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

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Meghan Markle taking Mail On Sunday to Court *MNHQ tweaked title for accuracy*

999 replies

TheMustressMhor · 01/10/2019 23:20

And about time, too. They never stop castigating her.

Prince Harry has said that he's worried that she'll end up being the same kind of victim that his mother was with regard to the Press.

I hope she wins her case.

OP posts:
Oriunda · 02/10/2019 12:24

@Dongdingdong False. The Heil changed their strap line on their online article once people started complaining. It’s very easy to do (I write online articles and can go in once published and change things).

SaraNade · 02/10/2019 12:24

Prince Charles' PR is an American one that reps celebrities.

Again, a point that simply proves she is doing nothing any other royal hasn't done.

joyfullittlehippo · 02/10/2019 12:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Oriunda · 02/10/2019 12:25

Pic taken from Twitter. Luckily plenty of people had the chance to screenshot it before they changed it.

QualCheckBot · 02/10/2019 12:25

I'd never criticise anyone for hiring a ruthless law firm. Presumably they want the best representation they can get.

Well there are law firms who will advise their clients to be sensible, and their are law firms which will give more selective advice so as to flame the irritation felt by their clients so as to give the impression that it can be resolved only by sueing. Which of course is very good for the law firm, but not necessarily for the client.

Moknicker · 02/10/2019 12:26

So happy they have done this. To all the posters who are saying "all the details of her nastiness will come out now" I take the opposite view. What is under debate in not MM's personal life but the editorial practices of the DM

Im looking forward to having the nasty MoS journos and editors on the stand and being cross examined. Hopefully their vileness will exposed for the world to see. In my fantasy world Petty Piers will also take the stand.

Obviously it wont change the mind of all the nasties on the DM website and on here. Cognitive bias is extremely hard to change. But hopefully it will have some effect on the nastiness of the press to bully everyone.

One point on Harry's letter stood out. The result of all this nastiness is that for most people she isn't a real person anymore - just a target for all their rage, helplessness and unhappiness. And there is a lot out there due to Brexit and likely to be more if Boris has his way.

I for one dont know anything about MM and dont care either way about her personally but its really shameful to see the way she and other are treated by the DM to satisfy the insatiable appetite of the masses for lurid content.

AnyMinuteNow · 02/10/2019 12:30

I think whats apparent is there's a huge Venn overlap between celebrity and royal.

Ah thanks shush my understanding so far was that anything else fell more into data protection, whereas profiting from sharing was infringement of copyright.

Can you point me toward this in law please? (Link)

LaurieMarlow · 02/10/2019 12:37

I think whats apparent is there's a huge Venn overlap between celebrity and royal.

I’ve never really seen a distinction. They fulfil a very similar role for people, always have done.

BertrandRussell · 02/10/2019 12:41

“To all the posters who are saying "all the details of her nastiness will come out now"”
Well if it does it does. For all we know she is an awful human being- maybe we’ll find out.

escapade1234 · 02/10/2019 12:41

it was horrific. Saying she had faked her pregnancy to get attention

Is that horrific? I’d say it’s ridiculous. Would that rumour really play on your mind for more than a nano second before you put it down to losers with poor social skills who have nothing better to dream up?

Come on. That’s not horrific at all - don’t be dramatic.

CatherineOfAragonsPrayerBook · 02/10/2019 12:41

The one they only signed with like three weeks ago???

No I mean in general but also including them, which is why I mentioned BP PR. I appreciate your point regarding the time it took to rehabilitate Camilla's image. Yet I think it's worth remembering that Harry in particular started with with a very positive public image and Meghan had a large following due to her fictional persona and also her 'Tig' blog.

So I'm somewhat doubtful about the press being wholly responsible for things going so awry. My point is that I feel there is some evidence to suggest they are not necessarily heeding appropriate advice, save perhaps where promoting their causes is concerned.

KevinKlineSwoon · 02/10/2019 12:42

@SaraNade @joyfullittlehippo It's hard to explain.

This public statement is just not the way it's usually done. Usually the royal family is extremely discreet, things are settled privately, public statements and independent law firms are not usually engaged. It's all very old school, traditional and quiet. I work in news, and there are several open royal secrets that are never reported. Loads of work goes on behind the scenes that the public never hears about. To do this so publicly is a surprise. The legal action could have been launched without a statement.

Maybe this is just changed times. We no longer live in a time when the press pack camps out for pictures. Journalists and photographers have no time or budgets or staff so I'm very cynical when I see pappaazzi shots.

Dongdingdong · 02/10/2019 12:44

@Dongdingdong False. The Heil changed their strap line on their online article once people started complaining. It’s very easy to do (I write online articles and can go in once published and change things).

@Oriunda Nope - what you said is false. You said the following:

after news of court came out, they changed their headline to ‘Royal Car Crash’ Duchess. Disgusting and mildly threatening.

The Daily Mail did not change their headline to "Royal Car Crash Duchess" after Harry's statement came out. "Royal Car Crash" was the original headline, which they then changed to "Meghan Markle and Prince Harry face new green row over Range Rovers shipped from UK to southern Africa for their 10-day tour" after Harry's statement.

I agree that "royal car crash" is a vile headline but let's be accurate, please.

Mollymoo01 · 02/10/2019 12:46

Apparently MM does not behave as the usual Royals if reports are to believed

“This alliterate former actress earned herself $250K by having a 30 minute lunch with a group of people who each paid 5 figures to attend. Meghan Markle ("Women in Public Service" breakfast at the High Commission or Woodstock Exchange to meet women entrepreneurs and technology investors)”

It’s fine to charge for a meet and great, many people do but 1, I’m not sure it’s appropriate for royalty and 2, don’t make out that women empowerment is important to you and then charge women entrepreneurs to spend half an hour in your presence. If it was that important morally for you, you wouldn't charge!

SaraNade · 02/10/2019 12:46

@QualCheckBot There is nothing to make up. You said it yourself. Or do you forget saying that she should visit him because he in his 70s and not well?

Do you have a habit of forgetting what you yourself have written? 'but not visit him before the wedding or make the effort to see him to set things straight after the wedding. ....but the man clearly isn't the healthiest and is in his seventies, so its rather sad that no sympathy is being shown for him. He's still a human being.'

You did write this, did you not? Or are you going to attempt to say you didn't and we are 'misreading' you? If two people supposedly 'misread' your own words, maybe you should stop to consider how you come across in your written posts.

LaMarschallin · 02/10/2019 12:47

joyfullittlehippo

I know people in the entertainment world in L.A. I heard this from them years before MM met Harry.

Haha suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure.

I'm assuming that "Haha suu..." etc is implying that you don't believe the poster you've quoted, hippo?

To be fair, this is an anonymous message board and anything people post has to be viewed in that light.

It's possible this is the truth.
I've certainly read things here and "Haha suuuuure-ed" to myself.
But I wouldn't imply someone was lying because I can't know the truth.

ilovetofu · 02/10/2019 12:48

Erm sorry if this is a stupid question but how do you "vote" besides commenting?

NoTheresa · 02/10/2019 12:48

@Ponoka7

Kate is never called Kate Middleton.

She most certainly is.

NoTheresa · 02/10/2019 12:50

But I wouldn't imply someone was lying because I can't know the truth.

No you wouldn’t because you seem to be a reasonable person. Others, however, might do just that.

AlexaAmbidextra · 02/10/2019 12:51

She was no longer an HRH. I doubt she would have been entitled to much, if any, security detail.

She was still entitled to royal protection. Paul Condon, the then Commissioner of the Met, begged her to reinstate her protection after she had dismissed it. He spoke to her many times to try to get her to change her mind but her paranoia led her to believe that the police were in cahoots with the Palace so not on her side.

Dongdingdong · 02/10/2019 12:52

She was still entitled to royal protection. Paul Condon, the then Commissioner of the Met, begged her to reinstate her protection after she had dismissed it. He spoke to her many times to try to get her to change her mind but her paranoia led her to believe that the police were in cahoots with the Palace so not on her side.

So very sad.

ilovetofu · 02/10/2019 12:53

I am in no way a fan of the royal fam.
But...the press were chasing Harry's mother when she died. Then they filmed her. I feel it's understandable that he blames them 🤷‍♀️

QualCheckBot · 02/10/2019 12:54

SaraNade Do you have a habit of forgetting what you yourself have written? 'but not visit him before the wedding or make the effort to see him to set things straight after the wedding. ....but the man clearly isn't the healthiest and is in his seventies, so its rather sad that no sympathy is being shown for him. He's still a human being.'

No, I don't have such a habit.

Absolutely right I said those words. Is there something to be spun out of that particular viewpoint in your latest personal attack on me?

I know you think everyone should have uniform views or they should be expelled from the human race or something, but these aren't especially abhorrent views to express, and they are shared by a number of posters on this thread.

Its the fact that I'm gently mocking you that's irritating you so much, isn't it?

I'll actually do you a courtesy you don't deserve and explain why I think it would have been better for MM to have handled her father better. Firstly, its been terrible publicity for her and it will haunt her all her life, because even with little nitpickers like you constantly on the case, it will never die away. People will always comment on this. I suspect when people write autobiographies of the woman in 100 years time, it will still be getting dissected in detail. Secondly, the Royal Family at its best sets a good example of how to behave well in public. Granted it doesn't always succeed, but it can be better if you are in the public eye to turn the other cheek, to be holier than holy in your response to bad behaviour.

So sorry to disappoint your excitable little mind, but I said that not because I am the second coming of the antichrist but through a logical process called thought. Not clearly one which you can imagine yourself but one which I am entitled to have.

Keep trying with the censorship thing though!

joyfullittlehippo · 02/10/2019 12:54

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Idontwanttotalk · 02/10/2019 12:57

@SaraNade

"I'm still not following. How doesn't she follow royal behaviour? I have not seen her do one thing, say one thing, or advocate one thing, that any other royal doesn't. No one has to date been able to give anything tangible she has done or said that isn't standard royal behaviour (bar baby shower in the US)."
What about her not doing what other royals do:

  1. Announcing the godparents of her child.
  2. Appearing with her newborn on the steps of the hospital when leaving.
  3. Publishing a picture of their baby on the day of the Christening (one where you can actually see the baby).

I am not saying she should do these things but just stating these are areas in which she has not followed royal behaviour.