Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To wonder why Prince Harry got annoyed with Sky News reporter?

865 replies

elprup · 03/10/2019 13:30

It seems very out of character for Harry? Confused I wonder if he misinterpreted and thought she was asking about the lawsuit...

twitter.com/TheRoyalExpert/status/1179155649898467329

OP posts:
Boysey45 · 05/10/2019 15:13

Hes such a bell end its laughable. I think he seems to have very little understanding about how they come across and the consequences of actions.

Rosehip10 · 05/10/2019 15:16

Harry is a deluded, entitled idiot.

Cohle · 05/10/2019 15:20

Frankly I think their have been loads. But listing them comes across as mean spirited and obsessive. And of course on MN thinking "she seems a nice enough woman in a difficult role facing a hostile press but she/her team haven't always played it right" gets you accused of being racist.

Mummy195 · 05/10/2019 15:21

Good on them, the DailyKlan needs to be checked.

There is a lot of people who say H&M are courting publicity. But don't you need to court publicity for work? when a film is coming out the cast and directors will hold lots of interviews and premiers, when someone is publishing a book they will hold interviews, but I have never demanded to see their babies and know how much their fathers hate them?. It does not matter if they are public paid and they did not choose it, bottom line is they work, they do more than 200 engagements p/a and it does not take a genius to work it out that there are 365 days per year. The senior RF does more than 400 on average. Diplomats represent the country while everything is being paid for them and that is a similar role the RF represents - except the RF bring in way more money. Luckily, they can do the job too. You meet lots of specialists, scientists etc. you have to know something to say to them without making a fool of yourself - they are never reported to do.

H&M go to charity events as their duty and will be photographed there, they have no problem with this, but why do we need to know all about their personal lives, they are not our slaves. Surely the press can access all of the RF engagements, yet they never report on Anne, Sophie and Edward etc. , that is the press choosing, they target these two, who are in turn accused of not keeping their heads low, seeking publicity.
It is not in the public interest to know about her falling out with her father or any of their personal life.

Suing the press is actually a page3 story, not headlines. The media have exposed themselves once more. They put their greed before public interest, because the front page story should be about the charities the Sussexes are visiting, not what they are doing in their personal time (suing the press).

I suspect this was timed right by the PR company, for later court cases when they can prove the media has been out for sales all along not public interest, and they predictably fell right for it.

Iamnotagoddess · 05/10/2019 15:29

😂

Mummy195 · 05/10/2019 15:30

Betrand
William's private jets were romanticised. And Harry was seen as taking a pop at Wills when he mentioned the overpopulation, but how could he have been when William said it first.

It's the double standards from the media and trolls I cannot stand.

To wonder why Prince Harry got annoyed with Sky News reporter?
KatyCarrCan · 05/10/2019 15:34

Bertrand I think you genuinely don't understand PR and that's fine but it's also tedious that you keep repeating that point. It's not your field so you don't understand what they could have done. But it's also impossible to explain it to you because a comprehensive communications strategy touches on aspects that you wouldn't even consider from wording, to timing, to quiet lunches with journalists, from switching one story for another and on and on. You don't need to understand it. When PR works well, the general public don't 'see' it. But when it works badly, you're left with a mess like this.
And don't misunderstand what I'm saying, there are lots of horrendous comments and stories on social media that wouldn't have been impacted at all by a decent strategy but H&M aren't launching cases against Facebook/Twitter etc. They're targeting the traditional media and that's exactly the format that their team could control better.

BertrandRussell · 05/10/2019 15:34

“Frankly I think their have been loads. But listing them comes across as mean spirited and obsessive.”

How about 2?

BertrandRussell · 05/10/2019 15:38

@KatyCarrCan
Do you think you could redraft that and make it just a bit more patronising?

MauritiusNext · 05/10/2019 15:43

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

MauritiusNext · 05/10/2019 15:44

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

timshelthechoice · 05/10/2019 15:47

Isnt it really sad that most people on this thread continues to character assassinate the royals while ignoring the real issue

What's sad is having a taxpayer funded 'royal' family in supposedly modern country in 2019. They have plenty of money of their own to swan around in private jets, preach on a beach, whinge like toddlers about how hard done by they are.

timshelthechoice · 05/10/2019 15:50

No, Harry isn't responsible for Elton John's actions but it says a lot about his crap judgement of the people he associates with.

He isn't exactly known for his brain power.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 05/10/2019 15:59

I sincerely hope this case goes to trial and all of them and their bosses take the stand so we can all hear about the unethical practices that go on that affect all of us

Personally I think it'll be settled out of court if it gets that far at all, but it's worth considering what "putting the papers on the stand" could lead to. If even Paul Burrell had to be stopped before giving evidence, I wouldn't want to assume the RF would enjoy whatever the press chose to disclose under oath - especially bearing in mind their history of keeping back stories until they consider the time's right

Even for our unaccountable RF, it's sometimes wise to be careful what you wish for

KatyCarrCan · 05/10/2019 16:00

Oh how very ironic.
Exactly.

BertrandRussell · 05/10/2019 16:00

“Queen slapping her nephew playfully while saying 'I'm the Queen!'”
There was an anecdote going around million years ago that the Queen Mother once called down the stairs to her staff “I don’t know what all you old queens are doing but this
old Queen wants a gin and tonic!” .....

justasking111 · 05/10/2019 16:03

What would be interesting is observing the advertisers who appear on the pages of these tabloids online and in print. Hope none of them enjoy a royal warrant.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 05/10/2019 16:05

Interesting point made about Elton's indiscretions too

Now that Harry's made it quite clear how much he objects to the spreading of stories which are best kept private, let's hope he'll be accepting no more free holidays, jet trips or anything else from this particular celeb

Or would that be somehow "different"?

Moknicker · 05/10/2019 16:06

@timhelthechoice
And that is of course a debate worth having but its not the issue being discussed is it? The issue is whether they have a reasonable expectation of privacy despite their public roles.
But lets stay on the issue of whether you need a royal family for a moment. Why aren't there threads about the Queen and a scrutiny of her expenses to see if it is justified? Surely the discussion should start there. What about whether taxpayers should be funding a prince who has links to a convicted pedophile?

However, if we are being honest, that's not what most people on these sorts of threads are questioning. It is whether MM should be funded by the taxpayer. People cant bear the fact that she is now a royal and is being funded by them in some small way (compared to all the other royals).

Leighhalfpennysthigh · 05/10/2019 16:07

GrinHmmShockat the poster who compared the "work" the royal family do to diplomats!

Myimaginarycathasfleas · 05/10/2019 16:07

How about 2?

The shambolic arrangements for notifying the press when Meghan went into labour. It caused a lot of unnecessary ill feeling. They could simply not have made any announcement at all until after the baby had been born. Instead I believe Harry deliberately tried to wrongfoot the media by releasing misleading information.

And the timing of the release of his ranting statement, so soon after a highly successful tour in which they seemed to get everything right. All that good work tarnished by a petulant footstamp.

Competent PR would have managed both of these scenarios better.

timshelthechoice · 05/10/2019 16:13

And that is of course a debate worth having but its not the issue being discussed is it?

Congratulations on being promoted to Thread Monitor! It's your opinion that everything's about MM being funded, so own it with 'I' not 'if we are being honest', you personally believe it's all about MM.

Hmm
MauritiusNext · 05/10/2019 16:15

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Myimaginarycathasfleas · 05/10/2019 16:15

However, if we are being honest, that's not what most people on these sorts of threads are questioning. It is whether MM should be funded by the taxpayer. People cant bear the fact that she is now a royal and is being funded by them in some small way (compared to all the other royals).

Where do you get this idea from?

I've never read anything about whether she should be funded by the taxpayer!

justasking111 · 05/10/2019 16:19

Weren`t the photographers using long lenses and trying to spy to catch Meghan leaving the house so that they could say she was on the way to hospital. Now compare that to the Duchess slipping into hospital to have her babies without being photographed. The Sun also whipped up some story that no-one was allowed to approach MM or the baby if they were walking around the estate and that employees had lost parking places. They had to apologise for that

observer.com/2019/10/prince-harry-meghan-markle-frogmore-cottage-parking-claim-the-sun-apology/