Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Antonia on Mon 15 Sep 2014, 6:11 pm



There were 26 reviews of the hard cover version on Amazon when I looked just now : 10 give 5 stars, 2 give 2 stars and 14 give one star (you have to give a minimum of one).

Now in reviewing I think the reader should compare the cover blurb to the reality. They should also give detail to justify their review especially when giving all 5 stars or just one.

Do the reviewers do this? Those who give one or two stars generally do, but the 10 reviews giving the 5 stars are very low on specifics:

Extracts from these 5 star reviews:

‘really detailed study of this tragic case and very well researched.’

’this is a book for independent thinkers’

‘One star reviews are one sided and too bad to be true’

Suberb book backed up by years of research. Examines in depth all the available evidence’

Most of these reviews (ie negative ones) make absolutely no sense’

‘a must read for those who can’t be doing with traipsing thro the files’

‘thoroughly well researched; impartial’

In the only review where the reviewer was more specific he said the authors deconstructed the forensic evidence in laymans terms showing that the McCanns had no case to answer. He also said they quote the files in date order showing there was never any real evidence against the family.

I hope all members will post a review if and when they read this book. I have to admit I can’t bring myself to buy it but may try to get it from the library.
avatar
Antonia

Posts : 418
Join date : 2014-08-26

Back to top Go down

Amazon customer reviews

Post  Freedom on Mon 15 Sep 2014, 10:35 pm

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Looking-Madeleine-Anthony-Summers/dp/147221160X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1410816831&sr=1-1&keywords=looking+for+madeleine#customerReviews
avatar
Freedom
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 13615
Join date : 2014-08-17
Age : 102
Location : The nearest darkened room

Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Guest on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 8:00 am

My suggestion would be..don't buy the book, lets not let another person make money from this poor child, we all know what the basic premise of the book is, and of course it has been serialized in a national newspaper, so why bother?

I would be surprised if the libraries even bother to buy it...

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Guest on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 9:35 am

susible wrote:My suggestion would be..don't buy the book, lets not let another person make money from this poor child, we all know what the basic premise of the book  is, and of course it has been serialized in a national newspaper, so why bother?

I would be surprised if the libraries even bother to buy it...

I've bought it already, but I agree - don't buy it.  For one thing it's total rubbish, the authors have done no investigative work at all, everything in the book you can find in press reports, the PJ files, and Kate's book.  What you won't find is any single thing that points the finger of suspicion at the McCanns.  You'll also find complete untruths, fiction, lies.  An example of this is the claim that the GNR officer sat Gerry and Russell O'Brien down and asked them to write the handwritten timelines, which is utterly contradicted by that same officer's statement.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Antonia on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 9:44 am

Unfortunately some more 5 star reviews since I made the opening post tho the one star still outnumber them.Any member who has bought it should do a detailed honest review.

The authors have a marketing team behind them and I am sure libraries will buy it especially as they are established writers who were apparently shortlisted for a pulitzer prize.
avatar
Antonia

Posts : 418
Join date : 2014-08-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Guest on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 9:46 am

Ooofft...your poor eyes (and logical brain) trawling through that wlbts..you're a martyr to the cause...

Incredible though that this piece of junk can be feted as the "definitive" account of the investigation...on similar lines to Kate's account of the "truth"

My own feeling on this book is that although S&S claim they only had one meeting with the McCanns, it probably was a collaboration, and from the McCanns point of view, it was an attempt to "re-affirm" their "innocence" and from S&S they probably thought they could make a lot of money on the basis that the "Maddie" story sells...looks like they were wrong though, because I think the public are just fed up now and view the McCanns with more suspicion than ever.

I wonder what DCI Redwood and his team think of it...raised eyebrows all round I imagine.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Freedom on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 9:52 am

Have there been any other instances where books (whether good or bad) have been published when cases are still open and unsolved?

Obviously this excludes historical events like the Jack the Ripper murders where it is too late to put anyone on trial.
avatar
Freedom
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 13615
Join date : 2014-08-17
Age : 102
Location : The nearest darkened room

Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Guest on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 9:53 am

Antonia wrote:Unfortunately some more 5 star reviews since I made the opening post tho the one star still outnumber them.Any member who has bought it should do a detailed honest review.

The authors have a marketing team behind them and I am sure libraries will buy it especially as they are established writers who were apparently shortlisted for a pulitzer prize.

Not so sure about the libraries buying it, I used to work for a local authority library service and as times are tough with all of the cutbacks, the team who decide what to buy in terms of what will be most requested and therefore loaned out is what determines their choice...so far they've sold 18 books, not exactly a best seller.

I wouldn't worry about the 5 star reviews either as it seems that so far, the only people who have bought it are those with an interest in the case,whether they be pro or anti, so all that tells me, is that another pro has submitted a review. Overall though, I don't think the public care that much and as they have read the salient parts in the newspaper serialization and would probably come to the conclusion that it's the same drivel they've been reading in the Daily Mail for the last 18 months

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Guest on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 9:55 am

Freedom wrote:Have there been any other instances where books (whether good or bad) have been published when cases are still open and unsolved?

Obviously this excludes historical events like the Jack the Ripper murders where it is too late to put anyone on trial.

I can't think of any Freedom. That was the first thing that crossed my mind when I saw the book was to be published, what on earth do Operation Grange think about this "definitive" account of the investigation, that they have yet to conclude.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Poe on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 10:00 am

susible wrote:Ooofft...your poor eyes (and logical brain) trawling through that wlbts..you're a martyr to the cause...

Incredible though that this piece of junk can be feted as the "definitive" account of the investigation...on similar lines to Kate's account of the "truth"

My own feeling on this book is that although S&S claim they only had one meeting with the McCanns, it probably was a collaboration, and from the McCanns point of view, it was an attempt to "re-affirm" their "innocence" and from S&S they probably thought they could make a lot of money on the basis that the "Maddie" story sells...looks like they were wrong though, because I think the public are just fed up now and view the McCanns with more suspicion than ever.

I wonder what DCI Redwood and his team think of it...raised eyebrows all round I imagine.

This book will cause some bruising to both egos and bank balances.

The "definitive" account of the as yet unsolved crime of the century, with the iconic child at its heart, written by famous prizewinning investigative journalists.

The book that was printed in the hundreds and sold in single digits - it's not even going to cover its costs.



_________________
“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say."
George R. R. Martin, A Clash of Kings.
avatar
Poe

Posts : 914
Join date : 2014-09-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Andrew on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 10:11 am

IMO this book (although not read it), has Team McCann all over it.

They couldn't write it themselves. E.g Kate part 2. So approached an author with or did have credibility and brokered some deal. Summer getting on a bit thought he was in line for a nice retirement fund and chose the money (or though by the looks of it won't make a sausage) over his own credibility and status. I'm sure he totally underestimated the whole magnitude of it all. Scored a massive own goal and in hindsight, I bet he wished he never put pen to paper now.

It was clearly aimed to come out when the damages trial concluded. I should imagine Team McCann wanted it postponed but the publishers refused.

Backfired on the lot of them. Great stuff.
avatar
Andrew

Posts : 13087
Join date : 2014-08-29

Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Guest on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 10:16 am

Andrew wrote:IMO this book (although not read it), has Team McCann all over it.

They couldn't write it themselves. E.g Kate part 2. So approached an author with or did have credibility and brokered some deal. Summer getting on a bit thought he was in line for a nice retirement fund and chose the money (or though by the looks of it won't make a sausage) over his own credibility and status. I'm sure he totally underestimated the whole magnitude of it all. Scored a massive own goal and in hindsight, I bet he wished he never put pen to paper now.

It was clearly aimed to come out when the damages trial concluded. I should imagine Team McCann wanted it postponed but the publishers refused.

Backfired on the lot of them. Great stuff.

cheers well said Andrew..totally agree

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Antonia on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 10:38 am

Here's my take on it.

The authors claim the idea for the book came from their young daughter whose middle name is madeleine asked them how long they would look for her if she was missing. I don't buy that. I'd even question if her middle name is madeleine!

Authors approached to take on project and favourable financial terms offered. The big question is who approached them. If the Mccanns are behind it, the approach would have come from an agent of theirs who these fine investigative journalists could not connect to the couple.

Authors approach their publisher and pitch the idea. Publisher accepts as they have sold books before and case is high profile. Advance agreed.

Now Summers and swan won't lose as under my scenario they have a payment from whoever approached them and an advance from their publisher. Advances are not returnable. If sales are poor there may be no royalties as the advance would have to be covered first.  There would have been payments for the 'serialisation' of the book etc - not sure whether the publisher gets all that or the money is split with the authors.

The publishing company stands to lose as it may have printed a large no of copies anticipating good sales and it has spent a lot on marketing/pre publicity. Some of this publicity may generate sales eg Judy of Richard and Judy praising the book.  And has Lorraine kelly yet suggested it should win the Booker prize?  She could do it, which would be hilarious as that prize is for fiction.

My concern is that whoever is really behind this will stop at nothing to discredit those who critisise the book and one way to do this is to organise 5 star book reviews.  New reviews may push older (critical) ones off the screen.

So I urge wlbts and others who have read it to review it.
avatar
Antonia

Posts : 418
Join date : 2014-08-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Guest on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 10:50 am

Antonia wrote:
So I urge wlbts and others who have read it to review it.

Will be doing that shortly, both here and on Amazon Smile

A thought that has just occurred to me is that writing this book before the investigation has finished makes no sense. Surely a book about the investigation when it has completed - whatever the conclusion - would sell more copies, and have something new to say. What is the point of (selectively) rehashing information from the public domain right now?

I have absolutely no doubt about the real purpose of this book. I'm guessing that the idea for the book began at almost exactly the same time as Operation Grange began its investigation. I believe that the purpose of this book is to replace the awful 'Book of Kate', which was horribly misjudged.

Create enough doubt, and if the evidence is not strong enough you can avoid conviction.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Lorraine on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 11:51 am

wlbts wrote:
Antonia wrote:
So I urge wlbts and others who have read it to review it.

Will be doing that shortly, both here and on Amazon Smile

A thought that has just occurred to me is that writing this book before the investigation has finished makes no sense.  Surely a book about the investigation when it has completed - whatever the conclusion - would sell more copies, and have something new to say.  What is the point of (selectively) rehashing information from the public domain right now?

I have absolutely no doubt about the real purpose of this book.  I'm guessing that the idea for the book began at almost exactly the same time as Operation Grange began its investigation.  I believe that the purpose of this book is to replace the awful 'Book of Kate', which was horribly misjudged.

Create enough doubt, and if the evidence is not strong enough you can avoid conviction.

And that is a very good review in itself wlbts.
avatar
Lorraine

Posts : 39
Join date : 2014-08-28

Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Guest on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 2:47 pm

Taking my previous point a step further - why not wait until the investigation has been completed to create doubt?  There's a simple answer to that one - there just wouldn't be time to get a book out.  So it has to be done now, without knowing the outcome of the investigation.  Which is why I believe Redwood is keeping his cards very close to his chest - as should every investigating officer - to deny the McCanns and their legal team the opportunity to develop reasonable doubt, or at least, minimize that opportunity.

The book is not going to make any money.  Surely the only purpose it could possibly serve is to influence the outcome of a trial.  To us, the book is the same old rubbish we've been reading for years.  But to a jury it will look genuine enough to create doubt, and the prosecution would have a tough job on their hands countering it.

I have to say that this book seems to me like an act of desperation.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Guest on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 3:37 pm

I have read all the literature published so far, to help me find out what probably happened to Madeleine, so I guess I should read this in order to be certain of what issues have not been addressed [ I have a very good idea, based on the intro which did not point to the starting point of an open mind, then through analysis and hard research with cross referencing knowns with claims, reaching a logical conclusion]

I will post my review under the name of zhivago, which is the name I used to post my review of Kate's book.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Cristobell on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 9:46 pm

wlbts wrote:Taking my previous point a step further - why not wait until the investigation has been completed to create doubt?  There's a simple answer to that one - there just wouldn't be time to get a book out.  So it has to be done now, without knowing the outcome of the investigation.  Which is why I believe Redwood is keeping his cards very close to his chest - as should every investigating officer - to deny the McCanns and their legal team the opportunity to develop reasonable doubt, or at least, minimize that opportunity.

The book is not going to make any money.  Surely the only purpose it could possibly serve is to influence the outcome of a trial.  To us, the book is the same old rubbish we've been reading for years.  But to a jury it will look genuine enough to create doubt, and the prosecution would have a tough job on their hands countering it.

I have to say that this book seems to me like an act of desperation.


I agree this book is an act of desperation. In my opinion, there is a small, hard core, of people working proactively to give the McCanns a squeaky clean reputation and reinforce their victimhood. It may prove to be the foundation of any future 'the parents are innocent' campaign. From the word go, the McCanns have carried this case along on a huge wave of public support. It worked phenomenally in the aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance, and they have kept an active publicity department to keep it going ever since, though not quite successfully.

I see this book, as the latest in a long line of smellymen, binmen, prowlers, burglars etc, another story planted by the McCann media machine to keep the supporters (whats left of them) onside. In the early days Kate foresaw rioting in the streets in they were arrested - the public simply wouldn't stand for it! They continue to claim mass support by buying ridiculous numbers of 'likes' every time the webmaster (Kate) puts up a post. Their 'mass' support is as fake as the abduction story.

_________________
http://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk/
avatar
Cristobell

Posts : 672
Join date : 2014-08-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Guest on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 9:56 pm

Cristobell wrote:
I agree this book is an act of desperation.  In my opinion, there is a small, hard core, of people working proactively to give the McCanns a squeaky clean reputation and reinforce their victimhood.  It may prove to be the foundation of any future 'the parents are innocent' campaign. From the word go, the McCanns have carried this case along on a huge wave of public support.  It worked phenomenally in the aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance, and they have kept an active publicity department to keep it going ever since, though not quite successfully.

I see this book, as the latest in a long line of smellymen, binmen, prowlers, burglars etc, another story planted by the McCann media machine to keep the supporters (whats left of them) onside.  In the early days Kate foresaw rioting in the streets in they were arrested - the public simply wouldn't stand for it!  They continue to claim mass support by buying ridiculous numbers of 'likes' every time the webmaster (Kate) puts up a post.  Their 'mass' support is as fake as the abduction story.  

The book simply collates all of those ridiculous stories into one volume, it doesn't add anything new.

And if the investigation is a whitewash and this book is a part of it, that stretches the bounds of credibility. The book would come after the investigation, to tell us all exactly how innocent the McCanns were after all.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Cristobell on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 10:21 pm

wlbts wrote:
Cristobell wrote:
I agree this book is an act of desperation.  In my opinion, there is a small, hard core, of people working proactively to give the McCanns a squeaky clean reputation and reinforce their victimhood.  It may prove to be the foundation of any future 'the parents are innocent' campaign. From the word go, the McCanns have carried this case along on a huge wave of public support.  It worked phenomenally in the aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance, and they have kept an active publicity department to keep it going ever since, though not quite successfully.

I see this book, as the latest in a long line of smellymen, binmen, prowlers, burglars etc, another story planted by the McCann media machine to keep the supporters (whats left of them) onside.  In the early days Kate foresaw rioting in the streets in they were arrested - the public simply wouldn't stand for it!  They continue to claim mass support by buying ridiculous numbers of 'likes' every time the webmaster (Kate) puts up a post.  Their 'mass' support is as fake as the abduction story.  

The book simply collates all of those ridiculous stories into one volume, it doesn't add anything new.

And if the investigation is a whitewash and this book is a part of it, that stretches the bounds of credibility.  The book would come after the investigation, to tell us all exactly how innocent the McCanns were after all.


Absolutely with you on that WLBTS! They would have waited for the investigation to end when they would have had a guaranteed bestseller if the McCanns were found innocent. Also, as Blacksmith pointed out, if they had anything new or anything of substance from SY pointing to the McCanns' innocent, they would have included it. This is a rush job before the result of the investigation is known.

_________________
http://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk/
avatar
Cristobell

Posts : 672
Join date : 2014-08-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Guest on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 10:54 pm

Oh dear, just saw the S and S follow on twitter list. The esteemed duo follow Barbara1957 and Father Jack. That's their credibility gone for me !

They also follow the vile fanatic Tigerloaf of the hateful stuff about Cristobell.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Scrants on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 11:19 pm

Here is a brilliant reply by Vten to a "5*" post by "Tim Buckley" on Amazon. I wonder who Vten is? He can certainly write. (Sorry about the length but it is worth reading)


2 of 6 people found the following review helpful
See your doctor - not a quack., 16 Sep 2014
By Tim Buckley
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: Looking For Madeleine (Kindle Edition)
Once upon a time - a long time ago - my brother went missing. He was 5 or so. My parents were more and more desperate every 5 minutes but after 2 hours he was found, safe and sound.
We hear about so many desperately tragic stories involving abductions. The ones about children are of course the most harrowing. They are supposed to be our future and futures are not supposed be cut short. If it is through "God's will" it's difficult enough...
The Madeleine McCann disappearance is the most highlighted one in our time. Plenty of other similar stories do not at all reach our attention, or at most to a small extend. The parent's heartbreak in all these unknown stories is obviously no less than that of the McCann's.
In today's world of mass media and super fast spread of information and opinion, it is inevitable that unchecked facts and moronic opinions find their way faster than light to those who are receptive to them. In communities similar things happen in the case of witch hunts (we all know about McCarthy-ism) - where ignorance and unchecked facts could lead to the demise of innocent people and the world of medicine - where 10 quacks have more treatments than one proper doctor can ever dream up. Quackery is a business still practised by many and making victims everywhere. The victims are receptive... some of them are even considered intelligent.
I choose not to be treated by a quack. I also choose not to listen to the quacks in the world of politics and crime. I choose to believe that Elvis is really dead and that the US Government was not secretly behind the attack on the Twin Towers. I have no time for attention seekers and mad conspiracy theorists. And I am grateful that our hospitals in general are filled with good, well-educated doctors and not with quacks.
If only the same standards applied to the world of publishing and its mirror world of reviews, where well-educated, serious and commended writers can be lambasted by the "Ignoranti" and journalistic quacks, because they dared write about "Maddie" and either dismiss or disagree - implicitly - with "quack-ist" opinions and theories.
I got this book because since I read "Official & Confidential: The Secret Life of J Edgar Hoover" and "The Eleventh Day", I am impressed with Summers and Swan.
They are the journalistic equivalent of proper doctors and not Quacks. That's why I got "Looking for Madeleine".
However, I don't do Idolatry either, so while I have great admiration for the team, I don't rate this a 5 star book automatically. I do however believe that anyone who is genuinely interested in how the whole workings of various authorities can hamper the efficient investigation a dramatic case, should buy this book.
Just don't expect the proper doctors to come up with a quack's solution to the disappearance.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
Report abuse | Permalink


Comments
Track comments by e-mail
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-1 of 1 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 16 Sep 2014 17:18:42 BDT
Vten says:
Well, Tim Buckley, I almost felt like a proud father hearing 'Hallelujah' sung for the first time when I read your review.

It certainly was eye-opening and provokes some serious thought.

I was so impressed, in fact, that I went looking to see what else you've reviewed in order to find out what you think on other topics.

Funny thing though...

Not only did I notice that the only reviews in your collection were dated two days ago, including reviews for a number of books which are far older than this week's 'hot topic' titles, but I also noticed that they didn't say very much. In fact, they didn't mention any detail at all. None. Excise them from all connection to the titles they are associated with, and they're surprisingly generic... almost like the person writing them hadn't actually read them, certainly never connected with them, and was trying to make it sound to the rest of the English class and the teacher that he'd been doing his homework and had lots of good thoughts about what he'd read.

This was especially a nice touch, that instead of writing your own review for one title you, only two days ago, read through some other reviews for it, found one which was two years old, and then posted a comment which said in paraphrase 'I don't need to write my own review for this, because I agree with everything this reviewer said.'

I won't think too deeply about the interesting review for the outdated, underpowered and decidedly average computer that you paid over the odds for at the weekend after your own computer 'exploded' on your desk the weekend previous, but I'm glad that when you ordered it that weekend, it only took until Tuesday to arrive. I do appreciate Amazon's rapid delivery service almost as much as I appreciate their honest reviewers.

Thankfully I have strong faith in humanity, because certainly any lesser person than I might begin to think that you had arranged to write this most detailed 'glowing report' on this title by agenda, and that in order to not get trimmed by Amazon when the pruning of the trolls goes down, you had concocted some fake reviews in order to look like an active participant in the Amazon Review community.

Clearly that cannot be the case, and so I welcome your comments, because I too have a story...

I was present, much more recently than 'long ago', when a child in my holiday group went missing. They didn't go missing from an unattended apartment. They didn't go missing from childcare facilities. Their parents were very present when they vanished. They were included in all the family activities, watched like a hawk throughout, and their parents didn't go out eating, drinking and attending quiz night while they cried themselves to sleep every night, alone and in an unsecured apartment in a strange holiday resort. They actually didn't go missing in anything resembling avoidable circumstances, or as a result of anything resembling neglect. Instead, they darted the wrong direction in a crowded place, letting go of the hand they were holding on to, and became disorientated and wandered further and further, looking to objects and locations that piqued their interest. Thankfully they were found a few minutes later, safe and sound. Curiously, their mum and dad cannot stop telling people, months on, how guilty they felt for that moment of lapse, and how they would never again be lacking in vigilance. But then, their mum and dad also insist on having family meals, family activities, keeping babysitters to a minimum, and being present all the time on family holidays. The one thing that couple, my friends, do not do is look at the McCann's and say 'it's only sheer luck that we're not just like them today... oh there but for the grace of God...'

I'll tell you what else...

When that child disappeared, no one screamed... no one threw a tantrum... no one began immediately ringing the press in another country... no one rang the foreign office... no one even screamed for the police to come... no one shouted 'the f****** b******* have taken her', no one began pointing in random directions and claiming that some stranger must have spirited them away... Know why? Because in the moment of shock, disbelief kicks in. The brain, courtesy of the flow of adrenaline and other hormones, prompts the 'fight or flight' mode, which is universally acknowledged as utterly precluding calculations, elaborate reckonings, wild hypothesising, and theorising - all of which take time. Instead what is provoked is the most basic reaction of all... to look, personally, for YOUR child, as YOUR responsibility, in YOUR charge, as if YOU and YOU ALONE had the ONLY hope and duty of finding that child. It takes several moments of burning the adrenaline and diluting the other hormones and calming the heart rate before you're even capable of something more, something which does not come as a 'reaction' but as a 'realisation' (a process of rationality, not impulse) - that something is very wrong, cannot be solved imminently, has utterly escaped your control, and you need help.

To further highlight just how true to profile this accounting of reactions actually is, it is common policy of most Western police departments to be wary of, and not panicked by the frantic finger pointing and theorising of parents and guardians, whether they are agonised in their fear or not, and to allow a due process to take place by which hysterical and knee-jerk reactions and overblown responses (call out the helicopters, close the borders, 'they' could be getting away) are avoided UNLESS there is evidence, physical or eyewitness, which highlights a scenario of abduction. Why? Because the vast majority of children which parents would report as 'missing' are either found not far away, unharmed and wandered, or are in the custody of someone close to them and known to the parents, as was the case earlier this year in Australia, and as, it seems, was the case of 'Daniel' in Portugal earlier this year in an instance which was heralded by the media as 'the New Maddie.'

Now... to the commentary on the book.

You make frequent reference to 'unchecked facts' and 'moronic opinions.' The material that you're referring to is also known as the 'Case File' belonging to the Portuguese Policia Judicia. It is a matter of public record and freely available. Frankly, if those 'facts' are not checked and valid, then there are actually NO facts for the authors of this book to write anything based on, since all that will be left is the opinions of the parents, their friends, and a whole lot of people who weren't there, but have vested interests in claiming to be authorities on what took place.

Herein lies the enigma. Without the detail of what was reported to Portuguese police, you have nothing. Nothing, that is, except for British parents with a child missing, who say that she went missing in Portugal in a resort, but you would have only their word and that of their friends that they were ever there... If you're going to accept SOME of the objective facts reported to the Portuguese police in their investigation, then you have to accept ALL of what is reported in that investigation. You can't take some, and not others, because to do so means that you have to have a standard of choosing which states 'I reject X because the people with the most to lose say I should reject it' and 'I accept Y because the people with the most to gain say I should accept it.' If those police files aren't the sum total of every material fact known about this case, then nothing is. There's nothing to work from.

The authors acknowledge this, but they don't like its implications. The parents acknowledge this, but they don't like its implications. Neither of them have contended that the material in the police files is false. Neither dispute that what Kate and Gerry and others reported to the police, or saw collected and taken from their property, or watched being removed from their rental home, is not real nor accurately recorded in the police files. They just have a reaction to the conclusions that the evidence leads objective, intelligent detectives to reach. In fact, the ONLY conclusion that CAN be reached considering all the available evidence.

So any counter argument against this book which stems from questions presented by the Policia Judicia Case Files is not 'unchecked facts and moronic opinions.' They're a matter of police record and the subject of extensive analytical consideration, arriving at a conclusion which is both predictable, high in likelihood and probability, and an oft-repeated, globally recognised 'principal profile' for the cause of such occurrences. It is, in short, love it or loathe it, the most statistically supportable likelihood in every modern nation on earth. Einstein said that insanity was defined as doing the same things repeatedly and expecting a different outcome. It would be insanity for any police force to actually expect the most likely scenario and the most evidentially supported scenario to be the least likely conclusion. Their experience tells them that.

That's not speculation, nor quackery.

Now... you talk about how you read this book - and believe it - because you hate conspiracy theorists and the 'quacks' who promote them, and you cite the good journalistic authorship of this book. You comment that you appreciate an author who affirms that the US Government was not secretly behind 9.11 (Summers) and you appreciated the Summers volume on J Edgar Hoover. Did you read Summers' most critically acclaimed book, the one that earned him his kudos? The one he wrote defying the official government story, and claiming that JFK died as the result of a massive conspiracy theory - a conspiracy theory which many claim is 'quackery?' A conspiracy theory that many would claim Summers is a quack for writing in support of?

Do you realise, for example, that 'conspiracy theorists' claimed that the Reichstag fire was staged, that the attack on Pearl Harbour was known to be imminent and not reacted against, that Hillsborough was covered up, that Jimmy Saville and a number of high-level establishment pedophiles including MP's were routinely and massively abusing children in the care home system, that there was never any WMD in Iraq and that the Watergate Affair was an inside job?

Do you feel more enlightened, academic and authoritative by rejecting and living in ignorance of anything that such 'conspiracy theorists' and 'quacks' say?

Personally, I'd rather not be spoonfed my information or my opinions by any 'sacred cows' of journalism in single 'definitive' volumes. I'd rather use my brain and decide for myself where the evidence leads and whether the people who make the details of the evidence, not the generalisms of the condensed and abridged summative the central topic of discussion, and I'd hope other readers do too.

Glad you enjoyed it, though. Most people would have read your comments and concluded that you'd barely read past the index, or that curiously you already knew what it was that the book said, as if by psychic impression. Obviously I wouldn't begin to imagine you were as underhand and deceitful as that.

I mean... that would be like telling people you'd written the definitive book, even though you left out most of the details and failed to mention that you weren't legally allowed to write any other, without fearing being sued.
Reply to this post
Permalink | Report abuse | Ignore this customer
0 of 1 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Thank you for your feedback.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
avatar
Scrants

Posts : 107
Join date : 2014-09-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Andrew on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 11:31 pm

What a fantastic response that was. Absolutely brilliant.
avatar
Andrew

Posts : 13087
Join date : 2014-08-29

Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Cristobell on Tue 16 Sep 2014, 11:43 pm

Scrants wrote:Here is a brilliant reply by Vten to a "5*" post by "Tim Buckley" on Amazon.  I wonder who Vten is? He can certainly write. (Sorry about the length but it is worth reading)


2 of 6 people found the following review helpful
See your doctor - not a quack., 16 Sep 2014
By Tim Buckley
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: Looking For Madeleine (Kindle Edition)
Once upon a time - a long time ago - my brother went missing. He was 5 or so. My parents were more and more desperate every 5 minutes but after 2 hours he was found, safe and sound.
We hear about so many desperately tragic stories involving abductions. The ones about children are of course the most harrowing. They are supposed to be our future and futures are not supposed be cut short. If it is through "God's will" it's difficult enough...
The Madeleine McCann disappearance is the most highlighted one in our time. Plenty of other similar stories do not at all reach our attention, or at most to a small extend. The parent's heartbreak in all these unknown stories is obviously no less than that of the McCann's.
In today's world of mass media and super fast spread of information and opinion, it is inevitable that unchecked facts and moronic opinions find their way faster than light to those who are receptive to them. In communities similar things happen in the case of witch hunts (we all know about McCarthy-ism) - where ignorance and unchecked facts could lead to the demise of innocent people and the world of medicine - where 10 quacks have more treatments than one proper doctor can ever dream up. Quackery is a business still practised by many and making victims everywhere. The victims are receptive... some of them are even considered intelligent.
I choose not to be treated by a quack. I also choose not to listen to the quacks in the world of politics and crime. I choose to believe that Elvis is really dead and that the US Government was not secretly behind the attack on the Twin Towers. I have no time for attention seekers and mad conspiracy theorists. And I am grateful that our hospitals in general are filled with good, well-educated doctors and not with quacks.
If only the same standards applied to the world of publishing and its mirror world of reviews, where well-educated, serious and commended writers can be lambasted by the "Ignoranti" and journalistic quacks, because they dared write about "Maddie" and either dismiss or disagree - implicitly - with "quack-ist" opinions and theories.
I got this book because since I read "Official & Confidential: The Secret Life of J Edgar Hoover" and "The Eleventh Day", I am impressed with Summers and Swan.
They are the journalistic equivalent of proper doctors and not Quacks. That's why I got "Looking for Madeleine".
However, I don't do Idolatry either, so while I have great admiration for the team, I don't rate this a 5 star book automatically. I do however believe that anyone who is genuinely interested in how the whole workings of various authorities can hamper the efficient investigation a dramatic case, should buy this book.
Just don't expect the proper doctors to come up with a quack's solution to the disappearance.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?  
Report abuse | Permalink


Comments
Track comments by e-mail
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-1 of 1 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 16 Sep 2014 17:18:42 BDT
Vten says:
Well, Tim Buckley, I almost felt like a proud father hearing 'Hallelujah' sung for the first time when I read your review.

It certainly was eye-opening and provokes some serious thought.

I was so impressed, in fact, that I went looking to see what else you've reviewed in order to find out what you think on other topics.

Funny thing though...

Not only did I notice that the only reviews in your collection were dated two days ago, including reviews for a number of books which are far older than this week's 'hot topic' titles, but I also noticed that they didn't say very much. In fact, they didn't mention any detail at all. None. Excise them from all connection to the titles they are associated with, and they're surprisingly generic... almost like the person writing them hadn't actually read them, certainly never connected with them, and was trying to make it sound to the rest of the English class and the teacher that he'd been doing his homework and had lots of good thoughts about what he'd read.

This was especially a nice touch, that instead of writing your own review for one title you, only two days ago, read through some other reviews for it, found one which was two years old, and then posted a comment which said in paraphrase 'I don't need to write my own review for this, because I agree with everything this reviewer said.'

I won't think too deeply about the interesting review for the outdated, underpowered and decidedly average computer that you paid over the odds for at the weekend after your own computer 'exploded' on your desk the weekend previous, but I'm glad that when you ordered it that weekend, it only took until Tuesday to arrive. I do appreciate Amazon's rapid delivery service almost as much as I appreciate their honest reviewers.

Thankfully I have strong faith in humanity, because certainly any lesser person than I might begin to think that you had arranged to write this most detailed 'glowing report' on this title by agenda, and that in order to not get trimmed by Amazon when the pruning of the trolls goes down, you had concocted some fake reviews in order to look like an active participant in the Amazon Review community.

Clearly that cannot be the case, and so I welcome your comments, because I too have a story...

I was present, much more recently than 'long ago', when a child in my holiday group went missing. They didn't go missing from an unattended apartment. They didn't go missing from childcare facilities. Their parents were very present when they vanished. They were included in all the family activities, watched like a hawk throughout, and their parents didn't go out eating, drinking and attending quiz night while they cried themselves to sleep every night, alone and in an unsecured apartment in a strange holiday resort. They actually didn't go missing in anything resembling avoidable circumstances, or as a result of anything resembling neglect. Instead, they darted the wrong direction in a crowded place, letting go of the hand they were holding on to, and became disorientated and wandered further and further, looking to objects and locations that piqued their interest. Thankfully they were found a few minutes later, safe and sound. Curiously, their mum and dad cannot stop telling people, months on, how guilty they felt for that moment of lapse, and how they would never again be lacking in vigilance. But then, their mum and dad also insist on having family meals, family activities, keeping babysitters to a minimum, and being present all the time on family holidays. The one thing that couple, my friends, do not do is look at the McCann's and say 'it's only sheer luck that we're not just like them today... oh there but for the grace of God...'

I'll tell you what else...

When that child disappeared, no one screamed... no one threw a tantrum... no one began immediately ringing the press in another country... no one rang the foreign office... no one even screamed for the police to come... no one shouted 'the f****** b******* have taken her', no one began pointing in random directions and claiming that some stranger must have spirited them away... Know why? Because in the moment of shock, disbelief kicks in. The brain, courtesy of the flow of adrenaline and other hormones, prompts the 'fight or flight' mode, which is universally acknowledged as utterly precluding calculations, elaborate reckonings, wild hypothesising, and theorising - all of which take time. Instead what is provoked is the most basic reaction of all... to look, personally, for YOUR child, as YOUR responsibility, in YOUR charge, as if YOU and YOU ALONE had the ONLY hope and duty of finding that child. It takes several moments of burning the adrenaline and diluting the other hormones and calming the heart rate before you're even capable of something more, something which does not come as a 'reaction' but as a 'realisation' (a process of rationality, not impulse) - that something is very wrong, cannot be solved imminently, has utterly escaped your control, and you need help.

To further highlight just how true to profile this accounting of reactions actually is, it is common policy of most Western police departments to be wary of, and not panicked by the frantic finger pointing and theorising of parents and guardians, whether they are agonised in their fear or not, and to allow a due process to take place by which hysterical and knee-jerk reactions and overblown responses (call out the helicopters, close the borders, 'they' could be getting away) are avoided UNLESS there is evidence, physical or eyewitness, which highlights a scenario of abduction. Why? Because the vast majority of children which parents would report as 'missing' are either found not far away, unharmed and wandered, or are in the custody of someone close to them and known to the parents, as was the case earlier this year in Australia, and as, it seems, was the case of 'Daniel' in Portugal earlier this year in an instance which was heralded by the media as 'the New Maddie.'

Now... to the commentary on the book.

You make frequent reference to 'unchecked facts' and 'moronic opinions.' The material that you're referring to is also known as the 'Case File' belonging to the Portuguese Policia Judicia. It is a matter of public record and freely available. Frankly, if those 'facts' are not checked and valid, then there are actually NO facts for the authors of this book to write anything based on, since all that will be left is the opinions of the parents, their friends, and a whole lot of people who weren't there, but have vested interests in claiming to be authorities on what took place.

Herein lies the enigma. Without the detail of what was reported to Portuguese police, you have nothing. Nothing, that is, except for British parents with a child missing, who say that she went missing in Portugal in a resort, but you would have only their word and that of their friends that they were ever there... If you're going to accept SOME of the objective facts reported to the Portuguese police in their investigation, then you have to accept ALL of what is reported in that investigation. You can't take some, and not others, because to do so means that you have to have a standard of choosing which states 'I reject X because the people with the most to lose say I should reject it' and 'I accept Y because the people with the most to gain say I should accept it.' If those police files aren't the sum total of every material fact known about this case, then nothing is. There's nothing to work from.

The authors acknowledge this, but they don't like its implications. The parents acknowledge this, but they don't like its implications. Neither of them have contended that the material in the police files is false. Neither dispute that what Kate and Gerry and others reported to the police, or saw collected and taken from their property, or watched being removed from their rental home, is not real nor accurately recorded in the police files. They just have a reaction to the conclusions that the evidence leads objective, intelligent detectives to reach. In fact, the ONLY conclusion that CAN be reached considering all the available evidence.

So any counter argument against this book which stems from questions presented by the Policia Judicia Case Files is not 'unchecked facts and moronic opinions.' They're a matter of police record and the subject of extensive analytical consideration, arriving at a conclusion which is both predictable, high in likelihood and probability, and an oft-repeated, globally recognised 'principal profile' for the cause of such occurrences. It is, in short, love it or loathe it, the most statistically supportable likelihood in every modern nation on earth. Einstein said that insanity was defined as doing the same things repeatedly and expecting a different outcome. It would be insanity for any police force to actually expect the most likely scenario and the most evidentially supported scenario to be the least likely conclusion. Their experience tells them that.

That's not speculation, nor quackery.

Now... you talk about how you read this book - and believe it - because you hate conspiracy theorists and the 'quacks' who promote them, and you cite the good journalistic authorship of this book. You comment that you appreciate an author who affirms that the US Government was not secretly behind 9.11 (Summers) and you appreciated the Summers volume on J Edgar Hoover. Did you read Summers' most critically acclaimed book, the one that earned him his kudos? The one he wrote defying the official government story, and claiming that JFK died as the result of a massive conspiracy theory - a conspiracy theory which many claim is 'quackery?' A conspiracy theory that many would claim Summers is a quack for writing in support of?

Do you realise, for example, that 'conspiracy theorists' claimed that the Reichstag fire was staged, that the attack on Pearl Harbour was known to be imminent and not reacted against, that Hillsborough was covered up, that Jimmy Saville and a number of high-level establishment pedophiles including MP's were routinely and massively abusing children in the care home system, that there was never any WMD in Iraq and that the Watergate Affair was an inside job?

Do you feel more enlightened, academic and authoritative by rejecting and living in ignorance of anything that such 'conspiracy theorists' and 'quacks' say?

Personally, I'd rather not be spoonfed my information or my opinions by any 'sacred cows' of journalism in single 'definitive' volumes. I'd rather use my brain and decide for myself where the evidence leads and whether the people who make the details of the evidence, not the generalisms of the condensed and abridged summative the central topic of discussion, and I'd hope other readers do too.

Glad you enjoyed it, though. Most people would have read your comments and concluded that you'd barely read past the index, or that curiously you already knew what it was that the book said, as if by psychic impression. Obviously I wouldn't begin to imagine you were as underhand and deceitful as that.

I mean... that would be like telling people you'd written the definitive book, even though you left out most of the details and failed to mention that you weren't legally allowed to write any other, without fearing being sued.
Reply to this post
Permalink | Report abuse | Ignore this customer
0 of 1 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Thank you for your feedback.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›




Thanks for posting Scrants, that was a great read! I like the way he/she pointed out how bizarre the McCanns behaved the moment they found Madeleine missing. It is the sticking point for most when they see that the McCanns and their friends did not search for Madeleine, but instead spent the night phoning all their contacts and writing out their own alibis.

_________________
http://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk/
avatar
Cristobell

Posts : 672
Join date : 2014-08-26

Back to top Go down

Re: Review of the reviews of Looking for Madeleine

Post  Dee Coy on Wed 17 Sep 2014, 12:04 am

Wonderful. I hope that review stays.

Over to 'Tim'.

_________________
Philip Larkin wrote:It stands plain as a wardrobe, what we know, Have always known, know that we can't escape, Yet can't accept.
avatar
Dee Coy

Posts : 2178
Join date : 2014-08-29

Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum