ChatterBank6 mins ago
I Thought They Liked Publicity
26 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by SnookerPlayer. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
If you read the piece, it says "A friend of the couple claims ..."
which translates as - The McCann's have made no direct comment either way on this subject - so you can't really accuse them of looking for publicity and then being annoyed when they get it.
From what I have seen, The McCann's have endured publicity as a means to an end in keeping their daughter's disappearance in the public eye - which once again does not equate to 'liking publcity'.
which translates as - The McCann's have made no direct comment either way on this subject - so you can't really accuse them of looking for publicity and then being annoyed when they get it.
From what I have seen, The McCann's have endured publicity as a means to an end in keeping their daughter's disappearance in the public eye - which once again does not equate to 'liking publcity'.
SnookerPlayer - //Not annoyed, just bemused by their efforts to keep in the public eye at any and every opportunity. //
If you read what I posted - the McCann's have not said anything, so they are not keeping themselves in the public eye.
If an unsubstantiated source wants to comment on something they are supposed to have said, there is noting at all they can do about that - if they even knew about it at all.
If you read what I posted - the McCann's have not said anything, so they are not keeping themselves in the public eye.
If an unsubstantiated source wants to comment on something they are supposed to have said, there is noting at all they can do about that - if they even knew about it at all.
SnookerPlayer - //It is naïve to think the mccans knew nothing about this programme, and did not discuss it with "friends" //
That's not what I am saying.
If you believe that 'a friend' spoke to the paper about what the McCann's thought, then you don't know how tabloid papers work.
If you want to publish something like "A friend of the Queen is concerned that Prince Philip is wearing her dresses ..." you can - because that is an non-attributable source, and papers use it all the time to print something that will cause a stir, and from which there can be no comeback.
In cases like this the 'friend' does not exist - except in the mind of the hack who wrote the story.
That's not what I am saying.
If you believe that 'a friend' spoke to the paper about what the McCann's thought, then you don't know how tabloid papers work.
If you want to publish something like "A friend of the Queen is concerned that Prince Philip is wearing her dresses ..." you can - because that is an non-attributable source, and papers use it all the time to print something that will cause a stir, and from which there can be no comeback.
In cases like this the 'friend' does not exist - except in the mind of the hack who wrote the story.
SnookerPlayer - //If you believe that 'a friend' spoke to the paper about what the McCann's thought, then you don't know how tabloid papers work.
I was given to understand you were against patronising remarks. //
It was not my intention to be patronising - if that was how it came across, please accept my apologies.
I was given to understand you were against patronising remarks. //
It was not my intention to be patronising - if that was how it came across, please accept my apologies.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles15 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles17 mins ago
Crosswords50 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles72 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.