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 think we need a Royal Commission on the Conduct of the Daily Mail and other media?

144 replies

Jbon9087 · 08/03/2021 17:01

I see this H&M interview a little differently.

Do you agree there needs to be a commission investigation into the conduct of the media specifically the Daily Mail etc especially after the DM lost its court case?

Previous articles should be produced by them - including when Piers Morgan called on the Queen the take baby Archie away. Because its clear the DM is doubling down on their bullying and gaslighting and it has to be stopped before someone is hurt.

So Piers Morgan once liked Megan until she stopped talking to him because he's... him,... so he's used the paper to hound her for like 3 years?? Is he out of his mind? Are we? What if this were me? You? Your best friend? A girl or boy he tried to pick up in a bar? Another celebrity??

Where does it stop?

Forget the RF and H&M for a second, who gave the DM the right to destroy lives and our institutions?

I just damn well hate bullies, hated them at school, and I think we should all hate them.

OP posts:
FoxyTheFox · 09/03/2021 10:53

Harrys the one who dresses up as a nazi right?

And that absolves the press of any wrongdoing, does it?

Jbon9087 · 09/03/2021 18:28

Ofcom has launched an investigation into Monday’s episode of Good Morning Britain after it received more than 40,000 complaints about comments made by Piers Morgan about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s interview with Oprah Winfrey.

To anyone on this thread who may have called Ofcom to complain about Piers Morgan bless you!

He's a bully and like all bullies see how he fled this mornings show the first time his co-presenter finally challenged him? She also should have stopped him years ago btw.

He's a simple coward who for 3 yrs has run around with the power of a loaded gun.

See we don't have to stand for any of this. Lets keep up the pressure on Ofcom and remember we don't have to stand for the DM and their crap either. 😘

OP posts:
turquoisewaters · 09/03/2021 18:37

Why do you think the complaining would have come from this thread? It's ridiculous

The mobbing, 'cancel culture' mentality is likely to backfire at some point

rosetylersbiggun · 09/03/2021 19:45

Yes, we urgently need a proper investigation into the extreme amount of corruption and quid pro quo relationships that exist between the royals, the media, and the government.

Examples:

William and Kate's press secretary's partner was exposed for accepting three payments totalling £4,000 from a bank account belonging to the Sun, in exchange for negative insider stories about Meghan. That press secretary was not fired despite proof his partner was selling Royal secrets for cash. Surely selling royal secrets is much worse than anything Meghan was accused of? Surely a case for immediate dismissal, unless the decision to smear Meghan in the press came from the RF itself?

The royals forced Meghan to accept Dan Wootton's best friend since uni as her personal adviser and handler, he was leaking negative stories about her the entire time he was her adviser, he was the one who gave the Thomas Markle letter to the Daily Mail, and not only was he not fired but was promoted to being CEO of William and Kate's foundation. Why have William and Kate rewarded and given a position of trust to someone proven to be leaking royal secrets, unless he also was acting under RF orders?

Several journalists have gone on record as saying the Palace offered them nasty stories about and incriminating photos of Harry as a bribe to get them to kill stories that would make William look bad.

According to the Robert Lacey book the Palace started giving negative stories about Harry to the tabloids in order to protect William when Harry was still a minor child, including giving a tabloid photos of underage Harry drinking in exchange for them censoring stories of William's partying.

One of the things the "bullying allegation" revealed is that several RP staffers who have signed NDAs preventing them from speaking to the press, actually had tabloid journalists' personal mobile numbers and were regularly chatting to tabloid journalists about their boss and what happened inside Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace on a day to day basis, and no one in the RF has spoken about this breach of NDA and huge breach of professional ethics, and they were not fired for breaching their NDAs.

The story about Meghan and Kate having a tiff during the flower girl dress fitting was originally given to a journalist named Camilla Tominey, who is known to be close friends with Carole Middleton. Only someone very close to the royals could have known the tiff happened since it was in private. All the debate and drama about what happened during the tiff, not a word about which Palace source phoned up a journalist to repeat a private conversation to her. (Not even talking about the fact the 'source' lied and changed it from Kate making Meghan cry to Meghan making Kate cry, the identity of the Leaker and the fact someone intimately connected to Royals is phoning up tabloid journalists to repeat a senior royal's private conversation is a much bigger scandal than why did two stressed hormonal women have a brief tiff.)

Buckingham Palace released the statement that Harry would be stripped of his military titles the same day the British High Court ruled that Matt Hancock had broken the law in terms of the PPE contract corruption scandal, an act which killed thousands of people. BP releasing the statement on the same day successfully buried the Matt Hancock story which was a much bigger and more important story (royals tiffing with each other is fun gossip but not actually important news-wise).

All the stuff about the Queen and Charles pressuring the UK government to pass laws favourable to them.

rosetylersbiggun · 09/03/2021 19:51

Oh and several journalists have gone on record to say they'd received harsh phone calls from the Palace telling them to stop writing any kind of negative coverage of William or Kate and - direct quote - "be nice about Kate, and threatening them with removal of access if they did not comply.

No one has come forward to say the Palace has ever asked the press to stop abusing, racially abusing, and smearing Meghan.

I’m very happy with a free press, thank you.

LOL we don't have a free press.

gingganggooleywotsit · 09/03/2021 20:45

@rosetylersbiggun this is fascinating! So much conniving and underhand behaviour..unbelievable.

gingganggooleywotsit · 09/03/2021 20:49

It makes sense as William is the heir and Harry is the spare. The royal family have always been ruthless. I can really believe all this could be true..

Lampzade · 09/03/2021 20:53

We need an investigation into Murdoch’s monopoly of British media

Lampzade · 09/03/2021 20:56

@rosetylersbiggun

Yes, we urgently need a proper investigation into the extreme amount of corruption and quid pro quo relationships that exist between the royals, the media, and the government.

Examples:

William and Kate's press secretary's partner was exposed for accepting three payments totalling £4,000 from a bank account belonging to the Sun, in exchange for negative insider stories about Meghan. That press secretary was not fired despite proof his partner was selling Royal secrets for cash. Surely selling royal secrets is much worse than anything Meghan was accused of? Surely a case for immediate dismissal, unless the decision to smear Meghan in the press came from the RF itself?

The royals forced Meghan to accept Dan Wootton's best friend since uni as her personal adviser and handler, he was leaking negative stories about her the entire time he was her adviser, he was the one who gave the Thomas Markle letter to the Daily Mail, and not only was he not fired but was promoted to being CEO of William and Kate's foundation. Why have William and Kate rewarded and given a position of trust to someone proven to be leaking royal secrets, unless he also was acting under RF orders?

Several journalists have gone on record as saying the Palace offered them nasty stories about and incriminating photos of Harry as a bribe to get them to kill stories that would make William look bad.

According to the Robert Lacey book the Palace started giving negative stories about Harry to the tabloids in order to protect William when Harry was still a minor child, including giving a tabloid photos of underage Harry drinking in exchange for them censoring stories of William's partying.

One of the things the "bullying allegation" revealed is that several RP staffers who have signed NDAs preventing them from speaking to the press, actually had tabloid journalists' personal mobile numbers and were regularly chatting to tabloid journalists about their boss and what happened inside Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace on a day to day basis, and no one in the RF has spoken about this breach of NDA and huge breach of professional ethics, and they were not fired for breaching their NDAs.

The story about Meghan and Kate having a tiff during the flower girl dress fitting was originally given to a journalist named Camilla Tominey, who is known to be close friends with Carole Middleton. Only someone very close to the royals could have known the tiff happened since it was in private. All the debate and drama about what happened during the tiff, not a word about which Palace source phoned up a journalist to repeat a private conversation to her. (Not even talking about the fact the 'source' lied and changed it from Kate making Meghan cry to Meghan making Kate cry, the identity of the Leaker and the fact someone intimately connected to Royals is phoning up tabloid journalists to repeat a senior royal's private conversation is a much bigger scandal than why did two stressed hormonal women have a brief tiff.)

Buckingham Palace released the statement that Harry would be stripped of his military titles the same day the British High Court ruled that Matt Hancock had broken the law in terms of the PPE contract corruption scandal, an act which killed thousands of people. BP releasing the statement on the same day successfully buried the Matt Hancock story which was a much bigger and more important story (royals tiffing with each other is fun gossip but not actually important news-wise).

All the stuff about the Queen and Charles pressuring the UK government to pass laws favourable to them.

Interesting post
Forwhatitsworth101 · 09/03/2021 21:01

Funny I don’t think hate for MM is actually black and white- racism comes in all forms and actually be between ethnic groups

FoxyTheFox · 09/03/2021 21:03

The royal family have always been ruthless

Right the way through history.

AlecTrevelyan006 · 10/03/2021 07:12

@rosetylersbiggun

Yes, we urgently need a proper investigation into the extreme amount of corruption and quid pro quo relationships that exist between the royals, the media, and the government.

Examples:

William and Kate's press secretary's partner was exposed for accepting three payments totalling £4,000 from a bank account belonging to the Sun, in exchange for negative insider stories about Meghan. That press secretary was not fired despite proof his partner was selling Royal secrets for cash. Surely selling royal secrets is much worse than anything Meghan was accused of? Surely a case for immediate dismissal, unless the decision to smear Meghan in the press came from the RF itself?

The royals forced Meghan to accept Dan Wootton's best friend since uni as her personal adviser and handler, he was leaking negative stories about her the entire time he was her adviser, he was the one who gave the Thomas Markle letter to the Daily Mail, and not only was he not fired but was promoted to being CEO of William and Kate's foundation. Why have William and Kate rewarded and given a position of trust to someone proven to be leaking royal secrets, unless he also was acting under RF orders?

Several journalists have gone on record as saying the Palace offered them nasty stories about and incriminating photos of Harry as a bribe to get them to kill stories that would make William look bad.

According to the Robert Lacey book the Palace started giving negative stories about Harry to the tabloids in order to protect William when Harry was still a minor child, including giving a tabloid photos of underage Harry drinking in exchange for them censoring stories of William's partying.

One of the things the "bullying allegation" revealed is that several RP staffers who have signed NDAs preventing them from speaking to the press, actually had tabloid journalists' personal mobile numbers and were regularly chatting to tabloid journalists about their boss and what happened inside Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace on a day to day basis, and no one in the RF has spoken about this breach of NDA and huge breach of professional ethics, and they were not fired for breaching their NDAs.

The story about Meghan and Kate having a tiff during the flower girl dress fitting was originally given to a journalist named Camilla Tominey, who is known to be close friends with Carole Middleton. Only someone very close to the royals could have known the tiff happened since it was in private. All the debate and drama about what happened during the tiff, not a word about which Palace source phoned up a journalist to repeat a private conversation to her. (Not even talking about the fact the 'source' lied and changed it from Kate making Meghan cry to Meghan making Kate cry, the identity of the Leaker and the fact someone intimately connected to Royals is phoning up tabloid journalists to repeat a senior royal's private conversation is a much bigger scandal than why did two stressed hormonal women have a brief tiff.)

Buckingham Palace released the statement that Harry would be stripped of his military titles the same day the British High Court ruled that Matt Hancock had broken the law in terms of the PPE contract corruption scandal, an act which killed thousands of people. BP releasing the statement on the same day successfully buried the Matt Hancock story which was a much bigger and more important story (royals tiffing with each other is fun gossip but not actually important news-wise).

All the stuff about the Queen and Charles pressuring the UK government to pass laws favourable to them.

I worked in publishing then PR for many years across a range of industries and that is pretty much standard fare.

PRs offering journalists story B in return for dropping story A happens all the time.

Justaboutok · 10/03/2021 20:26

www.theguardian.com/media/2021/mar/09/society-of-editors-claim-uk-media-not-racist-laughable

Slightly disturbed by the initial statement from the society of editors and that it required hundreds of journalist to petition turn it around...

BluesInTheSun · 10/03/2021 21:32

[quote VladmirsPoutine]**@bestthingsinceslicedbread* Don't bother, I've come across people like FiveGens* both IRL and online - esp on Mumsnet. They have no vested interest in 'seeing' the racism. I'd even go so far as to say they quite enjoy it. The BBC could call Meghan the n-word on News at Six and people like that would still not see the issue. So the whole 'straight outta compton' stuff doesn't wash with them - if anything it's far too subtle. That's how racism is allowed to flourish within our institutions especially within the media thus becoming a pillar of this country. Don't bother.[/quote]
👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿 So well said

LizzieSiddal · 10/03/2021 21:38

I worked in publishing then PR for many years across a range of industries and that is pretty much standard fare.

PRs offering journalists story B in return for dropping story A happens all the time.

Yes and it needs to stop. Especially when it’s Royal “insiders” telling lies about another person.

BluesInTheSun · 10/03/2021 21:51

@Livelovebehappy

The press are not racist. They are closely regulated and you will not find racist comments made by any of the mainstream media publications. Stupid to suggest otherwise. We need the press to expose issues which are happening, which otherwise would be covered up and hidden.
UK papers are essentially self regulated. The same people writing the racist headlines are the ones deciding what constitutes racism. They are also overwhelmingly white so they are making a determination when racism is unlikely to affect them.
Quaagars · 10/03/2021 22:48

Why do you think the complaining would have come from this thread? It's ridiculous

I know I'm not the one you were referring to, but just commenting - I don't think it will have come from this thread, but it's clear from the sheer volume of complaints and the strength of feeling here on on other social media that he finally took it too far.
It's not a good look for a company to have a mental health campaign, a whole #bekind hashtag, and to be called out by MIND charity because one of their main producers rubbished/ dismissed mental health claims.
Which is why I think he had to go.

Jbon9087 · 10/03/2021 23:10

Why do you think the complaining would have come from this thread? It's ridiculous

Yes I do - the people on MN - including me - who called Ofcom form some of the 41,000 complaints who made a nasty bully flounce off set Tuesday. That's how social activism works and it's how we hold companies and govt to account.

Instead of whinging and moaning online and hoping others do the hard work and when we effect change they pretend it was magic

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread