Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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:
justasking111 · 05/10/2019 16:20

As for Elton John writing that drivel and serialising it in a paper that has given his so called friends a very hard time. I hope that his other friends will give him a dressing down. Our family would certainly block him completely.

CallmeAngelina · 05/10/2019 16:22

I used to like Harry. And Meghan too.

I think they have behaved very foolishly recently, and this latest issue re: the press will come back to haunt them. It will not go well, for them or the Royal Family generally.

cathyno5 · 05/10/2019 16:24

A few years ago a friend who was a journalist on a national newspaper told me that they had a number of very interesting royal stories but that Rupert Murdoch would not allow them to be published during the queen's lifetime. I'm not sure if it's true of course....

CallmeAngelina · 05/10/2019 16:27

I know of someone who used to be a journalist for the Mail, and they were told quite categorically that if their articles didn't provoke frothing and anger in their readers, then they weren't doing their jobs properly.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 05/10/2019 16:34

I assume you're joking in that last post, Moknicker? Even a brief search brought up endless comments on the Queen's finances, and you surely can't be suggesting there haven't been threads about the taxpayers' continuing support of someone like Andrew ... ?

I'm not saying (obviously ) H should be blackmailed

Fortunately, neither are any of us - but the fact remains that the press will defend themselves if they have to. At that point there'd be much less RF control of where the chips fall, which is probably one reason they'll never let it get that far

Given some of the quid pro quos the family (including his sainted mother) have engaged in with the press, I'd have thought Harry would be capable of working this out for himself ... but apparently not

BertrandRussell · 05/10/2019 16:39

“I bet there's a load of RF skeletons clattering about in closets that the media know about,”
Let’s hope they come out. Entertainment while the tumbrels roll......

Moknicker · 05/10/2019 16:39

@myimaginary- I was responding to a specific poster who raised the issue
What's sad is having a taxpayer funded 'royal' family in supposedly modern country in 2019

and referencing other threads discussing taxpayers funding MM exposing the fact that i spend too much time on mumsnet

diddl · 05/10/2019 16:46

The whole lot of them seem to be so clueless tbh.

Wasn't it the QM who said after Buck Palace had been bombed that she could look the Eastenders in the eye/knew how they felt or some such guff?

She was hardly homeless with just the clothes on her back to her name!

I'm not sure that they have really become any more clued uo since then!

Myimaginarycathasfleas · 05/10/2019 16:57

You and me both, @Moknicker Grin

CurlyhairedAssassin · 05/10/2019 17:05

Let’s face it, the press is out to sell stories (hard copy or online). Controversy about the RF of any kind sells. Nice “heartwarming” stories about the RF sell. Highlighting whatever dress Kate or Meghan wore to a function sells. God knows why, but it does. Whatever you think about their existence, people want to read about them. We are all hypocrites if we deny this, we have all opened the thread and commented.

The media knows this. Yet there has been some fucking DISGUSTING behaviour by the press over many years in order to sell newspapers. Just ask Millie Dowler’s family. They are all after a story, good or bad. This correspondent KNEW that asking a loaded question like that, referring specifically to the “short” conversation Harry had just had, would possibly provoke a reaction. She knew his state of mind. Did she have to make it sound like an accusation? Implied that his attendance there achieved nothing? Would she dared have asked the queen the same question in the same situation? I very much doubt it.

These media types are horrible. Vile human beings. Plenty on here have suggested that the press have probably got stories hidden up their sleeves ready to pull out when they’re not getting what they want from the royals. Is that really what we want our press to be? Is it?

QualCheckBot · 05/10/2019 17:12

I'd love to see figures for properly audited accounts for all members of the RF. I'd be particularly interested to compare the sums spent on PR and legal fees. Then it would be possible to make meaningful criticisms.

I'd also be interested in figures for payment of members of the Royal Family for meetings with them, gifts, etc..

Does anyone know if these figures are available?

Cohle · 05/10/2019 17:15

How about 2?

The way her birth was handled. I think exactly the same result for their family could have been achieved with much less negative publicity if the media had been handled better. The patronising initial statement about privacy, the shambles on the day, the eye to American timings etc all played badly.

I also think her baby shower was a misstep. Of course she can have a baby shower but the private jets, expensive hotel, Hollywood guests being papped arriving holding huge gifts, insta stories etc etc, has I think in part shaped the way she has been perceived by the public.

There are plenty of others - her comments at the Lion King premiere, the way her deteriorating relationship with her father has been played out in the press, having her friends give comments to the media and so on.

QualCheckBot · 05/10/2019 17:15

As obviously it would be a bit hypocritical to use public funds on PR etc and then take legal action against the Press when you yourself are not in any way accountable whatsoever.

It would hardly be very woke to expect that in these days of austerity.

And you would have to be very gullible or indoctrinated in British tradition to agree that's acceptable.

CurlyhairedAssassin · 05/10/2019 17:17

I'd also be interested in figures for payment of members of the Royal Family for meetings with them, gifts, etc..

Why? Do you think they SHOULDN’T accept payment for meetings with them? You can’t accuse them on one hand of refurbishing their houses with public money, and on the other that they shouldn’t be accepting money for interviews, surely?

CurlyhairedAssassin · 05/10/2019 17:29

Personally I think they would be best having no relationship with the press whatsoever. Maintain a dignified silence. Confirm nothing. Deny nothing. Turn up to their charity engagements, shake people’s hands, take the flowers off the school children, do whatever speech is expected of them for the occasion, smile nicely for photo calls, say how happy they are to be there, and keep their private thoughts to themselves. Don’t bother answering ANY questions from the press attending as all the information they would need to know about the occasion would have been spoken about in their “happy to be here” speech. Have fixed answers ready for intrusive or provocative questions from so-called “correspondents”. Palace to release statement about births, deaths, divorces, marriages. Do not comment on any story in the press whether it’s a pack of lies or not and they would remain an enigma. If interest in them dies out because of that then so be it.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 05/10/2019 17:44

QualCheckBot I've no idea if the figures you mentioned are available or not, but I'm pretty darned sure that we'll never get to see them if they do

The closest we probably get regarding "cash for access" is the charges donations expected from those who attend semi-private events hosted by the family, with Charles's dinners in support of Dumfries House being an obvious example. We are of course told that the host makes nothing out of such events at all ...

Myimaginarycathasfleas · 05/10/2019 18:15

@CurlyhairedAssassin Your post sums up exactly what a lot of people expect from the royal family, and with which they would be perfectly content. I for one would be more than happy if the Instagram and a Twitter feeds came to a dead stop and all we saw and heard of them was exactly as you describe. They could still do plenty of worthy work under the radar but minus the publicity.

Pitterpatterpettysteps · 05/10/2019 18:21

Yes, I think their Instagram is a big part of what is making H&M more unpopular- it seems so smug and self important.

Other royals have Instagram accounts, but you get the impression they are run by staff & not serving as a vehicle to boost someone’s ego.

I quite like the Highgrove Gardens page

RoseQuartzGlow · 05/10/2019 18:24

*Yes, I think their Instagram is a big part of what is making H&M more unpopular- it seems so smug and self important.

Other royals have Instagram accounts, but you get the impression they are run by staff & not serving as a vehicle to boost someone’s ego.*

Yes exactly

BertrandRussell · 05/10/2019 18:25

It’s weird that people don’t like the Instagram- it’s just pictures of stuff they’ve done.....

RoseQuartzGlow · 05/10/2019 18:27

@CurlyhairedAssassin

Your comments are spot on.

Myimaginarycathasfleas · 05/10/2019 18:28

Well no, it's more than that. Both H&M used Instagram to leave gushing birthday messages to each other. All very lovely in a card but who posts that stuff so publicly? Utterly crass.

BertrandRussell · 05/10/2019 18:29

Personally I like to get my money’s worth, so the more pictures the better.

BertrandRussell · 05/10/2019 18:30

“All very lovely in a card but who posts that stuff so publicly? ”

The Obamas?

RoseQuartzGlow · 05/10/2019 18:32

That's the point though. They aren't in the same position at all.