BBC The Princes and the Press

[coniferforest]

Did anyone watch this last night? About William and Harry and their different approaches to the press. Last night was part 1 of 2.

@Roussette

Janiie

Joanna Lumley said all that about the Crown. I personally think it's awful so no need to score points on that one with me.

I'm not scoring points! I'm saying the crown isn't just a drama as many, not just you, proclaim. They recreate loads of factual stuff but then throw in their own shit made up crap too. Misinformation and mistruths if you like, I'm surprised H takes $$ from a company that spreads mistruths under the guise of it's a drama.

Ok. Drama wrong word then. I was just repeating from the articles on Joanne Lumley!

I think it's a dire programme and I'm proud to stand up and say I've never watched any of it!

But it literally is a drama. Of course they fictionalise things like conversations. Nothing to do with Harry - if you're so anti misinformation then why focus on that rather than the way the Palace briefs the tabloid media and invites them to parties to keep them on side? Their stories are actually presented as news and fact and it's actively fed by the RF.

Rousette has often mentioned seeing things on Twitter.

I have found it. It wasn’t Rousette. I do apologise

Thank you Aspiring

And thank you @Nishkin. I want to explain why I was so cross at you saying this. Twitter can be a cesspit but it can also be very informative as far as hearing breaking News or learning as I go along. It's taken me years to build up followers and I follow many interesting accounts on very many varied subjects. I find it a useful tool for researching and informing myself. I do my best to avoid the vile nasty stuff and mostly succeed. I know there's lots who hate it, but I just find it useful.
So I just knew I would never have said I don't use it!.

But I wholeheartedly accept your apology and have a glass of on me tonight lol

@Roussette you do not have to explain why you were so cross when I posted something untrue, I do not deserve your kindness but will take it

💐

Those flowers are not as nice as the mumsnet ones but I can’t do the brackets

Aww, that's really nice. 🥰

👍

@Roussette

She also did not include the text from Harry that was so nasty the Judge declined to read it aloud in court

I hate to do this because I get it all the time... but can you link to anything saying that Harry sent a nasty text?
Happy to accept any outcome on this.

Is Meghan being held responsible for Harry's texts now? Reading some of the comments is like a conversation with my MIL. She doesn't like M, but then she doesn't like many women and holds them responsible for all men's ills.

Oh course not, BonnesVacances - I don’t see why you would think that?

Meghan is responsible for the selection of texts that was given as evidence before the court of first instance however, and which did not tell the whole story.

You keep saying this @Serenster, and I asked you to link TM's messages.

MM's messages did sound as if TM was not responding. They said, later at night they received a response from TM. What responses did she not show?

Just as you said the judge said Harry's email was rude, when you link it shows it was the ANL lawyer who said this. What is that txt btw, because maybe it was in the court papers. Can you link this rude message?

You can object to my tone all you like @Roussette. You are in the wrong for suggesting I should post irrelevant information about celebrities on a thread described as a 'safe haven' for people working through their trauma.

The thing to do would be apologise and confirm you will not repeat that mistake.

DM readers, did the Fail make any references to the 'daily fail' remark in the statement? Does anyone know?

This is an interesting article in regards to the DM headline that MM must want to face them in court.

bylineinvestigates.com/2021/12/03/explained-the-mails-cynical-dishonest-reaction-to-defeat-to-meghan/

That says it. Forget everything else; what the Mail wants, what it yearns for independently of the whole tiresome business of proving things in court, is to get the Duchess into the witness box and give her a hard time.

So let’s just spell out why it is not happening. The Mail on Sunday knowingly breached her rights of privacy and copyright – any journalism or law undergraduate could have told them that. The Duchess, as was her right, sued, and at that point it was up to the Mail on Sunday to justify what it had done.

She was not on trial. The paper was, and it chose to defend itself by saying that she never intended her letter to be private. When the High Court reasonably asked ‘Can you prove that?’ the paper could not. When the Court of Appeal asked the same question the answer was the same.

As the case proceeded it became ever clearer – and Glover confirms it today – that what the Mail really wanted was the spectacle of the Duchess in the witness box and the opportunity to bully her there. Now that it has discovered it does not have the power to make that happen, the paper is left frothing at the mouth with incoherent rage.

I had a look at KA’s twitter out of curiosity after it was mentioned up thread. I don’t go on twitter normally. She makes reference to what really happened with the ‘making Kate cry’ episode which I found interesting. I assume she knows the truth with the family connection.

I have not told you to post on that thread. Get your facts right.

I said this... "So are you saying... let me get this right... that anything you say about a parent has to remain the same forever? Would you like to go on Stately Homes thread and state that?"

I am quite obviously not saying to go on there and post about celebrities! Nowhere have I said that. I am saying that it's not right to say that anything said about a parent remains the same forever and it would not go down well on the Stately Homes thread if that was a comment said on there.

I will apologise for not making that point clearer.

@PicsInRed
I genuinely thought Meghan and her Dad had a good relationship. She spoke of him lovingly on her blog to my knowledge.
I don't know when the relationship broke down. I found it odd that he hadn't met Harry.

The point Rousette is that she appeared in very way to have a loving and close relationship with her father. She posted about him several times on social media before she met Harry. Once she met Harry I suspect he became an embarrassment to her. Her father has behaved really badly. However she certainly failed to prepare him or support him properly in the time up to the the wedding . Allowing Harry to text him telling him what he should or shouldn’t do when they hadn’t even met is insensitive in the extreme. Feelings were obviously hurt and pride was at stake. That doesn’t excuse the way he’s talked about her since.
Let’s not forget that the heart wringing letter to her father was written expressly with the view that it WOULD be published.

As far as I can see, the relationship broke down when he probably told Samantha about Harry and Sam decided they could cash in. He seems to have been doing her bidding since.

TM has a relatively comfortable life in Mexico on a high US pension (he said something around 4K per month) not bad for a single pensioner. So, I believe his media payments go to Samantha.

In one of Harry's txt, I felt they were saying (coded) that they could pay him some kind of stipend. This was the line when they say, there is a way things could be settled without going to the press. If they had met, maybe they could have spelled it out to him.

[quote LadyEloise1]@PicsInRed
I genuinely thought Meghan and her Dad had a good relationship. She spoke of him lovingly on her blog to my knowledge.
I don't know when the relationship broke down. I found it odd that he hadn't met Harry. [/quote]
Lots of children or partners of narcissistic people or family systems will only see the dark side when the person/family turns on them.

It seems that envy from Samantha, and jealous control from Thomas, all came together when Meghan met Harry and they all kicked off. It's possible that this was the 1st time Meghan had seen the nasty side of her father directed at her - and possibly the 1st time Samantha felt permission from her father to really lay into Meghan.

I think Doria would have some stories to tell about how Thomas treats you when you're no longer on the team, but she probably won't talk.

Pre-Harry, Meghan was trying to build a profile for herself on social media and with The Tig so I'm not surprised she put a positive spin on her relationship with her dad. Lots of celebs do that. It's just part of how they market themselves. She was hardly going to say he was a shit parent!

Well, I think what is pretty clear is that EVERYONE is trying to make a buck off the back of Prince Harry in one way or another while they can, MM's extended family, Spotify, Netflix, Oprah Winfrey, Penguin and the list goes on.

There maybe some considerable financial gain for some (inc the couple themselves), because at the moment he is the big money ticket due to who he is, although where the actual marketable 'talent' and future content is going to come from is questionable, there may be some CEO regrets further down the line.

@PicsInRed

You mention 'narcissistic people', who has been diagnosed with NPD?

Let’s not forget that the heart wringing letter to her father was written expressly with the view that it WOULD be published.

That's not what the judge's summary said. To that's just your take on it.