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

[MrsMaxDeWinter]

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

Why snipe at @mixedrecycling?

they haven’t said anything deserving of that.

That would be great, but I can't see it happening either. I click on tabloid sites and here I and complaining about them

I haven't had any posts deleted. You must be mixing me up with someone else.

Do feel free to point out any deleted posts from me, as @MNHQ haven't notified me of any.

Definately! 😄

That's @Iwantcakeeveryday

I want cake very day too...

I have had cake every day for 3 days in a row 😬and I am not sorry!

You have had a post deleted earlier here, they do not always tell you

Of course he wouldn't read books like that when he was a child. I accept that. But when he got to be older, if he felt that he might have been Hewitts son and the family wanted to oust him, he'd have read his mums book to see what she said. He was reading newspapers and watching TV programmes. He'd have spoken to William if he couldn't speak to his dad. In 2002, he read a mirror article saying he might not be Hewitts son. But he didnt read the 2002 mirror article saying he definitely wasn't Hewitts son. Over the next 12 years he read lots of articles about himself but never one saying he wasn't hewitts son. It just stretches credibility really.
I can accept he knew he was Charles son, so he didn't follow it up. But clearly he didn't know til he was 30 according to him.
I can accept that he didn't care so he didn't follow it up. But he did care.
It's possible, I suppose that he just didn't know how to start finding out. But he had so many friends to help. Friends that will have read his mums book even!
It does seem that these unfortunate things just always seem to happen to Harry.

@mixedrecycling , it's at 16.42 , I wasn't about reading but there's a load of deleted posts at that time!
No idea what happened! , surprised to see you with a deleted post!

Well, every day is a school day, as they say!

If I was deleted I assume it was because I referred to a deleted post/why a post was deleted...

I think we call tell from this case that the pres - especially the tabloids - have not really changesd since Levison, have too much distructive power and something stong needs to be established to moderate their behaviour.

I do not know what shape that would take BUT put some interesting minds in a room and I am sure they could come up with something.

It cannot be self governed.

The value of this case could be immesurable in terms of public tone and as a test run for social media and it's unregulated bullshit.

It is an important case but interestingly - MOST reporting on it maintains the focus on PH, HG, wealth and privilage.

But we KNOW - from the utter tragedy of the Wilson family that MOST targets are ordinary people, served up for amusement/outrage/humiliation.

This is important - for us.

Looking back I quoted a post that has now been deleted at 16.30 - but my post wasn't deleted?

Great post. So agree.

It is very important. Also important that the rich and connected do not have the capacity to stifle the press.

There is no political will to change ithe situation because political parties get accused of gagging the press so they always want to leave it as open as possible. (Probably so they can leak about their rivals, too! 😉 )

Yes, true!

‘It is very important. Also important that the rich and connected do not have the capacity to stifle the press.’

💯

You can't agree! I am one of the haterz!

I'm not the thread police, I know but this thread was set up by someone who feels very supportive of Harry. There's another thread where people are, say, less supportive. Can we not post on one or both but not let it descend into a slanging match? Rather can't we just stick to the topic and be respectful that people feel strongly on both sides but, ultimately, if we met in person, we're all nice people.
It's not fair to drive people from threads where they feel comfortable and are not posting nasty things about people.

I get where you're coming from @mixedrecycling. I have enjoyed the past few days where people could post and disagree without the disagreements getting so heated and sometimes, well, vile. I think we've all appreciated it.
I believe the intention of @MrsMaxDeWinter was having a similar type of thread but being more supportive of Harry. No one can or should dictate where people can post, and I wouldn't want to, you need a bit of disagreement for us to have our views challenged and keep things interesting. But I noticed on the other thread that people challenged politely and gently. And it really was very pleasant. A lot of us commented on that.
I was thinking it would be nice if the posters who felt similarly to the op on this thread had the same experience.
That's all my thoughts were. 🙂