egafd.com

A lot said about the McCann's and why they get more attention than, how shall we say a less fortunate family, in the same situation:



Not what you are, it's who you know...

Personally I don't know any parent who wouldn't do their best for their kids and if in the same situation wouldn't use /get the contacts they can.

I have been saying the same for years.

Am I missing something? Is this a subtle joke which I have missed?

What has this got to do with the McCanns?

He has:
1. 20 years experience at the BBC as a reporter and presenter etc. so he had a high profile for decades before he worked with the McCanns.
2. He has already worked with the Tories.
3 He has loads of experience in public affairs and as a spokesman.
4. He has had prior experience as a Director of the government's Media Monitoring Unit.

Why shouldn't he be selected as a Tory candidate?

I maybe wrong buti thought. The ops point was that this may help to explain wh y the mcanns got so much media attention by employing this bloke.

Gentleman wrote:

> I maybe wrong buti thought. The ops point was that this may
> help to explain wh y the mcanns got so much media attention by
> employing this bloke.

Yes, was a bit obvious but sadly, while no real shock, clearly not to some.

Well if that is what you actually mean, it still doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Mitchell joined in I think Sept 07.

The McCanns had obviously done shedloads prior to this appointment. This from Wikipedia.

"Around 500 million people watched an appeal screened at the FA Cup Final in 2007. Rehling writes that some British tabloids had Madeleine in the headlines every day after the disappearance for almost six months; Sky News had her appear as a menu option. Her parents made a decision early on to interact with the media, and set up a campaign to raise awareness and funds, Madeleine's Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned Ltd.

The Fund's website reportedly received 58 million hits and 16,000 messages of support by 18 May, only two days after its launch. Over ?1,095,000 had been raised by 30 October 2007. In July 2007 there was a cinema advert throughout the country about the disappearance. The McCanns had an audience with Pope Benedict XVI in May 2007, and visited the United States and certain key European and North African countries"

This was all before Clarence Mitchell.

When Mitchell was employed by the McCanns, this was round about the time when things went bad for the McCanns with them being described as "suspects" by the Portuguese police. They started to get vilified by a substantial component of the British press.

In short McCanns proved themselves before Mitchell of being more than capable of keeping their name and Madeleine's in the public eye and have done the same ever since.

I don't think Mitchell made much difference in the publicity stakes. The McCanns have proved themselves skilled operators at doing that.

And very good luck to them!!

I suspect that the continuing media interest in the disappearance of the McCanns has nowt to do with Mitchell but much more to do with the nature of the unsolved disappearance of a very young girl in the world of 24 hr media with television, web and newspapers desperate for anything new or invented for that matter.

Here is another case which is still in the public eye even though the mother has none of the funding and media expertise of the McCanns.



A story in the Daily Mirror this month, 22 years after a little child went missing. And there have been many more about this child over the years.

I thought the McCanns got attention by virtue of the enormity of their daughter being abducted then more scrutiny levelled at them for their lack of parenting skills (which is always a favourite of the media looking for a good story) they reaped the whirlwind and thus...It is what it has become

The McCanns couldnt even use the loo without finding a reporter with a mic and camera with snorkels on trying to get the scoop on them (pardon the pun)