Simon Hare's double dishonesty in the BBC's 'Inside Out' programme

Posted by Tony Bennett

SIMON HARE OF THE BBC – Did he deceive viewers about The Madeleine Foundation?

On our website, you’ll find details of concerns that we had about Simon Hare’s programme on The Madeleine Foundation on BBC TV’s ‘Inside Out’ programme, shown on 22 November. He has kindly answered these. His answers, and our comments, are in the article on our website (see the link: ‘Simon Hare’s final response’ on our home page, www.madeleinefoundation.org.uk)

However, there are two issues within the programme that were not covered in our correspondence with Simon Hare, yet are important in understanding whether Simon Hare ever intended to make a fair programme about us. These concern:

1) His introduction to the programme, and

2) The way he dealt with the response to our leafleting on the streets of Bristol.

The question we pose is whether Simon Hare misled viewers in his treatment of the introduction to his film, and in his selection of material from our day of leafleting in Bristol. Below we try to provide the answer.

Simon Hare’s introduction to the programme

Simon Hare began with these words:

QUOTE:

Secrecy surrounds the meeting of the self-appointed Madeline Foundation…they said I could attend. I have to wait for news of the location - I’m told to make may way to a hotel with conference facilities [he then shows a scene of him waiting outside The Gateway Hotel and Conference Centre, Nottingham] - but this proves to be just a meeting place - I’m then taken to the real venue… (long pause) - a room in a village hall in Nuthall [he shows a picture of Nuthall Parish Hall].

UNQUOTE

This sequence is accompanied by a certain style of music.

The wording and accompanying pictures chosen by Simon Hare give the viewers the clear impression that The Madeleine Foundation had led him to believe we were meeting in a grand conference centre in a posh hotel, but were actually meeting in a room in a Parish Hall. The key words Simon Hare has, no doubt very carefully and skilfully chosen, are these: “this proves to be just a meeting place”.

What Simon Hare did not tell viewers is that he knew in advance that this was only a meeting place. We explicitly told him that we were meeting at a community centre in Nottingham, not in a hotel with conference facilities. We also told him that the reason for the secrecy was threats of disruption from McCann-supporters; a fact he did not mention.

Here are extracts from an e-mail sent to Simon Hare 6 days before the conference:

Read more here
-----
Related links:

Simon Hare intends to write to the BBC Legal Department about comments made by 'associates of the so-called Madeleine Foundation'

BBC film on The Madeleine Foundation to be aired Monday 22 November, 7.30pm

The Madeleine Foundation's making of a programme - A history

Simon Hare threatens legal action

-----
Previous articles about Simon Hare of the BBC:

BBC's Simon Hare threatens "so-called Madeleine Foundation" with legal action after his own failure to produce a fair and balanced programme

BBC's Simon Hare and his failure to produce a fair and balanced programme about The Madeleine Foundation

Thoughts on BBC Inside Out and the Madeleine Foundation
-----
A comment from Judge Mental on our forum:

"A man saying: 'There are some evil people about'.

And another saying: 'There's always those with conspiracy theories'.

Yet on the BBC cutting-room floor were clips of several people eagerly taking away more leaflets to hand round to others, and others saying how they had serious doubts about the McCanns' version of events.

When Helene Davies-Green was interviewed at home, she was filmed by Simon Hare preparing some mushrooms for dinner. She is an expert on the subject and frequently gives lectures on the topic.

The one and only quote in the film from Helene, chosen by Simon Hare, was: "Some of them are very poisonous".

In these times of austerity, it is a most improper use of public money for the BBC to have allowed this programme to go to air in such a ridiculous and unfinished state. Having watched this mish-mash of silliness and barbs, and having continued to read many comments about this, one gathers that this programme was never likely to become a series. Therefore, one cannot see any point in the BBC having wasted public money on making any such programme in the first instance, if it were not to come to any conclusions about the motivations, aims and objectives of The Madeleine Foundation.

Having discussed the way in which this programme was made, and discussing this at great length with people connected to The Madeleine Foundation, one is most satisfied that Hare was furnished with a wealth of information, not deemed libellous in Portugal or the UK. He should therefore have used some of this effectively in his programme. If Hare still did not feel as if he had been given enough information on this subject, he could very easily have researched and read about the subject by spending a couple of hours of his time in reading the Portuguese police files, which are globally available not only to the world's journalists, but to all members of the public. Therein, he would have found precisely why members of The Madeleine Foundation were galvanised into action, and whereby their aims and objectives originally came from to motivate them into doing what they continue to do today.

Tony Bennett telling Hare that there were matters of grave concern which he could not speak out about due to libel lawyers gagging him, was absolutely no excuse for Hare not to speak about those matters on Tony Bennett's behalf in order to clarify The Madeleine Foundation's position for the viewing public. For Hare to have spent so many months on this undertaking, it is quite appalling to realise that he knows no more now than when he began. To have broadcast his thoughts as such to the public at large is utterly ridiculous. If he and the editor believe it was ''playful'' to intimidate a woman and allow this to become part of the programme, it is with a heavy heart that one realises that the BBC is no longer the greatly revered informative, educative and entertaining corporation it once was.

This is from their own website: The BBC is a vibrant, fast moving, customer centric organisation whose core values are creativity, collaboration, trust, audiences, quality and respect. The BBC exists to enrich people’s lives with great programmes and services that inform, educate and entertain. Its vision is to be the most creative, trusted organisation in the world.

Was it vibrant? No. Did it keep pace with current thinking? No. Was it creative? No. The collaboration seems to have been a one way street. Nobody could possibly be blamed for wanting to know if any other sort of collaboration may have taken place during the making of this programme though! The trust is broken. This was not quality television, however it could have been made so, had Hare taken care to show a fair and unbiased programme. Has this enriched anybody's life? No. Has it damaged relations with the BBC? Yes it has, because local programmes are becoming increasingly important in these days of power being handed back to our communities from the Government. Was any respect shown by Hare? No. Much respect has now gone out of the window.

It rather looks as if the BBC's vision to be the most creative, trusted organisation in the world will remain just that. A vision.

Yet it is still achievable, if the BBC were to consistently use its own ethical code in all areas of television. Other than that it will be destined to live under Murdoch's Sky. Regional programming has a great future, if only those people who work in it will listen to the public and produce quality television. This means employing programme-makers who are prepared to admit defeat, and pass the job onto somebody who knows what they are talking about when they are out of their depth. The public do not want to listen to somebody on television admitting that they are clueless about a programme they want them to watch."

BBC's Simon Hare threatens "so-called Madeleine Foundation" with legal action after his own failure to produce a fair and balanced programme

From: Simon Hare
Subject: Madeleine Foundation
To: "ANTHONY BENNETT"
Date: Wednesday, 1 December, 2010, 13:58

Tony,

I'm aware you have posted online a number of issues relating to my film. If you have also formed these into a letter to my editor, as previously discussed, they will be addressed. Airing them online in advance is, at best, discourteous, at worst, potentially defamatory. You may already have sent a letter, but I have been working from home due to the weather.

I'm also aware that a number of posts by you and others associated with the so-called Foundation have accused me of lying, deception and unprofessionalism. I treat such allegations very seriously and intend to pass them onto our legal department. As I'm sure you are aware, libel laws apply as equally to forums and message boards as they do to the BBC.

Simon Hare.

-------

REPLY: THE MADELEINE FOUNDATION TO SIMON HARE, 3 DECEMBER 2010

Dear Simon

Your comments are noted.

We do have a number of objections to the programme you made.

One of these was the vicious, nasty-sounding voice-over of the words I wrote on a forum after I attended the two sessions of the Department for Culture Media and Sport Select Committee on 10 March 2009. Your film didn't mention by the way that The Madeleine Foundation had made a 50-page written submission to the Committee, which is why we were invited to attend it.

Many people assumed this was my own voice. This was because, contrary to BBC and TV best practice, you did not say, before the words were read out, 'Mr Bennett's words are read out by an actor'.

The most popular Madeleine McCann Forum on the internet is currently 'Missing Madeleine'. To give a flavour of what many people thought on hearing the BBC actor's words, here is one poster's opinion from that forum, reproduced verbatim:

And Hare really rubbed it in the other night with a clip of Tony Bennett's own voice that I'd never heard before from after he sat behind Gerry McCann at the House of Commons. "It was to send out a quiet message. We are looking over his shoulder checking out what he and his team are saying, watching them." It sounded like something out of a horror filmMany others also referred to this clip in your film and said how horrible my voice sounded. This was a deliberate and unfortunately very successful deception perpetrated by the BBC. I naturally had to correct it as soon as I learned that so many peope really thought that that was my actual voice.

I turn now to the subject of allowing Ms Butler to tell several untruths in her wholly false account of the events of 12 August 2009 when we leafleted in Leicestershire.

You will recall that when I learnt that you might be asking Ms Butler to appear in the programme, I wrote this to you:

"I cannot influence your choice of people to appear in your programme - but it was sold to us on the basis that this was an examination of The Madeleine Foundation. and I would seriously question what Ms Butler has to offer to that programme given all that has happened in the past 8 months since she was expelled".

You then replied: "But at the moment I think it's unlikely she will take part in our film as she expressed the belief that I probably 'work for the McCanns'."

Other assurances you gave suggested that you were not intending to use any film of Ms Butler.

Moreover, in discussions with you, you were made fully aware of Ms Butler's entirely false allegations against me, made after she was expelled from membership. Indeed you were at my house the very day Detective Inspector Roe telephoned me and said that Essex Police were no longer going to pursue their enquiries against me.

Not only did the BBC have this clear proof that Ms Butler was capable of outright lying, but you had further concrete proof when she claimed to be doing a 1,000-mile walk across Spain in the height of the summer. It was clear to all observers that this was another deliberate and outright lie with no truth in it, and you will recall that you and I discussed this. She maintained the deception about this 'walk' for weeks and continues to do so to this day.

You were therefore on the clearest possible notice that no reliance could be put on any statement issuing from Ms Butler.

Yet you allowed her to speak without contradiuction about the events of 12 August. Moreover, contrary to your agreement to put to me any controversial points in good time before the programme went out, you gave neither me nor Helene Davies-Green any opportunity to rebut the false statements of Ms Butler (apart from a passing reference to my denying one of Ms Butler's false statemenrts).

Three of us gave you in detail a true and consistent account of that day's events. Yet the BBC decided to allow viewers only to hear the account of Ms Butler, of whose record of having deliberately lied you were fully aware.

I have therefore - again in response to many queries from members, supporters and followers of ours - had to publicly correct her false statements which you transmitted to viewers.

The statement of Debbie Butler about what happened on the day of leafleting in Leicestershire on 12 August 2009 was false in several respects, namely:

(i)] that she was ‘instructed’ to do anything that day

(ii)] that it was known in advance that the Restaurant and Tea Rooms in Mountsorrel was a place Dr Kate McCann had once visited with Madeleine

(iii) that any of us distributed leaflets there that day

(iv) that she was ‘instructed’ to leaflet the McCanns’ road. The Crescent

(v) that she only did so because Helene’s legs ‘turned to jelly’.

Further, you claimed in writing to us that "...the aims of our film are to examine what the Madeleine Foundation is, who its members are and what it is trying to achieve...I can assure you that I am motivated solely by an interest in examining your campaign in a full and fair manner.''

In our submission the film did not do those things. Your trailer referred to Goncalo Amaral as 'discredited'. Your film said that the theory that Madeleine McCann was found dead in her parents' holiday apartment was also 'discredited'. This left the uninformed viewers with a fait accompli, namely: the detective is discredited, his theory is discredited, therefore members of The Madeleine Foundation and anyone with a contrary view must be wrong and there is no basis for them to continuing to question the McCanns' account of events.

None of the reasons we gave you for believing that the McCanns still have many questions to answer were aired in the film.There was no mention of the alerts to a corpse given by a dog trained by one of the world's top dog handlers. There was no mention of the many contradictions in the evidence and changes of story of the McCanns and their friends, which provide evidence that their stories may not be true. Viewers were not told that we have 500 pages-plus of in-depth analysis of the case on our website.

The viewer was therefore effectively told by you that there was no basis for our view of the case - and that therefore there must be some other motive for our actions. In that context, you allowed Dr Kate McCann two separate opportunities within the film to suggest that we were motivated by a desire to attack a vulnerable family and would then move on to attack another family.

When on 19 October 2010 we heard that the Portuguese Appeal Court had overturned the book ban on Goncalo Amaral's book: 'The Truth About A Lie', we sought written assurances from you that, in the interests of fairness and balance, you would inform viewers that Mr Amaral's book was now back on sale as a result of this Appeal Court ruling.

You replied: "I intend to include the development of the book ban being over-turned in my film".

In the event you chose not to tell viewers that - and you described him as 'discredited' despite the fact that the second highest court in Portugal had just allowed his book to be read again, based on European Convention 'freedom of speech' principles. Whether that was your decision, or you were overruled by your editor and producer, we do not know.

I wish also to refer to the sequence of an MF member hiding behind a lamp-post. As you well know, that member had specifically stated to you beforeahnd that she did not wish to be filmed - and we had your written agreement to that effect. You could have dealt with that issue by simply telling viewers: "Another Madeleine Foundation member was distributing leaflets but did not wish to be filmed". Why did you then try to film her and include that sequence?

Further, you played the song "I don’t care what the people may say’ whilst filming me. What was that meant to convey to the viewer? The only opinion poll ever done in this country, in the Sunday Times, found that 80% of respondents did not believe the McCanns were telling the whole truth. After watching the McCanns appear on a Spanish TV programme, 70% of viewers thought they were lying; only 30% thought they were telling the truth.

As you are well aware, there are many who doubt the McCanns' version of events to a greater or lesser extent. The comments sent recently by members of the public on the subject of Madeleine's disappearence to articles in the online versions of many newspapers make this abundantly clear, quite apart from all the views expressed on the Madeleine McCann discussion forums. It is partly because we do care what the people may say that we write our in-depth articles and publish our leaflets, so that people may gain a better understanding of the case.

Finally, you refer directly to my having accused you of 'lying, deception and unprofessionalism'.

Pretending that it was my voice reading out my internet message and using a deliberately nasty-sounding voice in doing so was a deception on the viewer - as the sort of comments I have referred to above make clear. I do not resile from describing that as a 'deception'.

We were deceived into assuming that you were not going to allow Ms Butler a platform and in deciding to use her you did not offer us the right of reply. I do not say and have not said that that was 'unprofessional'. But others might.

Furthermore, you led us to believe that the un-banning of Amaral's book would be mentioned in the film.

Nowhere have I accused you of lying and I am not aware of a single Madeleine Foundation member who has done so. Clearly hundreds of people have been commenting on the programme on the various Madeleine forums and I am sorry if some have used that word. Their comments are however not our responsibility.

Yours sincerely

Tony Bennett

Comments on our forum here

BBC's Simon Hare and his failure to produce a fair and balanced programme about The Madeleine Foundation

By Tony Bennett, secretary of the Madeleine Foundation

6th Madeleine Foundation Conference - Shropshire - Summary Report

The following criticisms of Simon Hare and the programme he had put together were made:

*In the opening sequence, an impression was given to the viewer that by asking Simon Hare to meet with a member at the Nottingham Gateway Hotel, we somehow misled Simon Hare into thinking we had booked our conference there. This appeared to be a very deliberate misrepresentation. After he had asked for permission to attend the conference, we had clearly told him that we were meeting ‘at a community centre in Nottingham’. We had told him to meet at the Gateway Hotel and told him we would take him to ‘a nearby venue’. We had been absolutely straight about that, explaining that we did not disclose the venues in advance to anyone who had not registered, explaining that McCann-supporters had in the past openly threatened to disrupt proceedings. The accompanying background music to the clips of Nuthall Parish Hall was also designed to create a misleading impression of mystery.

* Simon Hare claimed that after leaving the Madeleine Foundation conference he was ‘still no nearer to understanding what the Madeleine Foundation was all about’. This was disingenuous at best. By that time, he had been able to read our entire website and had listened by invitation to a robust discussion by 19 members and supporters of what might have happened to Madeleine McCann.

* Simon Hare had promised in writing that as part of his obligation to produce a fair programme, he would ensure that viewers were told that the ban on Goncalo Amaral’s book being sold had been lifted on 19 October. That promise had been broken. Not only that, but in a trailer for the film he had described Goncalo Amaral as ‘discredited’

* The express purpose of The Madeleine Foundation handing in a petition to 10 Downing Street, and letters at the Home Office and Ministry of Justice, was to press the government to hold a full public enquiry, with the power to summon witnesses, into all aspects of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Simon Hare did not even mention this, despite promising in writing that he would make a ‘full and fair’ programme about our work.

* The arguments that we gave during interviews as to why we considered that the McCanns had questions to answer, e.g. the cadaver dog’s alerts, the McCanns’ reactions to the cadaver dog’s alerts, and the long list of discrepancies and changes of story, were all left on the cutting room floor and never made the film. Instead, Simon Hare dismissed the all the circumstantial and other evidence that Madeleine had died in the McCanns’ apartment as ‘discredited’. In short, the film did not allow us to make our case.

* The sequence of an MF member hiding behind a lamp-post was a breach of trust. The member concerned had specifically stated that she did not wish to be filmed and Simon Hare had agreed in writing to that, having been told that many MF members and supporters feared repercussions if they made public their questioning of the McCanns’ abduction claim.

* The playing of the song: ‘I don’t care what the people may say’ was cut into the film to convey a subtle, but inaccurate, message.

* The statement of Debbie Butler about what happened on the day of leafleting in Leicestershire on 12 August 2009 was false in several respects, and, again contrary to specific promises, was not put to the other three participants in the leafleting that day, namely Tony Bennett, Grenville Green and Helene Davies- Green. The following statements by Ms Butler were wholly untrue:

(i)] that she was ‘instructed’ to do anything that day

(ii)] that it was known in advance that the Restaurant and Tea Rooms in Mountsorrel was a place Dr Kate McCann had once visited with Madeleine

(iii) that any of us distributed leaflets there that day

(iv) that she was ‘instructed’ to leaflet the McCanns’ road. The Crescent

(v) that she only did so because Helene’s legs ‘turned to jelly’.

* Moreover, the other three had given to Simon Hare their account of the day’s events and none of those were used.

* During the making of the programme, Simon Hare had been given chapter and verse about Ms Butler’s malicious claim of fraud against Tony Bennett and full particulars of her repeated false claims to have walked across Spain in the summer heat, making it as plain as could be that her word on anything could simply not be trusted. Moreover, Simon Hare had given his promise that because of these concerns he would not be interviewing Debbie Butler for the programme.

* The longest clip shown of the Bristol leafleting was of a group of students challenging Tony Bennett. Other sequences showing Tony chatting to passers-by who were in full support of our campaign and asking to take away more leaflets to hand to others were clearly left on the cutting-room floor.

* No reference whatsoever was made to the in-depth articles on our website, e.g. about the contradictions, about the private investigators, about the Fund, about Robert Murat, about the trials of Goncalo Amaral, about Marcos Aragao Correia, etc., yet these form the core of our work, and the BBC promised a ‘full’ look at the work of The Madeleine Foundation.

* During the filming of Grenville Green, Simon Hare asked to film him running a Union Jack up the flagpole in his garden. He asked Simon Hare: “What do you want to do that for?” and refused.

These were not the only points of concern raised about the film. At stake had been the reputation of the BBC for fairness, integrity and honesty. What action we take to raise these concerns formally with the BBC has not yet been resolved.

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i5UxCQunmk


Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wn_JuW0TFnI

-------

Related links regarding the BBC Inside Out programme:

Tony Bennett's voice on the 'Inside Out' programme

BBC East Midlands programme about the Madeleine Foundation

Stealing copyright and blocking opposition - the BBC East Midlands film on YouTube

BBC film on The Madeleine Foundation to be aired Monday 22 November, 7.30pm

The Madeleine Foundation's making of a programme - A history

The BBC are to air their short programme on the Madeleine Foundation this evening amid fresh controversy.

THE MADELEINE FOUNDATION’S MAKING OF A PROGRAMME WITH BBC EAST MIDLANDS’ ‘INSIDE OUT’ TEAM:

A HISTORY

The Madeleine Foundation decided in early 2010 to co-operate with BBC East Midlands in the making of a programme, said to be of 8 to 10 minutes’ length, about our work. It was to be part of the BBC’s ‘Inside Out’ series, which examines organisations - often highly controversial ones - in depth.

The decision to co-operate was close-run and taken only with a certain amount of reluctance and misgivings. The reasons for these misgivings included:

1. the previous history of The Madeleine Foundation’s treatment by the press, which had been universally hostile
2. concern that the BBC’s agenda was not to paint a fair picture of The Madeleine Foundation but to attack us
3. the previous conduct of BBC East Midlands, notably their hostile interview of our former Chairman Debbie Butler on 14 August 2009 after what became known as the ‘Rothley Leaflet Drop’, and the way they reported on Mr Amaral’s appeal against his book ban in Lisbon. Alone amongst many media, BBC East Midlands’ reporter John O’Sullivan had claimed that Mr Amaral had said, in answer to a question, ‘F___ the McCanns’, whereas all other media said he had simply said ‘Forca los McCanns’, meaning: ‘Ask the McCanns’. Mr Amaral does not speak English.

In favour of co-operating with the programme were the following considerations:

1. even previous adverse publicity had led to renewed interest in The Madeleine Foundation. Despite hostile publicity, The Madeleine Foundation had received thousands of extra hits to its website, two dozen new people joined, other people wished to distribute our controversial ’10 Reasons’ leaflet, we received many offers of help, and hundreds of extra copies of our book ‘60 Reasons’ were sold
2. there remained large numbers of people who had not heard about the work of The Madeleine Foundation, amongst a population we believe to be still overwhelmingly sceptical about the McCanns’ claims
3. the BBC has a duty under OFCOM codes of practice to produce a ‘fair’ and ‘balanced’ programme about us. Indeed, Simon Hare of BBC East Midlands, who first approached us about making a programme, promised that his programme would be fair to us
4. we would certainly be given a fair opportunity within the programme to explain why we were set up, what our aims are, and how we set about achieving them.

The rest of this article can be read here

BBC East Midlands programme about the Madeleine Foundation

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00w7768

Quote hardlinemarxist

"Note – The McCanns have never been cleared of wrong doing. Like Robert Murat, their arguido status was lifted and the investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance was shelved pending further information coming to light. The Madeleine Foundation campaigns for justice for Madeleine McCann. My understanding is that The Madeleine Foundation largely considers Amaral’s thesis to be accurate; this is why they demonstrate support for him."



Quote Tony Bennett, Madeleine Foundation

Dear all,

The BBC has just posted up this synopsis for the programme about The Madeleine Foundation to be shown next Monday 22nd at 7.30pm by BBC TV East Midlands:

Next Monday, 19:30 on BBC One (East Midlands only)

Synopsis

What happened to Madeleine McCann remains a mystery. Her parents were cleared of playing any role in her disappearance, but a controversial group continues to campaign in support of a discredited detective who claims Kate and Gerry McCann covered up the truth. Inside Out investigates the members and motives of the Madeleine Foundation.

I am now fearful that the programme will give us a worse pasting than I thought.

The references to the McCanns being 'cleared' and Amaral being 'discredited' appear to me to be biased to begin with. The language is IMO not neutral.

Nevertheless, I stick by my point of view that the response we had just over a year ago to the awful publicity about us being 'vile sickos', stalkers etc. etc. showed that many people wanted to know more about us, despite the adverse coverage.

We got new members, loads of hits on our website, hundreds of extra books sold, many offers of help etc. etc. For that reason I believe the broadcast will win us new friends and contacts as well as perhaps some new and highly critical enemies.

I would ask you not to be too downhearted by the broadcast, I am still trusting the BBC will observe its duty and OFCOM guidance to produce a fair programme so far as our activities are concerned.

We shall see.

Tony
-------

Some links for those who live in the East Midlands who may google for info about the fraudulent, child neglecting NHS doctors who are prime suspects in the death and concealment of their own daughter.

Madeleine Foundation and BBC Inside Out

Up-to-the-minute Maddie news from Portugal that isn't reported in the UK

Maddie: The truth about the lie

Official police files

Complete mystery of Maddie McCann forum

McCann's on twitter

Madeleine Foundation on Facebook

BBC East Midlands apologise to the Madeleine Foundation

Here we see Anne Davies, BBC East Midlands, being biased towards former chairman of the Madeleine Foundation.