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.

@Dolma

I can quite imagine why William wouldn’t want to sit through a trial. Pity his brother is trying to make it sound sordid and underhand.

Honestly Meghan must have the patience of a saint to listen to him.

That seems quite unreasonable to expect people wanting to maintain their privacy and taking someone to court for breaching it, to have to divulge during the case what private things you were trying to keep private! I gather though, that for celebrities they’re suing regarding actual articles? So the information is already private? Which is I guess why Sienna Miller wanted to go to trial, for justice and because she had nothing to lose as they already wrote about it.

Harry’s statement doesn’t say anything about Williams settlement being sordid or underhand. His barrister said it was revealed to defend against the strike out- for being out of time.

Yep, I would imagine that to kate and William, especially, it would be quite traumatizing having to have their private correspondence being discussed and dissected publically in court. I've read stories of people who found the whole court process very difficult and gruelling to deal with. it's never guaranteed that things will go your way.

At that point Balthazar Getty had reconciled with his wife so perhaps it was best forgotten for the sake of his wife

i don’t think she would have appreciated Sienna going to court and having to relive he affair again ?

I agree with many of these points but the tabloids benefit hugely from out of court settlements. It basically allows them to continue their nefarious practices without much hinderance behind closed doors, and without them becoming widely known, leading to their methods remaining unchallenged and unquestioned by the public at large.

It’s only because a few people who probably consider they don’t have anything more to lose, have decided to stick their heads above the parapet, that these murky practices become bathed in light.

As we see from the fascinating article linked by Skullbabe, the tabloids are more than just tinkering at the sides of politics, they are fully interfering with the democratic process.

That article is incredible actually:

(posting here again in case anyone misses it)
https://newrepublic.com/article/118750/rebekah-brooks-trial-demonstrates-how-power-works

And we just thought we were chuckling at Ed Milliband’s “tablet of commandments” when in fact we were looking at an exercise in personal destruction by the press.

And I think it has been pointed out on Mumsnet before that an article in the Evening Standard in 2014 cited that among the close coterie of friends who had Rebekah Brooks back during the phone hacking trial were: Piers Morgan and Jeremy Clarkson, both of whom expressed fulsome delight at her acquittal. Yes, JC and PM, both friends and supporters of Camilla and strangely enough, the journalists who have written the most virulent articles against Meghan Markle. Isn’t that surprising?

And can I just drop in another one pls? Scroll down and you will find a few interesting words from the lovely Matt Hancock of all people as to why Leveson 2 has been shelved:

https://hackinginquiry.org/the-triumph-of-cynicism-the-suppression-of-leveson-ii/

Thanks for that article, I’m still reading but this!

I saw what that meant in 2009. A weak Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, was at the Labour Party Conference, working desperately to shore up support and inject confidence into a Party facing defeat at the General Election to come. I was in the room when the Brown team heard the news that Labour had dreaded since the 1997 endorsement – The Sun was shifting its support to David Cameron’s Conservatives and was doing so at a time to inflict maximum damage to the Prime Minister. A chill went round the room as I saw in action the political power News International had at that time.

This is the power that scares me. I just don’t know why people aren’t more concerned the influence one corporation has.

Hopefully Levenson 2 will come about. But this is a government issue.

@Novella4
as you’re an arch republician, would you find pushes by the RF for Levenson 2 as ‘interfering in government business for your own benefit’

If the RF pushed for Levenson 2, that’s the coverage they risk.

Good point.

In his witness statement, per the Guardian, Prince Harry says, "my brother appeared to know an awful lot more than I did on the subject of phone hacking although he did not tell me if that was the case...However, NGN [News Group Newspapers] still settled his claim for a huge sum of money in 2020 without subjecting him to a similar strike-out application, without any of the public being told, and seemingly with some favorable deal in return for him going 'quietly' so to speak."

So you're saying that Harry’s statement above doesn't imply that William’s acceptance of the settlement was in any way sordid or shady? Because I'm getting the opposite impression, and many others are too, as harry’s fans are now accusing William of being in kahoots with Rupert Murdoch and even the Guardian are issuing articles questioning whether this private settlement was ethical. If harry had no intention of smearing his brother (again), he and his lawyers have done a horrible job at it because now William is being attacked as being a Rupert Murdoch supporter.

Wow, this exchange in 2018 ( this gives me another reason to detest Hancock more than I already did ):

Ian Lucas: I know what your position is. What I am saying to you is that you misrepresented Sir Brian Leveson’s position to the Commons on that day.
Matt Hancock: That is your view. We are not going to come to an agreement on it. I think I have faithfully represented it, as you read out. I can see that you would rather I had done differently.
Ian C. Lucas: No, what I would rather is that you had been straightforward. I am a lawyer; I know when particular words are drafted for particular purposes, and I think your words were drafted to mislead. That is what I think.
Matt Hancock: All I can say—
Ian Lucas: What I would have preferred would be if you quoted Sir Brian Leveson when he said that he fundamentally disagreed with the conclusion that the Government had reached.
Matt Hancock: I can see that that is your preference. I wrote my speech in order to describe his position and that is that.
Ian Lucas: My preference, Secretary of State, is for honesty and straightforward evidence. I would welcome that from you.
Matt Hancock: Noted.

This

Prince Harry’s allegations against NGN include:

• Illegally intercepting voicemail messages, obtaining private information (such as itemised phone bills or medical records) by deception or ‘blagging’ and using private investigators to commit these unlawful information gathering acts on their behalf.
• Unlawful activity was allegedly used to obtain highly sensitive information about his late mother’s state of mind, his welfare (aged just 10) and their relationship with each other.
• That a Private Investigator in the US called ‘Detective’ Danno Hanks was instructed to obtain private information about his emerging relationship with Meghan, including her (confidential) social security number and other personal information about her family in the full knowledge that it was unlawful, which was used as the basis for two articles in The Sun. This occurred as recently as 2016, Prince Harry alleges.

Yet William feeds off these people. Collecting money from them and giving them emails and stories of M&H. Surely he could take a minute to remember how they treated his mother and other victims since then. It really is a shame.
Harry is worth many kings.
twitter.com/ArchewellBaby/status/1651203304171421696?s=08 Hugh Grant highlighted this dangerous beast needs to be dealt with as did Harry.

All this thread proved is if you scour anti monarchist articles you come up with anti monarchist articles. If you do the opposite you reach entirely opposite views. Shows how echo chambers work.

Lol

Sorry OP, it was such a good thread

Interesting. I worked for the BBC too but on the legal side - Factual Programming and Contracts Advising.

So facts about press illegal activity is anti-monarchist 🤔 that’s an interesting perspective.

@Whaeanui

Please do a second thread!

Meanwhile, this quote from a lawyer in a Daily Beast report explains why revealing the secret deal struck by William is legally relevant.

Some commentators have suggested that William’s settlement with NGN was fairly standard practice, and certainly speaking to William’s friends one gets the feeling that many of them believe Harry has revealed the settlement, at least partly, out of spite aimed at his brother.

But media lawyer Mark Stephens, a partner at leading law firm Howard Kennedy, told The Daily Beast that Harry’s decision to reveal his brother’s settlement, far from being an act of mere vindictiveness, made good legal sense. “NGN is essentially arguing that Harry is out of time, but Harry is making the argument that he delayed proceedings because of the secret deal, and the payment to his brother is part of the evidence that such a deal existed. The payment is important. It is a crucial piece of the picture which Harry and his lawyers are building which is that William and the other royals were cozying up to Murdoch while Harry was kept out of the loop because they suspected he would see it see it as his duty to fight.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/prince-william-will-never-trust-harry-again-friend-says

Looking back now, three years on, this exchange was a big part of my decision to stand down from Parliament the following year. I was always told that telling the truth was a fundamental part of Parliamentary process for a Member. I remembered, even as a child, reading about John Profumo and how his career had ended because he had told a lie to the House of Commons Chamber. It was my view that Hancock had misled me in the Commons Chamber and I thought I had exposed it in my cross-examination of him. What astonished me was his lack of contrition. What also astonished me was how little interest the press took in the exchange. I do not remember ever being asked by a journalist about the cross-examination. It seemed to me that telling the truth in Parliament no longer mattered.
Ian Lucas

Just so interesting isn’t it? Matt Hancock, of all people, had a big role in preventing Leveson 2.

@MrsMaxDeWinter thanks, I will do. So that’s as I said yesterday, the reason for introducing the settlement was a direct argument against striking out his case.

Harry said William did this about Meghan all the time. He uses the media narrative as fact even when he knows otherwise.

I know no one is allowed to criticize the RF, only H&M are to be destroyed but fact is William is in bed with the media.

William has a habit of employing publicity staff for thrived on controversy. Harry said this in his book and it's evident.

Openness, transparency and honesty is what the RF is totally opposed to.

Uh huh I’m not sure it’s helpful to the flow of conversation to go back to comments from 5 days ago. You’ll just have to catch up and jump in with what’s currently being discussed.