News on Meghan and Harry

[Viviennemary]

Since they are in the news more or less daily why not a thread on this. Latest I've read over the last few days is that Meghan is going to produce a film from a book. And later this month she is teaming up with Michelle Obama for project on gender equality. Both sound interesting projects.

Just a query on the overnight deletions... do we now have overnight mods? I thought during UK night hours we just had the night watch who would "hide" a post until it was seen by one of the mod team.

There aren't any time stamps on deletions but certainly up until midnight posters were referencing ARose's post.

Did anyone notice if the posts were hidden then deleted?

The Nightwatch page were responding to requests to hide/delete an outing post at 00:45 this morning which suggests the NW is still in operation and active last night.

There aren't any references to this thread on the NW page as far as I can see - is there another way of contacting the NW?

So perhaps we have overnight modding for all plus the NW, or the posts were reported somehow to NW and then MNHQ, or we have the NW plus additional overnight modding for particular threads?

Rose's post was deleted at about 6.45 this morning.

I thought it was an excellent post - both heartfelt and an incisive analysis of MM's speech.

I'm glad I was able to read it before it disappeared.

I too thought Rose's post was thoughtful and clear. I'm glad I read if before it disappeared

it's a shame MN are now unable to their apply rules consistently and with consideration to their whole audience.

I never really intended to subscribe to MN premium and now that 's a very definite NO. I think many may feel the same.

Mumsnet HQ - very disappointed in you .

Are MNHQ worried that they will be sued?

Is there anyway those of us who would like to, can see Rose's post?

@Puzzledandpissedoff

Excellent post, ARoseInHarlem ... I wonder how long it'll be before it's deleted?

i only read the thread briefly last night(and did not report anything) but it was obvious that people knew it was going to be deleted.

wufti that's my feeling too. I am not inclined to pay to be the subject of uneven moderation where personal attacks are fine against 'regular' posters and other high profile individuals but not against a particular one.

Have asked MN to clarify the deletion of Rose's post on the thread. Let's see if that happens.

So if I disagree with someone’s views because they don’t mirror my own I can complain to MM and get their posts deleted? That’s what seems to be happening on these threads as far as I can see?

I read RoseinHarlem's post yesterday and thought that all of those predicting that it would be deleted were just being paranoid! Obviously not!

A few days ago there was a suggestion/request that when MN deletes a post they should point out exactly which part of the guidelines have been infringed. I think this would be a good idea except that often they just resort to 'not in the spirit'

If what MN intends is that only positive opinions about certain individuals can be posted then they should say so clearly

I don't post often but do enjoy reading a wide range of opinions, positive and negative on a wide range of topics. If only certain opinions are tolerated here MN then please be clear about that.

I accept that libellous or gratuitously unkind statements are not welcome but I really cant see that is the case for the particular post in question or for that matter for many that have been deleted in relation to this topic.

Hi all, just to be clear - the deleted post contained these comments:

"It’s a fucking power trip. It’s about publicity and fame and LA and the likes and all that shit. "
"This is a woman for whom appearance, wealth, demeanour, and utterly hollow and baseless verbiage is what matters. "
"once you look past the lip filler, eyelash extensions, hair extensions, contouring make-up, past the affectations"

We've posted about our moderation previously in this thread, but it bears repeating here.

We're fine with a Harry and Meghan news thread - but a number of comments made here are just not in the spirit of Mumsnet.

It's worth reading this post to get an idea of where we draw the line.
Here's a relevant section:

There's no doubt that some of the flack Meghan Markle has faced is also due in no small part to her being a prominent black woman. So we will work harder to bear this context in mind and crack down harder on people who seem to be on Mumsnet mainly to contribute posts that criticise her or speculate about her actions in an unpleasant way. Because frankly, it’s not what we want Mumsnet to be about.

We hope this explains the deletions.

Please do bear in mind the expectations we have for these discussions. And as always, please report any post or poster that you're concerned about and we'll take a look.

so you think a post that starts of ripping her appearance apart it a good post?
I just read it elsewhere and I can see why it was deleted.
mn hq have explained at length as to why they delete posts that do that.

I think this clears up that no one reported it. The last time overnight posts were deleted, even though I posted next morning that I hadn't reported them, I was accused elsewhere of being too quick to deny so I obviously was the one who did!

I found the first paragraph very unpleasant or as meercat said 'gratuitously unkind'. Very. But I went to bed.

Mumsnet has quoted selectively from the post, which said the following:

This enrages me because, to me, she’s standing in the way of women and girls actually making progress, not encouraging progress. I defy any girl aged, let’s say, 14-16 yo to watch that video and be able to tell you how exactly their thoughts or actions will have been changed by what MM just said. It would be a vague “believe in yourself!”, “girl power!”, but mostly it would be about the packaging (the looks, the backstory etc). Meanwhile, millions and millions of women all around the world are making real, tangible differences to the plight of women’s inequality.

It’s a fucking power trip. It's about publicity and fame and LA and the likes and all that shit. And it’s infuriating because she’s actually harming the cause she’s preaching about.

It is completely inappropriate to delete the sentence beginning "It's a fucking power trip" in isolation and without its context. Doing so underscores the impression that perfectly legitimate criticisms are being censored.

Are you implying that the deleted post was racist @MichaelMumsnet?

Maybe the fact the post you are all fawing over opened with an unpleasant and irrelevant personal attack on MM's appearance

It actually said all those things were irrelevant!

The ‘nice’ thread is absolutely full of unpleasant quotes from elsewhere, posted your deplore. I reported and was told it was OK to quote to rebuff. Pity they do not apply the same standards to all threads, as we would all then be on clearer ground to

FWIW I'm no more care about the "appearance" bit than I did about nail polish, tights, choice of underwear and all the rest - though MNHQ are apparently okay with such comments about others

I'm interested in content, behaviour and principles though, and all too often those posts go too. Obviously it's right that anything racist's deleted, but then it moves through "speculation" and "unpleasantness" (again, all acceptable elsewhere) to the catch-all "not in the spirit" if all else fails

Maybe "we just don't like that opinion being expressed" would be a more accurate guideline?

If the sentence 'if you look past the lip filler, hair extensions, make up etc' was said about a Kardashian, or an influencer like Mollie Mae, I wonder if it would be deleted. 🤔

I liked how she looked for the speech and enjoy her empowerment talks to younger people in particular
I think like most people her style may have changed a little through lockdown
I find her a compelling public speaker and I’m glad to here the BRF speak about race compassion or challenging internally held bias. Great job.

I believe if she’d been allowed to raise her son in relative privacy and allowed to focus on her own charity projects, she would have been perfectly happy and not left.

She absolutely could have done that and I'm sure Harry would have been very happy. They could have stepped back from most Royal duties, settled into a Cotswold mansion near the Soho farmhouse set. Sent Archie to a local private school and let him enjoy the company of his cousins and days out to watch Daddy play polo. Harry could have done the odd military gig and they both roll up for the big occasions, Trooping the colour, Ascot, Remembrance Day.

Security would have been a doddle and no one would have complained.

Obviously that isn't what she wanted though. And people are cross that they are sitting in their borrowed mansion delivering lectures to the country they have turned their backs on. I hate a lecture, me. 😵

*Oh I copied this and cannot find who to give the kudos to so sorry to the author of this post I copied, but thank you for saying it much better than I could.

I agree about the "effective public speaking" thing, though so far for me it seems more about style than content, but for that reason it's perhaps a shame Meghan doesn't pick an area to concentrate on rather than this pick n' mix of whatever's most headline-worthy

Not knowing her I couldn't possibly say whether she's got the intellect to really dig deep into a "cause", but if it is there I could imagine her being able to make a real difference with a little more focus

i read RoseinHarlem's post, it was a very well put post, definitely not racist, everything in good level and i am very disappointed that it was deleted.
it is like an authoritarian regime. similar stuff or worse said about other people are ignored, but for MM there are some special protecting rules being applied. i wonder the reason.

Gosh what a mess this moderation is. I don’t dare post for fear of it being construed as ‘unwitting’ racism. There’s no consistency here.

I hope it doesn’t spread elsewhere across the boards because it makes no sense.

I still can’t get past the hair extensions. It must be the light.

Deletion seems to be an overreaction.

But making snide comments about a woman's choice of how she wishes to present herself before then critiquing the same woman's failings when talking about women's equality is a bit rich.