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.

Just watched that - all about Harry 🤣

I think the difference between you and Piers is more that he was editor at two of the papers that have admitted or been found to have hacked phones while he was in the job, and that he listened to peoples voicemails and admitted this. Unless you did those things too? Are you saying you believe Piers Morgan wasn’t involved? Will you be engaging in this conversation or are you just going to quote my posts to talk about me instead? Seems like deliberately inflammatory behaviour to me.

Yes, he immediately deflected to the whole privacy thing, on his Twitter too. You’d think the first thing to say would be to answer the claims about hacking.

@Whaeanui

Perhaps he’s been advised not to mention it in advance of the court case.

much better to deal with in court under oath than on Twitter I think

That’s true. He should probably just so no comment.

Don't know how anyone is not already so tired of Piers happing on about this privacy narrative. It would be so easy for Harry to prove that the stories were already out there, but either false or not clarified.

Take the TK Maxx story for example.

Are you saying you believe Piers Morgan wasn’t involved? Will you be engaging in this conversation or are you just going to quote my posts to talk about me instead? Seems like deliberately inflammatory behaviour to me.

I am engaging with the discussion actually, and several people have thanked me for my contributions. If you don’t find them useful or interesting there’s not much I can do about that! I also don’t believe I have talked about you at all.

I have no personal knowledge of whether Piers Morgan was involved in hacking at the Mirror or not, so I don’t currently have any belief about it. I don’t like Piers Morgan at all (and have said so many times) but I also understand the burden of proof in legal cases and try not to let my own personal biases get in the way of following court cases.

I would be very surprised if any Tabloid in this country hadn’t broken information and data rules in gathering stories - that’s a general belief, if it helps. That’s a different issue as to whether any individual is legally liable for unlawful hacking, however.

I posted Piers Morgan’s conversation with Charlotte Church because I think actually it tends to undermine the allegation that he was telling his staff to hack phones. If he had a great source of information that he knew was dodgy, why would he publicly warn celebrities about it and tell them how to avoid it? That doesn’t mean he didn’t allow staff to hack phones, but this conversation is not evidence that he did, and it supports a narrative that the lawyers will doubtless be constructing that although he knew it was going on in the industry, he did not condone it.

The trial will be fascinating. I am very interested in hearing the evidence and seeing what comes out. Being accused of being inflammatory just because someone doesn’t like the fact I try to keep an open mind, not so much.

Well thank you for engaging directly with me, wonderful. I think that you’ve repeatedly made reference to my lack of knowledge on legal matters across threads in a derogatory and often patronising way. I realise you have a group that thank you every time you post. I just didn’t find that single post you made to be worthy of special thanks at that point.
Actually helpful corrections and information is welcome, from anyone, law degree or not. You’re very privileged to have a law degree in this country, sharing what you’ve learnt is great when it’s done respectfully. When you come on with snarky posts to say ‘ if you don’t want to rely on her googling’ you’re not respectfully sharing, you’re one-upping based on your specialist knowledge. Whether it’s the intention or not, it can come across elitist and patronising, attempting to humiliate because you have a degree another poster doesn’t. I speak with lawyers on the feminism board all the time who help us understand and correct things. It’s the way you do it that has made me uncomfortable now, on several threads. As I’ve said to you before. I hope we can discuss this case in a more respectful manner going forward.

I think you’re in a very small group of people that don’t have an opinion on if Morgan was involved with hacking. Obviously legally it’s a different matter, which would come down to evidence. But there’s a fairly large number of people in this country who feel that he, and others higher up than him, both knew about it and ordered it, and got away with it.

@notanotheroneagain I know! His ghost writer mentioned the tk maxx thing, very odd for them

I hope we can discuss this case in a more respectful manner going forward.

Based on your post above, I don’t fancy the chances! 🤣

I think you made a very good point. It does seem odd if he was doing it to celebrities that he'd then warn them about how to protect themselves. I think he is quite a complicated character so who knows, which is your point really.

I've find your posts very informative and I hope you keep posting.

Sorry I don't know about the TKMaxx story? Was Harry saying he couldn't afford clothes or PM saying he couldn't or am I missing something. Thanks if you can enlighten me.

Actually I'm being lazy. I'll go and have a google.

He has the most massive ego, I imagine he was showing off. People like that can't resist showing they know as a sort of oneupmanship.

I do think PMorgan could've just said 'no comment' on his doorstep as opposed to the massive rant about Harry. It showed him up for the sort of person he is however.

Personally I think we should all be grateful that Harry and others are holding the MNG's feet to the fire. How he can be criticised for that god alone knows. Trending on Twitter is #GoHarry. I remember annoying everyone by posting this on MN weeks ago, maybe I'm an influencer now whatever that is lol

So from what I can see Harry likes shopping in the sales at TKMaxx, TKMaxx say they don't have sales and the ghostwriter says TKMaxx are lying because of links to the then Prince Charles. Is that it?

Very many people linked pics of TKMaxx's massive sale notices plastered all over their shop window.

It's such a ridiculous point anyway, TKMaxx is one massive sale 365 days of the year.

Yes like I said I think PM is a very complicated character so you can read it different ways, hard to know what the correct version is without more evidence. I haven't seen his doorstep rant but I can imagine it. I think his obsession with H&M is quite embarrassing to watch.

Is anyone criticising Harry for the case? I know he gets criticised a lot but I didn't think this case was something he was criticised for but I don't follow it closely.

I think I've only been in there twice, not the London one I mean our local one. It is too chaotic for me but I do know people who love it.

Just catching up with the thread so I have skimmed and not read everything, but thought I would point out an interview that Alan Rusbridger gave to Andrew Marr yesterday. Alan points out the shocking lack of ethics of every tabloid that attacks Harry, and who, if they followed the principles of ethical journalism, would have a line in every story stating that Harry had taken legal action against them, but don't.

Meanwhile, the tabloids are not really covering the trial, but the Daily Mail does have a story SLAMMING Meghan for not working as hard as other Royals ... over the last decade. I am not even kidding, They have a poll showing Charles had the most engagements in the last decade, and Meghan the least engagements, with censorious comments about how this makes her selfish.

This is yet another thing the usual Mumsnetters can slam her for: in addition to the sin of wearing her own jewellery on a walk, she didn't even bother to turn up to work for the family before she was part of the family!

I don't think he's complicated at all, to me he is quite transparent!

Endless criticism of Harry on MN about this court case. Literally endless. What he wears, the fact he comes over from the US for it, the fact he walked in the front door, the suit he wore, what he said, what he did in the courtroom, saying he is showboating, a pap stuck a camera in his face and posters saying Harry was rude (not the pap). I could go on.

#GoHarry

I do!

I have upstairs hanging up a dress I bought last week. £349, in their red sticker sale... £12! And it fits! And I love it! And I have somewhere special I am going to wear it to. Happy days

Sorry don't mean to derail !

@Roussette yes the TK Maxx story was the most glaring example as they stupidly tweeted they don’t have sales ( to help people like PM claim he’s a liar ) because thousands of shoppers immediately debunked their stupid tweet showing their own advertisements of sale prices and reductions. They’re literally always having a sale. It was so quickly used by the likes of PM, without any of them stopping to think about it!

But that isn't all he is, I've seen him doing interviews where he has seemed a nice, quite reasonable person. On H&M he isn't and I said that. That's why I think he is complicated because if you see the reasonable guy doing the nice interview it is hard to understand the whole H&M thing.

The £12 dress sounds a bargain. I just can't see past the chaos, well it is chaos to me. I'm the same with carboots, DH loves them, finds some amazing bargains and I just see rubbish.

Maybe our branch is particularly bad? Maybe I should visit a different branch when I'm in a city, our is quite small so a big city one might be better.

I pictured you "derailing" the £12 red dress.

@Iwasafool yes lots of criticism about Harry and the cases, including yesterday saying he was trying to stifle free press and something about Putin 🤔 I never did get an explanation of how taking press to court for phone hacking is similar to how Putin runs things.

No one is all bad. And PM isn't. However, his obsession with Meghan took a very nasty turn. And he has lived and breathed it since.

TKMaxx takes times. Lots of time. I used to work in fashion at one point and I can look at an outfit and immediately know whether it will fit or not, so it's a dream for me, I can get through the racks at breakneck speed! I also know all about the codes on the price labels, whether they are made for TKM, genuine bargains, previous year stock, about to be reduced more etc. Don't start me off... my DD is even worse than me!