The Press & The Royals: a discussion

[Whaeanui]

As we were just having a great discussion on this topic I’m going to try again to continue it on a thread of its own. A previous thread highlighted two particularly prolific ‘royal reporters’, but the same is true for all. They often manufacture stories to create divisions between the women in the family, more often than the men. The public seem to feed off this and none of the family get treated very well except the monarch. So do we think it is possible for the royal family to stay relevant and in the publics mind without their unhealthy relationship with the media? Can social media replace this? What do you think they can do to make positive changes that would reflect an understanding of the mental health challenges the media intrusion results in? Also their role in charities that deal with mental health and misogyny, mistreatment of women etc could be impacted by this too. Thoughts?
Please do not derail this thread by discussing your personal dislike of particular members or if they deserve it. I would like a discussion on how the royal family could change the relationship with the press.

This may be one of those disappearing articles, or I just can't find it again, but it said that one line of defence was that Harry - 'should have suspected earlier.' Incorrect reporting since then corrected, or just disappearing article, or I could have read something similar and am remembering incorrectly, I don't know.

Do you mean skipped a page of posts on a thread.? The same has been happening to me in the past few days. I think I'm caught up on a conversation and leave the thread only to come back later and find seemingly a whole page of earlier posts that wasn't there the previous time.

He doesn't care about the people or his mother.

“Fucking hell, could you stoop any lower?”

Yeah, come on now. That’s vicious.

There are (many) other threads for that sort of stratospherically bonkers side-taking but we’re trying to have a rational discussion here.

Back in the 1970s, a new, up-and-coming newspaperman pointed out the problem. “We have more responsibility than power I think,” he said. “The newspaper can create great controversies… throw light on injustices – just as it can do the opposite. It can hide things, and be a great power for evil.”

That newspaperman was one Keith Rupert Murdoch."

It's a good read. I know this is a RF board and we are going to talk about RF members in relation to the media on here. This does not mention the RF but it's the newspaper of the man quoted above that Harry is up against. I think it is a good easily readable (though limited of course) examination of the power of the media and some of what happens when politicians and media cosy up together.

And I think Murdoch's own words quoted above are rather telling.

The Wiki entry for Murdoch was interesting. While reading this, my mental image of Murdoch media became a giant spider sitting in the middle of a global web.

From wiki, in regard to the Leveson Inquiry:
In connection with Murdoch's testimony to the Leveson Inquiry "into the ethics of the British press", editor of Newsweek International, Tunku Varadarajan, referred to him as "the man whose name is synonymous with unethical newspapers".

The people suing (or trying to sue) The Sun are really quite brave in my opinion. How the media report this will be interesting. Which news media is trying to get at the truth? Which media has a different goal?

The media source I've linked up top also has a good article re social media and how it effects us. Everything, Everywhere, All at Once (which is also the name of a pretty good movie btw for those who haven't seen it yet).

A Great Power for Evil

@Morestrangerthings yes the actual argument they’re using to stop it going to trial is, he should have suspected us sooner. It’s in several news reports about it and obviously many are pointing out that if it goes to trial the NGN lawyer would have to argue against his defence he’s using now 😐 All while saying The Sun was never involved in hacking. They can’t. He closed one publication, he absolutely dragged this all out and never admitting any of it, to protect them from criminal proceedings of course and to prevent forced closure of The Sun.

I think the 2012 ‘secret agreement’ was just a common or garden settlement agreement, or agreement in principle, a preliminary umbrella deal covering all potential RF claims. Settlements are almost always confidential

the RF didn’t want to appear on the witness stand and talk about the messages that were hacked - who would, even if they weren’t anything worse than a bit cringe ?

the paper wanted to settle, but wasn’t willing to give an apology as well as money until other cases were finished: it would prejudice the paper’s position in relation to them to be seen to apologise to another victim. It may not be just the RF who came to this sort of agreement , of course.

harry wasn’t as much affected (in volume terms) as others by the hacking. I think the testimony yesterday said he only had one message hacked, was his knowledge at that time. He was in Afghanistan, so somewhat out of the loop, and in any case no-one could talk to him in any detail about the individual settlements being reached gradually with Wills and others because they would almost certainly be covered by a confidentiality clause.

when H met M, and he saw the tabloids’ treatment of her, he saw red. It churned up all the worst memories of how his mother had suffered. He began fighting them on all fronts, and wanted wins. He became impatient with the 2012 process which no-one could talk to him about in
any detail. At some point he left that process and struck out on his own.

at some point in 2019 ish, it seems that W decided to cut his losses with the 2012 process in a different way. Litigation was still ongoing (maybe swelled by H’s new case) and would continue for years. W decided to take the cash and not wait for an apology. It might be this that spurred H into launching his own, separate case since it seems to me that an apology and sunlight were more important to him than money.

Again, because H was a separate litigant it would be more important than ever that those looking after the RF’s claims not talk to him about them.

Does this work at all?

Yes @Mumsnut that’s pretty much what I’m piecing together from reading it. It seems Harry only learnt much of it after getting his own lawyers, he said that in either an interview or something too because I remember him saying when he got his own lawyers he learnt much more. May possibly have been during the ANL trial.

The dismissiveness from the News Corp executives towards the Queen’s representatives again demonstrates the power these people have. This should worry everyone. It is truly frightening- if the very Queen could not get a resolution- it’s no wonder you have William and Charles trying one approach and Harry another and I don’t think either will bring the press/media to account.

One thing I do suspect is that the ‘secrecy’ Harry is complaining about isn’t anything sinister, just normal legal process.

That’s how I read it too - it’s confusing.

I think you cannot say that William did not and does not care about his mother - that is a really unfair. William is under the very same devils agreement the RF seem to be with the press - where stories and narratives are offered up to boost others, where cosy relationships are encouraged to protect the firm and where even interpersonal relationships in the family can be destroyed in favour of protecting the Crown. I don’t agree with his choices but I think they are absolutely understandable in his circumstances.

Harry has got the knives out for Piers Morgan who committed the grave sin of criticising Meghan.

I think Piers has done more than just criticise his wife. I would hope that my husband would hold no favour for someone who targeted me the way that man has target Meghan.

@skullbabe yes couldn’t agree with your last comment more. My DH won’t speak to a man in his own family because he repeatedly treated me very poorly, including misogynistic and racist language. I’d expect any husband to loathe a man that behaved like Piers Morgan towards their wife.

And yet Harry’s ‘close friend’ Eugenie seems happy to socialise with PM & to be photographed doing so?

@poppysockies 🤷🏽‍♀️ why is this continually brought up? It’s well known they have mutual friends with Morgan. What’s this got to do with the thread?

I think that was Beatrice and they are not just friend to Harry they are cousins. Regardless - I think it is awful, I don’t quite think I could countenance a family member socialising with someone who has behaved like Piers has towards my spouse.

why is this continually brought up? It’s well known they have mutual friends with Morgan. What’s this got to do with the thread?

PM is seemingly Meghan’s sworn enemy - if I had a sworn enemy, I certainly wouldn’t be very happy if my ‘close friends’ were socialising with them and being photographed hugging them in the street! Does this mean Harry and Meghan have no allies left in the RF?

Also, Camilla attending the same event as PM/JC has previously been cited as incontrovertible evidence of some darstadly conspiracy against H&M so it’s worth pointing out the double standard

I would struggle with it but it seems that the London scene is quite incestuous, journalists, politicians, royals all seem quite cosy with each other.

Does this mean Harry and Meghan have no allies left in the RF?

oh that’s your angle. Really not what this thread is about. Plenty of others that focus on imagining H & M being completely isolated.

I’m more interested in the way that the York sisters have been spared the sorts of extravagant conspiracy theories that were targeted at Camilla when she was pictured with PM.

Yes, I feel like I'm losing it as it is so confusing.

I know this not the thrust of the thread but why do you keep referring to the York sisters as his close friends as opposed to his cousins? Have I missed something?

So start your own thread about that. We haven’t been discussing that on this thread.

Hark at the thread police! Since when did MN threads stick slavishly to the topic at hand? Discussions inevitably meander - I wasn’t the one who brought up Piers Morgan

From an ITV reporter at the trial, this just clears up my earlier assumptions about Harry wanting them to admit it.

*The Royal Family allegedly agreed to delay bringing a claim until the end of the phone hacking litigation process - then NGN would “admit or settle such a claim with an apology”

Court papers claim senior NGN executives deliberately concealed wrongdoing - lying to the court, the Met Police, Leveson Inquiry, MPs and the public, destroying millions of incriminating emails and paying ‘hush money’ to former employees to avoid them revealing the truth*