Harry to sue BBC

[Viviennemary]

I just read Harry is going to sue the BBC for announcing the Queen wasn't consulted over the name Lilibet. They said she was told of their plans . Maybe told isnt quite the same as consulted. When is this all going to end. Seems to be getting worse instead of improving.

Not that I am suggesting the bbc were involved in that!

@Tistheseason17

I'm with H and M. If they had named their daughter anything un-royal there would have been stories about their lack of respect for family traditions... they can't win!

The press picks on any little thing and inflates it to bulky them and all because the press list the libel case already.

As for trademarking/branding the name - they HAVE to before someone unrelated does it and trades off their child's name. Pretty standard practice for rich/royal

Absolutely this. They would've still got slack if they'd picked another name.

She's called Lilibet now and there's nothing anyone can do about it.

The press loves to print these stories to keep us the 'commoners' arguing back and forth over nothing really.

Meanwhile Baby Lilibet is chilling in her million dollar mansion somewhere in LA and the Queen is relaxing in her palace wearing her finest pearls... please 😒

@Zzelda

I'm not convinced that he gets past first base in terms of what he has to prove. I'm no expert on libel, but I understand he has to show that what was said would lower him in the minds of right-thinking people. I don't know about anyone else, but it never occurred to me to consult my grannies about my children's names, nor would I expect my children to consult their own grandparents - even if they planned to name them after said grandparents. So I really don't care whether Harry consulted or not, and if it were established that he didn't I wouldn't instantly think worse of him. So what damage to his reputation has he actually suffered as a result of this specific issue? And has it damaged it any more than, say, running off to give interviews to Oprah, whingeing that Daddy isn't subsidising his millionaire lifestyle, etc etc?

The thing is truth is an absolute defence in defamation cases. So if the story was “Mr Important courtier said X” they have an absolute defence that that IS what the courtier said to them (it’s journalism 101 to keep notes/records) and it’s game over.

OTOH if the story was “The Queen thought Z” or “The Queen said A about B to C in private, they are on dodgier ground, but this is the BBC. They aren’t going to do anything so stupid. There’s a reason why everything is always reported as “A spokesman said”, “A senior aide commented”, or “A source close to Ms famous let it be known that...”. It is precisely to cover themselves legally and they will have the notebooks, audio tapes or emails that evidence their sources (names or unnamed).

I am just waiting for all the web updates and dust to settle to read a comprehensive broadsheet account of it all later, but I cannot see that the BBC news department would do anything stupid enough to give Harry legitimate cause for legal action over this story.

Good.
The sooner the media realise ‘a source’ is no longer going to cover “I’ve made a mean story up because how dare they not stand on the steps somewhere for our photographs” without facing a big payout to the D&D of Sussex

They have if it's not true. They can't just report anything that anyone tells them as the truth without being sure that it is.

Yes I know @Staffy1 - see my last post. I would be very, very surprised if a BBC news journalist has invented a comment from a palace courtier.

@RonaldMcDonald

Good. The sooner the media realise ‘a source’ is no longer going to cover “I’ve made a mean story up because how dare they not stand on the steps somewhere for our photographs” without facing a big payout to the D&D of Sussex

Is that really what you believe has happened here?

Have you been on Facebook reading conspiracy theories?

I'm with H and M.
If they had named their daughter anything un-royal there would have been stories about their lack of respect for family traditions... they can't win!
Why does it have to be so tribal like it's Harry and Meghan against the world?
They can win. They can enjoy life as a family of 4 in America, focus on whatever causes are close to their heart, and stop whining to the press about how they're the world's biggest victims the second they leave the headlines.

I don't have strong feelings on what they called their child in terms of royal traditions. It could be Gloria or Mary, or Jade, or Ophelia or any other name for all I care.
I do think it's weird that a couple who have spent the last few months whining about how terrible their family is to the point of flounce half way round the world and publicly airing their laundry suddenly feel inclined to use a relative's pet name.

I imagine I'm not alone in being of the view that Harry and Meghan can (and should) live their lives how they want and I'd wish them well doing it, whilst also thinking their public actions are questionable.

@HeronLanyon

I am just sick and tired of this. I want h and m to be happy. I really want them to stop adding to the drama. It’s what it is feeling like to me. Feel sorry for m but good god will it never end?! They’ve escaped. Stay escaped !

The point in their leaving was that the media would not stop publishing lies about them and this almost destroyed their mental health. As public figures they could do little or nothing about it. By standing down and becoming private figures, they can and have clearly shown they will litigate against lies printed about they and their family.

The media can stop this at any time by only printing actual facts about the couple or ignoring them completely

"Recollections may vary".

I read somewhere that after the BBC news, ITV sought to confirm or deny from Palace, Palace said they were not denying.

I think Harry messed up. Talk about stepping over the line.

Surely all this drama is in aid of something ? What is the endgame here, the abolition of the monarchy ? Or a sizeable payment… could this be a shakedown?
I think Prince Charles may have to open his wallet soon.

@Coronateachingagain

"Recollections may vary".

I read somewhere that after the BBC news, ITV sought to confirm or deny from Palace, Palace said they were not denying.

I think Harry messed up. Talk about stepping over the line.

So couldn't they just confirm ??

What a dick

@RickiTarr

No, not of FB.
BBC - A source said - okay then, name your source. Or shut up.

If the source was happy enough to go to the BBC they will be happy enough to go on record, shurely?
Unless all tosh

I'm with H and M
If they had named their daughter anything un-royal there would have been stories about their lack of respect for family traditions...they can't win!

We're they accused of lack of respect over Archie's name which is delightfully unroyal?
I'm not a Royal watcher and have no recollection of reports at that time.

I imagine I'm not alone in being of the view that Harry and Meghan can (and should) live their lives how they want and I'd wish them well doing it, whilst also thinking their public actions are questionable.

I agree so much with this sentiment lola

As an aside ‘recollections may vary* has been adopted in my place of work when you are of the opinion that someone is trotting out twaddle.

*Still not a reason for Harry to threaten to sue the BBC.

He doesn’t seem to have the first clue about how anything works. Meghan is a bright woman. I wonder how she copes with all his notions and reactions*

I think Meghan is very much the leader in their relationship and probably behind everything Harry does. I think it's exactly what she wants to do but gets him to do it so that it looks like it's his idea when the criticism starts pooring in.

No, not of FB.
BBC - A source said - okay then, name your source. Or shut up.

If the source was happy enough to go to the BBC they will be happy enough to go on record, shurely?
Unless all tosh

That’s not how sources work. They can be named or unnamed (in print or on air) but to get it past the publisher’s internal lawyers the journalist and the editor has to have the name of the source and contemporaneous notes, or emails etc.

Do we know for sure whether the palace source was named or unnamed yet?

I’ve given up trying to get the details for now. I will get the full details much later once everyone has calmed down and written the whole thing up clearly.

All I know is that Colin Robinson would have an absolute field day with these two.

I’m not sure staffy - I think M and H puff eachother up. If one person is disenchanted, sometimes it doesn’t take much for the other to feel similarly.

I’ve said it before but I think this would have been a whole different ball game if he hadn’t been the spare. And now he isn’t even that.

[quote RonaldMcDonald]@RickiTarr

No, not of FB.
BBC - A source said - okay then, name your source. Or shut up.

If the source was happy enough to go to the BBC they will be happy enough to go on record, shurely?
Unless all tosh[/quote]
I mean, this story aside, that would be a terrible system. Plenty of actually important stories would be unreported if sources had to be named in the article.

I agree though that vague “sources” do often sound like code for “unsubstantiated rumour”

@Cacacoisfarraige

This whole drama is sunshine Sachs generating clicks for their client.

They’ve probably got a whole planned list

Next

1)The Diana statue - will Harry go, will they all go drama,

2. the christening and godparent drama - will the royals be snubbed

3. balmoral drama- will they go, the Queen invites them on one of their daily zoom calls

4. Crisis talks with Charles or not

5. Crisis talks with William or not

Their PR company will have a whole plan signed off for their 20 weeks maternity leave.

Omid Scobie can tweet per his instructions from his tiny studio flat - he’s not getting rich on his association !

I think you’ve nailed it.

@Staffy1

*Still not a reason for Harry to threaten to sue the BBC.

He doesn’t seem to have the first clue about how anything works. Meghan is a bright woman. I wonder how she copes with all his notions and reactions*

I think Meghan is very much the leader in their relationship and probably behind everything Harry does. I think it's exactly what she wants to do but gets him to do it so that it looks like it's his idea when the criticism starts pooring in.

Yes , exactly.

@museumum

I actually on this one feel that the palace / queen / bbc are all being really nasty.

Can you imagine if you named your child after their grandparent and instead of 'congratulations how lovely' everybody instead weighed in with 'but did you ask her permission?' 'and if you did, did she feel she had to say yes?' it's mean and petty. it's an honour to have a child named after you, any child, you don't get to 'give permission'.

This. It's pathetic how the royal-loving idiots on here twist every little thing. If someone named their child after me i would be so touched, It would never occur to me that they should have asked my permission!

What, even if they had criticised and embarrassed the whole family in a public forum?

@Cacacoisfarraige

This whole drama is sunshine Sachs generating clicks for their client.

They’ve probably got a whole planned list

Next

1)The Diana statue - will Harry go, will they all go drama,

2. the christening and godparent drama - will the royals be snubbed

3. balmoral drama- will they go, the Queen invites them on one of their daily zoom calls

4. Crisis talks with Charles or not

5. Crisis talks with William or not

Their PR company will have a whole plan signed off for their 20 weeks maternity leave.

Omid Scobie can tweet per his instructions from his tiny studio flat - he’s not getting rich on his association !

^^ absolutely this

Their PR company knew some people would react like this and welcome it as part of a bigger plan.

Both sides use are using others to spread convenient rumours and they both
want us normal people to spread it faster and further.