Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family
Original poster

The Press & The Royals: a discussion

1000 replies

Whaeanui · 17/04/2023 12:25

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.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
45
PicturesOfDogs · 27/04/2023 10:30

Morestrangerthings · 27/04/2023 09:38

The timeline of emails when the Queen's secretary couldn't get a decent response from Murdoch's executives is two years long. The last email exchange saying the Queen is bringing in the lawyers is May 2018.

Makes Harry's reasons for delay look stronger, you'd think? NGN executives saying they did intend to get to it, but oh so busy.

If the Queen couldn't get a fair response after 2 years of requesting it, what chance would the rest of us have?

Show quote history

I think it significantly weakens his case, no?

If there is a statutory limitation period of 6 years to bring a claim, from when you’re aware of it, and he’s here admitting he was well aware of it before he made his own claim in 2019. (I personally think you should be able to bring a claim whenever, if you have the evidence to support it, but that’s the law apparently).

He seems to be arguing that he wasn’t ‘allowed’ to bring a claim on his own until 2019, but not sure how much legal weight that will have.

I also think that rather than support his case, the existence of Williams settlement might actually go against him? (I.e. you were part of that case, which was eventually settled, so you could have carried on with that one rather than started a new case that was out of time)

I think the hardest part will be to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the Sun were involved, as they have never been found guilty beyond reasonable doubt, and never admitted liability in any civil suits. It’s a high burden of proof.

I’ve also read somewhere that he was offered circa £200k to settle, which he rejected.

For those with legal knowledge, if he were to lose, would this negatively affect him, that he went to trial? I’m sure I read somewhere (earlier in this thread?) that the courts prefer for people to settle where possible, so it might go against him?

Iwasafool · 27/04/2023 10:38

Whaeanui · 27/04/2023 10:26

Yes exactly. It’s bizarre.

Show quote history

No I think some of us can understand that being knifed in the back by Murdoch is different to being knifed in the back by your brother or your child. Harry has said some horrible stuff and I can well understand why it has hurt people. Of course it isn't the same, I expect some loyalty and respect from family members, I have no such expectation of Murdoch.

Coxspurplepippin · 27/04/2023 10:40

'William being friendly to hackers but not his brother, speaks volumes.'

Friendly to hackers? He puts on a social veneer, same as we all do. His grandmother shook hands with Martin McGuiness - wonder if they were best buddies behind the scenes?

His brother, his actual brother, has written about him, criticised his parenting, questioned his love for his wife. Not much going on there at all Hmm

derxa · 27/04/2023 10:43

Coxspurplepippin · 27/04/2023 10:40

'William being friendly to hackers but not his brother, speaks volumes.'

Friendly to hackers? He puts on a social veneer, same as we all do. His grandmother shook hands with Martin McGuiness - wonder if they were best buddies behind the scenes?

His brother, his actual brother, has written about him, criticised his parenting, questioned his love for his wife. Not much going on there at all Hmm

Totally agree

Howsimplywonderful · 27/04/2023 10:43

When William was briefed about Spare and Harry’s comments about him

Does anyone think he said , at least it wasn’t a random journalist, that would have been harder to bear than my brother knifing me on the back

Dolma · 27/04/2023 10:43

Whaeanui · 27/04/2023 10:08

people we don't agree with and that we have issues with

Have you had to mingle with people who illegally accessed your phones? I mean you see the huge difference, don’t you? It’s not that I’m attacking William over it. It’s the whole system where that’s expected or part of life that astounds me.

Charles had to shake hands with Gerry Adams, who justified the murder of Charles' uncle by the IRA. Having to make nice with your hacker is small fry.

Iwasafool · 27/04/2023 10:46

Howsimplywonderful · 27/04/2023 10:43

When William was briefed about Spare and Harry’s comments about him

Does anyone think he said , at least it wasn’t a random journalist, that would have been harder to bear than my brother knifing me on the back

It's the betrayal that hurts the most isn't it and is most unforgivable.

Morestrangerthings · 27/04/2023 10:52

He seems to be arguing that he wasn’t ‘allowed’ to bring a claim on his own until 2019, but not sure how much legal weight that will have.

Yes, that is interesting. This is a man who had to ask him grandmother for permission to marry. Even to pursue this case. You wouldn't think it would mean anything in a court of law. But the British Monarchy is woven into the laws of the land.

PicturesOfDogs · 27/04/2023 10:57

Howsimplywonderful · 27/04/2023 10:43

When William was briefed about Spare and Harry’s comments about him

Does anyone think he said , at least it wasn’t a random journalist, that would have been harder to bear than my brother knifing me on the back

I feel really sad for William.

According to Harrys own words, he’s supported him through this the whole way, even encouraging him to speak to the Queen to go to court, and then Harry pulls this. Exposing things William clearly wanted to keep confidential.
It all over Twitter how William has took a back hander from Murdoch in exchange for throwing H&M under the bus. People are mentioning Diana, William being in cahoots with the people who ‘killed’ her. It’s mad.

Imagine that’s the thanks you get for apparently going against your own father to support Harry (according to H’s statement) to take on this lawsuit, and he literally throws you to the actual media/ social media wolves.

I’d never forgive him.

PicturesOfDogs · 27/04/2023 11:04

Morestrangerthings · 27/04/2023 10:52

He seems to be arguing that he wasn’t ‘allowed’ to bring a claim on his own until 2019, but not sure how much legal weight that will have.

Yes, that is interesting. This is a man who had to ask him grandmother for permission to marry. Even to pursue this case. You wouldn't think it would mean anything in a court of law. But the British Monarchy is woven into the laws of the land.

I don’t think it will mean anything (but who knows, stranger things have happened).

The obvious counter argument would be ‘when you asked for permission, it was granted, whose to say if you had asked earlier then permission wouldn’t have been granted earlier’

It then falls back to the ‘secret agreement’, which Harry didn’t mention in his initial argument according to the judges comments which have been reported.
Or that he didn’t know he was allowed to ask earlier? It’s a bit of mess really.

I think he’s brought up the secret agreement after initial submission to counter the out of time claims, but he’s kind of shot his credibility in the foot while doing so.

Howsimplywonderful · 27/04/2023 11:11

Will there be any cross examination of Harry at this stage ?

Or does the judge decide if there is a credible case to proceed without any cross examination of his statement ?

Original poster
Whaeanui · 27/04/2023 11:15

His brother, his actual brother, has written about him, criticised his parenting, questioned his love for his wife. Not much going on there at all

Criticised his parenting? Questioned his love for his wife? I don’t remember either.

William has clearly made sure things between them were made public too, so let’s not go over it again because we have done it all before… their fight was already in a book, minus William getting violent, the wedding drama also already in the public domain… I mean it goes both ways there.

Williams settlement is part of Harry’s argument against striking this out, as they began at the same time.

As I’ve said several times, the fact this institution works like this, where they mingle or are friendly with people who hack their phones etc is the issue I have. Why do they have to? Why has the press got the kind of power where they can invade their privacy to illegal means and still they have to socialise with them? This isn’t like a normal work event at all.

OP posts:
Iwasafool · 27/04/2023 11:18

What has William said about Harry? I don't follow royalty much so I don't know anything about that.

Original poster
Whaeanui · 27/04/2023 11:20

@Howsimplywonderful he’s not my hero, why do you say that? And post daily fail articles?

OP posts:
Original poster
Whaeanui · 27/04/2023 11:21

HIS FATHER! Clearly his father didn’t marry the woman he loved at first did he? Are people not seeing that?

OP posts:
Iwasafool · 27/04/2023 11:24

Well Camilla married someone else so Charles wasn't able to marry her. It takes two.

LivelyBlake · 27/04/2023 11:24

The Queen has had to mingle more than once with the same people that organised the murder of her uncle. This may help put in perspective the pic of William greeting Rebekah Brooks at a charity event.

LivelyBlake · 27/04/2023 11:25
  • had to
Original poster
Whaeanui · 27/04/2023 11:26

Which I find awful. When we say ‘had to’, who or what compels them?

OP posts:
Iwasafool · 27/04/2023 11:26

Howsimplywonderful · 27/04/2023 11:19

Poor Kate, what a horrible thing to say. I always thought Harry seemed close to her.

Iwasafool · 27/04/2023 11:27

Whaeanui · 27/04/2023 11:26

Which I find awful. When we say ‘had to’, who or what compels them?

It's their job. Politicians do it as well. I wouldn't be cut out for it, I bear grudges but fortunately I don't have to.

Howsimplywonderful · 27/04/2023 11:27

@LivelyBlake

I know.

Original poster
Whaeanui · 27/04/2023 11:29

Politicians I somewhat understand. Why should the Queen for instance, the former, have to socialise with awful journalists that write crap about her family. What a horrible job.

OP posts:
Original poster
Whaeanui · 27/04/2023 11:29

Harry did not mention Kate, why do people assume he meant her? I assume he meant his father. The most obvious one.

OP posts:
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In
This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread