Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Original poster

Queen and Meghan and harry

723 replies

Pixxie7 · 23/08/2021 04:47

Apparently the queen is considering taking legal action to stop the verbal attacks on the royal family.

OP posts:
Roussette · 30/08/2021 20:44

This is an interesting article, yes it's Australian press but it sets out about the press secretary etc.
I bet it's a fairly unpleasant place to work for these different competing households.

www.smh.com.au/world/europe/the-men-in-grey-the-true-powers-behind-the-palace-20210310-p579ml.html

CathyorClaire · 30/08/2021 21:02

No dog in the game here but I'm LOL'ing frantically at HMQ having zero interest in in the National Theatre patronage.

Guess that explains why 74% of charity patronages didn't get to see 'their' royal's boat even once in the previous year.

Roussette · 30/08/2021 21:06

It's good to read a different take than our nonsense press at times.... so yes!

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about this subject:

The royal family
Blossomtoes · 30/08/2021 22:16

@Roussette

It's good to read a different take than our nonsense press at times.... so yes!
It’s not different. The sources are Robert Lacey and Penny Junor - two of the talking heads the UK media trots out all the time. It even quotes The Times.
Roussette · 30/08/2021 22:21

It's written by a journalist for the Sydney Morning Herald actually.

There's a couple of quotes by those two RRs, but the body of the piece is not by them.

To me, it is different, an interesting take on the men in grey.

Blossomtoes · 30/08/2021 22:33

I know who wrote it. The sources that journalist used are exactly the same as all the UK media use. Lacey used to work for The Times and Junor worked for The Standard.

Roussette · 30/08/2021 22:45

I know who they are.. They are quoted.

They did not write that article

KidneyBeans · 30/08/2021 22:48

It’s not different. The sources are Robert Lacey and Penny Junor - two of the talking heads the UK media trots out all the time. It even quotes The Times.

Yep. Start an argument in an empty room Grin
Don't answer questions, don't back up your point. Just pick an opinion and argue against it. Again and again and again...

Blossomtoes · 31/08/2021 09:18

@Roussette

I know who they are.. They are quoted.

They did not write that article

I know they didn’t write it. They did, however, provide all the material.
Roussette · 31/08/2021 11:29

I can't do this any more with you Blossom. News pieces are written by the journalist, in this case one who works with the Sydney Morning Herald. It is her take on everything whilst quoting those two RR's. It is actually quite scathing towards the courtiers and the whole set up so it is not written by those two, because they are total sycophants.

Material is often provided to journalists who then WRITE an article with what they think about the material, what the implications might be on the material, what their take on it is.
I have no idea why on earth who are keeping on about this. I think @KidneyBeans has nailed it.

Roussette · 31/08/2021 11:30

*why

Blossomtoes · 31/08/2021 11:38

Because @Roussette, it’s supposed to be a discussion. That means alternative points of view. If you want an echo chamber with everyone just agreeing with you, all you have to do is say so. Do you not think challenge is good and constructive? No, silly question, you and your acolytes obviously don’t. You just want everyone to nod along and agree.

All I’ve done is disagree and challenge some of the absolute nonsense spouted by asking for sources which, to be fair, you’re the only one who ever provides.

Roussette · 31/08/2021 11:56

A discussion that is interesting I'm totally up for. But you nitpicking on an article that I said in passing, just in passing ...was different and interesting... and you have to immediately come on and say 'no it's not. It's just the our RRs who have contributed to that article.' Does anyone care?
No.
I thought it was an interesting read. No idea what you think about it because you are too busy picking me up on the fact I said it was different and interesting. What about the content? That seems to have escaped you.

You just want to challenge me (as you put it) on any tiny little thing that you can, because we don't agree on M&H.
It's tedious and timewasting and boring for everyone.

I'll discuss by all means but this is beyond a joke. Let's avoid each other for a while, that might be sensible.

Blossomtoes · 31/08/2021 12:51

Suits me. Enjoy your echo chamber. 😊

Billandben444 · 31/08/2021 13:32

@Roussette
It's tedious and timewasting and boring for everyone
I agree. The constant nitpicking and squabbling on these RF threads derails any interesting and thought-provoking comments. Surely posters can disagree with each other in a constructive way?

KidneyBeans · 31/08/2021 15:45

@Blossomtoes

Because *@Roussette*, it’s supposed to be a discussion. That means alternative points of view. If you want an echo chamber with everyone just agreeing with you, all you have to do is say so. Do you not think challenge is good and constructive? No, silly question, you and your acolytes obviously don’t. You just want everyone to nod along and agree.

All I’ve done is disagree and challenge some of the absolute nonsense spouted by asking for sources which, to be fair, you’re the only one who ever provides.

Shame that your approach to 'challenging' seems to be 'No it's not, because I've not seen it'. No analysis, no discussion, no sources. Talk about living in an echo chamber Hmm

And no Rousette isn't the only person in this thread that's provided sources (though she is excellent at that). But providing you with sources does seem rather counterproductive as you seem unable to engage in any deeper discussion regardless

Plumtree391 · 31/08/2021 17:34

Rousette, what you said about the Australian media struck a chord with me. It has only been in the last few weeks that I have taken a more than average interest in the recent royal stuff, due to Mumsnet. I started looking things up and was amazed at how much there is about it all from Australia, on Youtube! There's a lot of rubbish, you have to pick through it, but the Aussies seem to love our 'scandals'.

I'm trying to take less interest now, some of it has been quite distressing and triggering and, let's face it, there's no point in me feeling like that at my age; it's not as if I can influence anything.

Roussette · 31/08/2021 18:01

Plumtree391 Yes, I have earlier today watched a news show with nearly 20 minutes about PA and the implications for him and how it will affect the monarchy.

Where are our journos doing this? They aren't.

And interestingly Plum... there is a huge amount of press in loads of other countries too. It's interesting to see what they think of us.
It's not good

Awww sorry to hear it gets to you like that... yes step away, how you feel is what is important Flowers

Roussette · 31/08/2021 18:02

Meant to say the 20 minutes talk on it was Australia too.

Plumtree391 · 31/08/2021 18:45

Thanks Rousette.

It's always 'sources close to', wherever it comes from. Some of the stuff is utter rubbish.

I have too much time on my hands.

SamiReed1 · 01/09/2021 09:50

Well the Queen is the Queen of Australia too, hence why Australian media would cover the Royal family so much. The Queen is the head state in Australia.

OhDearMuriel · 01/09/2021 10:14

It’s about time.
They’re both disgraceful idiots and an embarrassment to the country, let alone the royal family.

KidneyBeans · 01/09/2021 14:41

@OhDearMuriel

It’s about time. They’re both disgraceful idiots and an embarrassment to the country, let alone the royal family.
How so?
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread