About me
Bookshop

Get new posts by email.

About me

BBC’s Madeleine McCann coverage indefensible

Peter Horrocks has written an interesting piece on his BBC blog defending the way the organisation has told the story of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance. Unfortunately, his defence makes little sense. Some selected extracts…

Often we’re not able to give viewers any new information and that’s one of the things I spend a lot of time talking to my journalists about, to focus on facts … I know that many other TV and radio networks have been absolutely extraordinary, always talking about it in terms of sympathy and their feelings

I am incomplete agreement with Mr Horrocks here: Reportage of the facts, not of feelings, is exactly where BBC News should be focussed in this instance.

Questions have been raised over why we used a helicopter to cover the McCanns’ journey home from East Midlands airport.

An understandable question: Coverage of a car driving from one place to another has apparently little news value, and adds few new ‘facts’. So why did the BBC cover it?

The McCanns’ return was an important emotional moment in this story, and something which we felt we needed to cover for continuous news.

Eh? The BBC, which Mr Horrocks says focuses entirely on facts, and indeed is better than its rivals because of its emotional detachment from the story, felt the need to give continuous coverage to a car journey because it was an “emotional moment in this story”.

I sense a gap in the logic.

This post was filed under: Media, News and Comment.

Recently published posts

Winifred Carney / 05 November 2024

Sincere and true / 04 November 2024

Tick tock, McKee Clock / 03 November 2024

Apostrophe / 02 November 2024

The bells, the bells / 01 November 2024

Happy Hallowe’en / 31 October 2024




Random posts from the archive

‘Racing Ahead’ / 15 May 2024

What’s on… / 14 February 2019

Photo-a-day 16: Teddy bear / 16 January 2012

Twelve things I have learned / 19 May 2003

Abortion rates hit all-time high / 30 July 2005

Banco Nacional Ultramarino / 09 September 2024




Comments and responses

Comment from hampshire terrier


    13.41, 11/09/2007

I absolutely agree with your sentiment. I have found the vast majority of the case coverage disgusting and blinkered.

We have seen people who know none of the parties involved claiming the police are framing the McCanns, we have seen forensic experts denouncing evidence that has not even been seen by them and we have seen a wave of sympathy for suspected killers in what would be one of the most sinister tales of our time should any guilt be proven.

For ‘impartial’ BBC reports to be constructed in this way is upsetting, let’s have some objectivity!! You would think they could learn from their mistakes in coverage of the Iraq war yet it is still tabloid-style journalism on a state-funded platform.


Trackback from another website



Trackback received at 16:26 on 11th September 2007.

This post has been referenced by another website:
BBC’s Madeleine McCann coverage indefensible


Comment from Mike P


    08.51, 12/09/2007

I personally believe that they are as guilty as a man found with his finger in his dog’s ass who then denies owning a dog


Comment from garth


    12.11, 12/09/2007

here here, I agree that this slack coverage is pretty symptomatic of the low quality of journalism about today (aside from bloggers of course)


Comment from Matthew


    14.21, 12/09/2007

Comment from sjhoward (author of the post)


    17.59, 26/09/2007

Thanks for your comments, everyone.

I’m glad that I’m not the only one who feels this way about coverage of the story – there does seem to be some consensus. Perhaps at some point the BBC will learn that in their quest to become ‘accessible’ they’ve gone too far, and reign the journalists back in a bit.




Compose a new comment

I'm not taking comments on my blog any more, so I'm afraid the opportunity to add to this discussion has passed.




The content of this site is copyright protected by a Creative Commons License, with some rights reserved. All trademarks, images and logos remain the property of their respective owners. The accuracy of information on this site is in no way guaranteed. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author. No responsibility can be accepted for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information provided by this site. Information about cookies and the handling of emails submitted for the 'new posts by email' service can be found in the privacy policy. This site uses affiliate links: if you buy something via a link on this site, I might get a small percentage in commission. Here's hoping.