Bennett case. I understand he is still trying to go ahead now within the European Courts.
As to consistency….I am sure this has already been defined within the Act itself. Whatever this may be, I refer you to my last statement above, that a change in the law as regards how parents behave on holiday in foreign countries may well now be advisable and beneficial for all. But I am no man´s judge and executioner Martina. I am too full of flaws to cast a stone, I prefer to put my trust in the authorities involved and allow them to decide when enough is enough and what constitutes wilful neglect.
As for single mothers “living on the dole who go for a drink in the pub leaving children unattended ” - those were your words originally, not mine, I only added the defining word consistently - I would prefer not to deal in such cliched generalisations. And I did use the words “perceived as” deliberately. As it happens it is not what I myself believe as a proven fact, it is however, an image that the more lurid of the newspaper headlines often employ. The undereducated and the underpriveleged are ignorant of the law or simply wilfully blind to it……that is how the media and the public tend to think. Not me.
I would add that I am not aware that the McCanns have in fact been paying their mortgage with the proceeds of the Madeleine Fund. From what I understand the necessity to pay his mortgage is what prompted Gerry to return to work.
Your other criticisms in your last sentence do not do you any credit.
We could go on…..and on Martina. I would prefer to say we agree to disagree on many things. I shall not reply to any other letter.
You may have the last word if you wish Martina, but I have said enough. Enough that is, on the main question - the Media´s influence upon this case.