Harry and Meghan - everyone still being respectful please

[Oldbutstillgotit]

Lots still to talk about .

He has spoken to the couple because he has covered them. He was invited with two other journalists at MM last engagement with the CW students is one engagement I remember. He wrote about his interactions, but never said anything about talking to them about the book.

Because the book was not anti Meghan the rags came up with the H&M wrote it narrative, and Omid had to clap back with a tweet.

Where did he say he collaborated with them on the book. Please link that because he was on my timeline at the time of announcement and I never saw what you are talking about.

“Writing in the authors' section of the book, Scobie and Durand say: "We have spoken with close friends of Harry and Meghan, royal aides and palace staff (past and present), the charities and organisations they have built long-lasting relationships with and, when appropriate, the couple themselves.”

A quick google found this in a report from 12 August. I believe it has since been rowed back on. Even so the blurb on Finding Freedom on Amazon still states that the Aurora spoke to people close to the couple and the fact remains that there are still no lawsuit. Since August

@Oldbutstillgotit
I think the book was positive about MM, because of the overwhelming negativity. They did state after all, that see the other 'real' story.

@smilesy
Lawsuits have been against people that have been breaking the law. Omid says he sat with a lawyer, so I suspect he did not break any laws, and I imagine neither did Lady C and the 5 other biographers. No lawsuit for any of them.

Hovering a drone to take pictures over a child, taking pics of private residence without permission, publishing someone's letter without permission are all straightforward law breaking.

Price points can be easily checked with stores, internet etc.

@Mummy195

He has spoken to the couple because he has covered them. He was invited with two other journalists at MM last engagement with the CW students is one engagement I remember. He wrote about his interactions, but never said anything about talking to them about the book.

Because the book was not anti Meghan the rags came up with the H&M wrote it narrative, and Omid had to clap back with a tweet.

Where did he say he collaborated with them on the book. Please link that because he was on my timeline at the time of announcement and I never saw what you are talking about.

It was said here, in the Authors’ Note.

@SunbathingDragon

This does NOT say they collaborated with this book. !!

We can agree to disagree about lawsuits etc but you asked about the authors claim that he had spoken to them. I am aware that price pints can be checked but why would you bother? And also name checking designers. Unless you maybe hoped to work with them at a later date.

[quote Mummy195]@SunbathingDragon

This does NOT say they collaborated with this book. !![/quote]
"we have spoken with... the couple themselves."

I think that's pretty conclusive.

@smilesy

I suspect that the price and name checking was done as an attempt to give the book credibility. MM also has a fashionista following, they can easily pick it apart if he is incorrect about those little details. And considering how ppl nitpick every little thing about H&M, he may have felt the need to include these, who knows.

@MidnightFlit
And he has that direct interaction included in the book.

[quote Mummy195]@SunbathingDragon

This does NOT say they collaborated with this book. !![/quote]
It doesn’t use the word collaborated, you’re right. However, in addition, there is the judge’s document where he said ”there is evidence to support the defendant’s assertion that the claimant’s side have been energetically briefing the media” with a reference to it being ”very likely” information was given to Omid Scobie. Do you believe the judge is wrong? It seems very damning combined with the authors’ note, don’t you think? The full document is here - www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/duchess-of-sussex-v-associated.pdf

[quote Mummy195]@MidnightFlit
And he has that direct interaction included in the book.[/quote]
What? You mean there's a single instance where the authors explicitly acknowledge a direct contribution? You're being naive - or disingenuous - if you think that's that!

Most of Scobie and Durand's comments about the Sussexes' involvement has been extremely carefully worded. I would imagine the legal read at Harper Collins goes into pages and pages of very detailed notes - all of which is meaningless if it turns out that the authors and H&M weren't completely transparent.

@Ninjava

If Scooby had invented all that stuff, including that very bizarre bit about peeing in the bush when they were in Botswana and how much Harry liked it(!), they’d have been on the phone to the lawyers faster than you could say ‘like a rat up a drainpipe’.

Even a rat can’t climb a drainpipe that quickly!

😂😂😂

@Ninjava
When you have no debate, do you always have to say such vile and nasty things things to people?

There really is not much to say if people seem to have really convinced themselves that they collaborated with the book despite their and Omid's denial. It's not even as if, someone else who would know or be involved has come in the contradict them.

It is my impression that a lot of posters on this thread are rooting for the MoS in this lawsuit. Is that really the case?

What nasty and vile things?

@Mummy195

There really is not much to say if people seem to have really convinced themselves that they collaborated with the book despite their and Omid's denial. It's not even as if, someone else who would know or be involved has come in the contradict them.

It is my impression that a lot of posters on this thread are rooting for the MoS in this lawsuit. Is that really the case?

Surely the judge comes under the category of someone who would be in a position to know, based on the evidence he has seen?

No, actually, I don’t believe ANL (or the media in general) should be able to break the law. However, Meghan’s additional (and struck out) comments show that she is using it as a platform to get across a point to change her perception and that’s not how a lawsuit works.

Yes Mummy195 I am now hoping AN win, and I am no fan of DMG Media.
I can’t stand rich, privileged people attempting to silence the media for their own benefit. It’s always the same people - footballers, actors, royalty, celebs - who can afford super injunctions or the ability to sue. Generally because they have something to hide, from us, the great unwashed public.
The case against AN by Meghan is about controlling the narrative. It’s not about privacy.

@Mummy195
What nasty comment are you referring to? I see nothing of this nature. If you are referring to the “rat up a drainpipe “comment, we explained this recently. It is a common English idiom that means “indecent haste”. It is in no way offensive.

[quote smilesy]@Mummy195
What nasty comment are you referring to? I see nothing of this nature. If you are referring to the “rat up a drainpipe “comment, we explained this recently. It is a common English idiom that means “indecent haste”. It is in no way offensive.[/quote]
Quite.

@ajandjjmum

From the get go both H&M and Omid denied any collaboration on the book, before it even came out for distribution.

That's not true. Scobie stated that he spoke to a number of people, and even the couple on occasion, but quickly rowed back on that. So he either lied, or has been leaned upon.

Scobie could have spoken to them about anything, not necessarily information for the book. For all we know they could have discussed what to have for lunch

Apologies if this has already been posted. Interesting that some organisations working on issues related to what H&M have been recently speaking about, are positive about their message. Some excerpts

“Harry’s admission he had not been as aware as he thought should resonate with others, said Tyrek Morris, from the community youth-led group, All Black Lives UK. “It invited people to question themselves on whether they are complicit in structural racism, or if they benefit from the system. Because white privilege is very much a thing,” he said.

From banks, with black people less likely to get loans, to health services, with black mothers five times more likely to die in childbirth, he said, structural racism existed and was an “uncomfortable subject”.

Hitherto, the royal family had not spoken about it, despite being figureheads for many Commonwealth countries, he added. “But now you’ve got a mixed-race princess, and her husband, advocating human rights,” he added, welcoming the couple “using their global platform for positive messages”.

And another one
“Gurpreet Kaur, of BLM in the Stix, which highlights racism in rural areas, said it was “heartening” to hear the couple use their influence “to highlight the issue of structural racism in the UK”.

Racism in the countryside and rural areas was overlooked, “denied and downplayed”, she said. “So what we want to do is call on white people in rural areas to take the same journey as Harry, and recognise that racism exists on their doorstep and is happening to their neighbours all year round.”

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/oct/02/campaigners-hail-harry-meghan-powerful-message-structural-racism-uk

Perhaps people working on these issues find H&M’s wokeness quite helpful? 😀.