Part 2: The Press & The Royals a discussion

[Whaeanui]

Following on from this thread: Part 1 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/the_royal_family/4786923-the-press-the-royals-a-discussion?page=1

As we know, the press often manufacture stories to create divisions between the women in the family, more often than the men. They have also hacked private communications, with cases ongoing. The public seem to feed off this and none of the family get treated very well except the monarch-although not always.

For discussion: 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, and how can they achieve that? How will previous and current legal proceedings alter the relationship?
Please do not intentionally derail this thread by discussing your personal dislike of particular family members or if they deserve it. I would really like to continue this discussion on how the royal family and the press interact, as above.

Hacked off summary of current cases involving Prince Harry v NGN

https://hackinginquiry.org/sun-publisher-ngn-allegedly-tapped-landlines-spied-on-prince-harry-as-a-child-and-princess-diana-and-settled-secret-claim-with-prince-william/

It really is hideous - what a way to live as royals. I've really been more and more unsettled the more I look into this and realize just how wide the net and the web goes. Research needed now in how to petition my MP or how to get this to parliament to push for another inquiry. Any governementy people around who can push us (me) in the right direction? I suspect we will have another event that noone will be able to defend (like Milly Dowler) before we have another inquiry but I hope it doesn't have to come to that.

"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."

@Whaeanui or why people just can't pull back from the RF soap opera and look at the wider picture which is where we have a RF who have now shown throught the Queen's team correspondence, Charles' and William's settlements and arrangements and Harry's lawsuits just how powerless our political class (I know the royal family aren't really political - but they kind of are) are against them.

The hacking etc are terrible but politicians are the ones with the power to change it.

Petition your MP to start another inquiry and get a press standards ombudsman with powers and stop buying the relevant publications.

This isn’t really a ‘royal’ thread by your parameters. Perhaps you should ask for it to be moved ?

Any enquiry needs to cover social media too. Wasn't the Nicola Bulley investigation derailed by people taking videos near the disappearance sites in an attempt to cash in with views? The sums involved are not the same as the multinational conglomerates but I wouldn't put it past the press to pay for exclusive access to this kind of content and creator.

Thanks @skullbabe yes it’s something the more I read about the more I want to know how we can get Leveson 2. You’re right too, it’s no way to live for anyone and I don’t think it should be part of the job/role/profile. I can’t accept that.

No. I’ve outliNed in the OP what this is about thanks, it’s everything to do with the royal family. It has crossovers but absolutely is appropriate here, as was the previous thread. Feel free not to comment if it doesn’t interest you.

*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.*

@4plusthehound said...

"You should read the timeline between the Queen'shead of PR and Thompson (head honcho for Murdock).

She was asking - FOR TWO YEARS - for ameeting.

Two years.

They eventually offered a chocie of dates - one was Harrys wedding the other was Commonwealth Day.

This is how they played with the Queen."

This absolutely has to do with the royals and their relationships with the press and media and what this means for all of us.

The revelations are really shocking. We thought it was all cleaned up and tidy now. Actually - they just got worse. That is how brazen they are.

This

This was from the BBC yesterday, just posting a few links from the other thread for anyone who may have missed them. BBC

@Whaeanui
" 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, and how can they achieve that?"

Very good question

Short answer : NO

The other issue is balanced reporting esp by national media like the BBC

The BBC are being challenged on this - the recent panorama doc on Charles mentioned his great wealth and how it has ballooned in recent decades

Even mentioning plain facts like this was rarely done before and it was shocking !

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001ld35/panorama-will-king-charles-change-the-monarchy

Social media is a big complicated monster of an issue. Especially because of the international element of it. Even if one country classifies a SM platform as a 'publisher' and therefore subject to the same rules as traditional publishers, it's going to be hard to legislate across borders.

And it's clear how quickly things go south when someone new and unethical buys a platform - just look at what Elon Musk has done to Twitter.

But I think a press enquiry needs to hold newspapers accountable for their comments sections - and insist on 24/7 monitoring by a team of humans, and the comments on social media under their own posts.

Thanks for the new thread Whaeanui

Just to go back to the point from the last one about William selling stories on Harry, if anyone has any actual examples I’d be very interested to see them.

As it seems that Harry goes between accusing his brother of planting/leaking stories, while simultaneously accusing him of ‘believing’ the press (eg MM bullying accusations)

From where I’m standing, William has always supported Harry (by Harrys own admission) while Harry just flings around vague accusations of secret deals and planting, but there doesn’t seem to be a single story that he’s actually accused William of ‘leaking’

I don’t know how much Twitter has changed under Elon Musk but it was pretty horrible before.

Socia media has given a platform to millions of amateur paparazzi and commentators and that’s here to stay. It also feeds the tabloids as we well know.

@PicturesOfDogs I wanted to get that answered on the last thread as I specifically stated I didn’t want either thread to be H v W or K v M etc there are other threads for all this, but it filled up. Any story where it was a private thing between them, Harry suspects or knows it’s his brother eg the story of their argument where W pushed or hit H… appeared first in another book and the source was a friend of Williams. The bridesmaids fiasco. I mean I don’t want to get into a 5 page to and fro on whether the separate offices brief against each other but it’s a well discussed topic and reporters have said certain stories about Meghan came from KP. Some people won’t believe that and don’t believe that William or his staff leaked negative stories or versions of so there’s not much to discuss.

I don’t know how much Twitter has changed under Elon Musk but it was pretty horrible before. Yes @LivelyBlake their previous T & C’s regarding MAPs ( pedophiles ) were pretty gross.

Harry is going to get cross examined in court about his confused statements. I just wonder did he listen to his legal team at all, is his statement what they prepared

I know this was from the previous thread, but given the statement's articulacy I doubt Harry wrote it. More likely, surely, that his lawyers did, while presenting the allegations he's chosen to make?

As for the shade thrown at William for "settling" with the media, it'll be a bit ironic if Harry ends up doing the same - and I honestly can't see any other outcome, as the idea of him in a witness box is unthinkable

It's got worse - I know that's almost unbelievable. There's basically no oversight now, and there's a lot of skulduggery over the verified blue check mark which some people think is helping to promote far right users and their content over everyone else.

A Statement by the Communications Secretary to Prince Harry
Published 08 November 2016
Since he was young, Prince Harry has been very aware of the warmth that has been extended to him by members of the public. He feels lucky to have so many people supporting him and knows what a fortunate and privileged life he leads.
He is also aware that there is significant curiosity about his private life. He has never been comfortable with this, but he has tried to develop a thick skin about the level of media interest that comes with it. He has rarely taken formal action on the very regular publication of fictional stories that are written about him and he has worked hard to develop a professional relationship with the media, focused on his work and the issues he cares about.
But the past week has seen a line crossed. His girlfriend, Meghan Markle, has been subject to a wave of abuse and harassment. Some of this has been very public - the smear on the front page of a national newspaper; the racial undertones of comment pieces; and the outright sexism and racism of social media trolls and web article comments. Some of it has been hidden from the public - the nightly legal battles to keep defamatory stories out of papers; her mother having to struggle past photographers in order to get to her front door; the attempts of reporters and photographers to gain illegal entry to her home and the calls to police that followed; the substantial bribes offered by papers to her ex-boyfriend; the bombardment of nearly every friend, co-worker, and loved one in her life.
Prince Harry is worried about Ms. Markle’s safety and is deeply disappointed that he has not been able to protect her. It is not right that a few months into a relationship with him that Ms. Markle should be subjected to such a storm. He knows commentators will say this is ‘the price she has to pay’ and that ‘this is all part of the game’. He strongly disagrees. This is not a game - it is her life and his.
He has asked for this statement to be issued in the hopes that those in the press who have been driving this story can pause and reflect before any further damage is done. He knows that it is unusual to issue a statement like this, but hopes that fair-minded people will understand why he has felt it necessary to speak publicly.

Totally get that we don’t want it to turn into a which brother done what, as it’s been a really interesting discussion overall, but obviously when it was mentioned William had sold stories I was just interested in specific, concrete examples, not vague insinuations.

Eg bridesmaid fiasco, Harry has said directly that came from Camilla didn’t he? It’s just interesting that he would levy specific allegations against her, but only vague insinuations about William.

But anyway, happy to leave it there, I’m sure there’s plenty more option to discuss that on one of the numerous other threads in this topic!

I don’t think he’d do well under cross examination.

We saw how he was at ease etc, and then how combative he became in the TB interview, when asked about calling RF ‘racist’. I wonder how he’d cope with a curve ball from a solicitor that he hadn’t prepped for

He's got the best legal advice that money can get. Of course his lawyers prepared him and made plenty of money doing it.

I think Harry probably did write his statement. It might have been tidied up and had some bits edited and plumped into position by someone else but it’s pretty long and also I think the phrasing is quite like him; “the institution was incredibly nervous” is straight from the horse’s mouth.

I get the feeling he wasn’t goi g to take no for an answer, Duchess.

I think it would have hung together better if a QC had written it- we can none of us work out the timeline or quite what has gone on