Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

The Prince and the Press: Continuing the Discussion on Prince Harry and the UK Media

972 replies

MrsMaxDeWinter · 06/06/2023 10:12

A few weeks ago, there were three really great long running threads about Prince Harry and his battles against the UK "popular press."

I thought I would do one that looks at Harry's current court action.

For those interested in the kind of balanced view you won't get from the tabloids, all of whom face conflicts of interest, here is the Guardian take, which is the springboard for this discussion.

It is not possible to take any of the tabloids seriously when they report on Harry's legal cases. Former editor Alan Rusbridger, now of Prospect, has observed that all tabloids covering this story are acting unethically as they have not declared their conflicts of interest: Harry is suing all of their media houses.

The only papers with no conflict of interest are the Guardian, the Telegraph and the Financial Times.

So I will be following this from the Guardian live page.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/04/diana-meghan-and-the-tabloid-press-harry-finally-gets-his-day-in-court

Diana, Meghan and the tabloid press: Harry finally gets his day in court

The Duke of Sussex has made it his life’s work to change the British media landscape. He’ll get his chance this week in the phone hacking case against the Mirror Group

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/04/diana-meghan-and-the-tabloid-press-harry-finally-gets-his-day-in-court

OP posts:
Thread gallery
26
4plusthehound · 09/06/2023 14:52

ArcaneWireless · 09/06/2023 10:22

The only thing I find curious is why some feel we should be on different sides and therefore threads.

All opinions are valid and as said, folk can post where they like.

Just because I choose not to eat marzipan, others could stuff their faces with it. They don’t feel the same way as I do. It stands to reason that there shouldn’t be certain marzipan eating areas just because I don’t like it.

And likewise, should some choose not to post on certain threads, it doesn’t mean that others feel the same.

Tis the nature of a forum after all.

That is a really good point.

The only problem I see is that some people really want ot chat about his character failings - like did he or didn't he. It is flogging a dead horse and not that relevant to the thread.

Did he tell Chelsy?

Damed if I know but it I am sure the judge will not factor that in his ruling!

4plusthehound · 09/06/2023 15:00

Howsimplywonderful · 09/06/2023 14:50

@4plusthehound

I just read that Nikki Sanderson has witness statements from friends and co-stars to support her case.

Harry didn’t provide anything like that from Chelsey.

And?

ArcaneWireless · 09/06/2023 15:03

The more I think about it, I’m so glad I never had a hankering for fame or status or bright lights or whatever.

I was ‘approached’ but chose to join up instead…. This of course was before my face was rearranged but inside, no matter what happened on the outside, that kind of life just never appealed. And the nonsense that Nikki endured? That shouldn’t be part and parcel but it seems it is.

There seems to be a lot to be said to be content with my little life in the shadows.

🦇

Howsimplywonderful · 09/06/2023 15:18

@4plusthehound

And ….

if she was glad/supportive of being dragged into a case she would have added a witness statement to give credibility to some of his statements (like the ‘listening bug’

at the moment it’s just his word

Iwantcakeeveryday · 09/06/2023 15:36

oh I missed this from The Guardian:

Sherborne presents an email in connection to the story about Harry and late television presenter Caroline Flack.
Sherborne says it contains a description of how to hack a celebrity’s phone.
This is an email that Katie Hind, the author of this article, is sending to someone at the Mirror. We can see here that she’s forwarding under the subject ‘pin numbers’ a description of how to hack a phone from a celebrity voicemail greeting website.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/live/2023/jun/07/prince-harry-court-trial-mirror-group-phone-hacking-latest-updates-live?filterKeyEvents=false&page=with%3Ablock-648088048f083b98d0d4f8dc

Iwantcakeeveryday · 09/06/2023 15:37

The only problem I see is that some people really want ot chat about his character failings - like did he or didn't he. It is flogging a dead horse and not that relevant to the thread.

Yes, this exactly.

mixedrecycling · 09/06/2023 15:43

What is irrelevant to one person may seem relevant to another. As long as it is within MN guidelines, of course, it is up to each of us to post as we see fit.

behaveasbefitsthesituationwillyas · 09/06/2023 16:05

Iwantcakeeveryday · 09/06/2023 15:36

oh I missed this from The Guardian:

Sherborne presents an email in connection to the story about Harry and late television presenter Caroline Flack.
Sherborne says it contains a description of how to hack a celebrity’s phone.
This is an email that Katie Hind, the author of this article, is sending to someone at the Mirror. We can see here that she’s forwarding under the subject ‘pin numbers’ a description of how to hack a phone from a celebrity voicemail greeting website.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/live/2023/jun/07/prince-harry-court-trial-mirror-group-phone-hacking-latest-updates-live?filterKeyEvents=false&page=with%3Ablock-648088048f083b98d0d4f8dc

Wonder if she will be called up?

jeffgoldblum · 09/06/2023 16:10

👋 @ArcaneWireless , as always your points are as fair and pleasant as I'm sure your beautiful face is !
Everyone's opinion is as valid as the next person's.
No need for abuse or snide remarks.

StarbucksSmarterSister · 09/06/2023 16:21

ArcaneWireless

My grandmother worked for a middle class family where there was a terrible tragedy, which was made into a huge scandal in the press. This was in 1907. Online newspaper archives show their exaggerated/untrue versions of what really happened are still available to read today.

Nothing has changed.

Roussette · 09/06/2023 16:21

Howsimplywonderful · 09/06/2023 15:18

@4plusthehound

And ….

if she was glad/supportive of being dragged into a case she would have added a witness statement to give credibility to some of his statements (like the ‘listening bug’

at the moment it’s just his word

How do you know that she isn't supporting him? How do you know that she doesn't want to make a public statement about it?

Obviously, being Harry, it splits opinions. But I think we ought to leave it, because we can assume one way or the other all we like. We do not know and it's no good going on about 'ahhh but he is so awful' and 'his track record' blah blah blah
We do not know so it's just boring and repetitive to speculate.

MayQueeen · 09/06/2023 16:25

Apparently a family friend has confined she wasn’t consulted

cobicat · 09/06/2023 16:26

We can't assume Chelsy supports him (without evidence) in the same way we can't assume he was hacked (without evidence).

Nikki Sanderson seems to have provided evidence of both support from others and of actual hacking. Why hasn't Harry?

MayQueeen · 09/06/2023 16:28

Looks like it is just some of the posters on mumsnet that have picked up on that double standard

Roussette · 09/06/2023 16:28

MayQueeen · 09/06/2023 16:25

Apparently a family friend has confined she wasn’t consulted

That came from Petronella Wyatt. See a couple of long posts about it earlier today.
She is a great friend of Camilla and wrote a really vile piece about Harry and said this.
Take it with a huge mountain of salt.

MayQueeen · 09/06/2023 16:28
  • that it isn’t

typos !!!

Roussette · 09/06/2023 16:29

And there you go. Linked by MayQueen. A really insulting horrible article from someone who has written many like this, each one worse than the last. The headline tells you all you need to know.

MayQueeen · 09/06/2023 16:31

And what’s your point ? You keep claiming that people are just making assumptions but here is an article taht claims a family friend has confirmed she wasn’t consulted

but you’ll of course discount it as the author has a different opinion to you regarding Harry - interesting

jeffgoldblum · 09/06/2023 16:32

I thought the telegraph was supposed to be more highbrow than the dm and others?

behaveasbefitsthesituationwillyas · 09/06/2023 16:32

MayQueeen · 09/06/2023 16:27

Ah that old chestnut the "family friend".

Pertronella Wyatt needs to stop drinking.

jeffgoldblum · 09/06/2023 16:33

Ps @MayQueeen , I really enjoyed the Jeff article, thanks

StarbucksSmarterSister · 09/06/2023 16:35

jeffgoldblum · 09/06/2023 16:32

I thought the telegraph was supposed to be more highbrow than the dm and others?

It was once. It's become just like the Mail in the last few years.

Roussette · 09/06/2023 16:35

MayQueeen · 09/06/2023 16:31

And what’s your point ? You keep claiming that people are just making assumptions but here is an article taht claims a family friend has confirmed she wasn’t consulted

but you’ll of course discount it as the author has a different opinion to you regarding Harry - interesting

'Claims'. Yes. *
Claims*. Have you read any other articles by Petronella Wyatt? She sticks the boot in whenever she can. And claiming that a family friend says something means absolutely nothing.

Glad you find me 'interesting'. I take that as a compliment.

This is not directed at just you but...

Is this thread about the court case, the ramifications, the current litigant Nikki Sanderson, more factual than rhetoric about Harry .... or is it just another thread to knock Harry in any which way?

Let me know. I'm off if it is. There's another thread to do that if you want to.

MayQueeen · 09/06/2023 16:35

jeffgoldblum

I’ve noticed that usually people are accused of being enthral to the dm

actually I’ve never seen that paper regularly referenced by anyone that isn’t a pro Meghan and Harry supporter

and when other posters refer to other journalists or papers, there’s always a screech about how that author is bffs with Camilla - so what 😂 should we all ignore what omid says just cos he’s bffs with Meghan and Harry? Of course not, he’s their mouthpiece and when he communicates info it is from them - most of us are capable of knowing how to interpret info despite the obvious biases

I haven’t said I endorse everything the author in the telegraph says - I don’t actually - but I find it probable that if they are saying they have a source to confirm Chelsey wasn’t consulted that assertion is prob true