It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Newspapers say sorry to McCanns

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 04:36 AM
link   

Newspapers say sorry to McCanns


www.news.com.au

TWO British newspapers published front page apologies on Wednesday to the parents of missing toddler Madeleine McCann for suggesting the couple were responsible for the child's disappearance last year.

The apologies in the Daily Express and the Daily Star were, along with "very substantial" damages paid, the result of complaints filed by the McCanns over coverage of the missing child in the two newspapers and their Sunday sister editions.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 04:36 AM
link   
Upon reading the headline i thought.

"Well that was nice of them."

Then reading the article it appears as though the reason for the apology was part of complaints coming from the family with damages also being paid.

I changed my feeling, i was not so convinced it was the right thing. I feel unsure as to whether a newspaper should apologise for stories they run. Sure they can do it if they want, however, is it ok if they are under duress?

I guess it also needs to be explored whether a newspaper should be able to run a story without supporting evidence.

www.news.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 05:12 AM
link   
reply to post by SilentShadow
 


The damages, if it helps, are being paid into the "Find Maddie Fund", not to line the pockets of the parents. Although, some may see the parents as using the fund to enjoy a jet set lifestyle, but thats a matter of opinion.

Newspapers are allowed to print whatever they like in stories, but they obviously run the risk of being sued for hefty sums if those people choose too. So the risk to the newspaper is financial if they choose to run these false or misleading articles.


CX

posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 05:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by SilentShadow

I guess it also needs to be explored whether a newspaper should be able to run a story without supporting evidence.



Well if they do that then we will be totaly stuck for any news i guess, and if they do that in the papers, will they do that with the tv news channels?That will be 90% of them out of business too!

Poor Fox News will have to call it a day
, and as most of the US apparently takes notice of Fox, maybe we'll finaly see thier viewers migrate across to ATS and discover whats really going on.


We can all hope i guess.

CX.



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 05:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

The damages, if it helps, are being paid into the "Find Maddie Fund", not to line the pockets of the parents.


Iirc this fund has been used in the past to pay the parents "expenses"? including their mortgage ect? also where did they get the money for the legal action? i believe it was stated that they had been forced back to work because they had bills mounting up and yet now they suddenly can afford legal action against several daily newspapers which can't have been cheap? or was the Maddie fund used to pay for this as well?



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 05:43 AM
link   
reply to post by solidshot
 


Costs would be met by the losing party in court, in this case, the newspapers. You don't pay your legal bills until the litigation is over.



posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 08:28 AM
link   
reply to post by SilentShadow
 


but who in their right minds would believe what the tabloids say?
they are mostly either heavily biased or a cut job with small percentage being facts and the rest being the opinion of the paper and the stand they take.




top topics



 
1

log in

join