"They don't just report the news, they create it": on Meghan, Harry and the Press

[MrsMaxDeWinter]

The much trumpeted story of the Dior deal is such a classic tabloid creation, isn't it.

I enjoyed this Grazia article that lays bare the utter nuttiness.

First the tabloids report the rumours as though they are true.

"Meghan to sign with Dior!"

No sources, just speculation based on Meghan and Harry wearing clothes by Dior a handful of times.

Then when both the Sussexes and Dior report that the rumours are not true, (Dior spokesperson said they are "nonplussed" about where the rumours came from) they spin it into "Meghan Rebuffed by Dior!"

This has also happened with Meghan's much rumoured run for the presidency: Robert Jobson actually wrote, with a straight face, in his book published in April 2023, that she was absolutely, certainly and most definitely going to run for president in 2024.

I mean any critical person would realise that the timelines don't make sense, she would have needed a fundraising Super PAC by the time the book was published, and in any event, Democrats don't normally challenge a sitting president ... but hey ho, Meghan is running for president in 2024 because a "Royal Correspondent" said so (and they are so knowledgeable about the American presidency) and a tabloid published it.

And it's the same with The Tig. She is going to launch it any day now. She wants to rival Gwyneth Paltrow! Story after story, based on nothing but speculation.

Rumour after rumour, speculation published as "news" to create media stories about a woman whose plans are not known to the tabloids because she and her husband made it crystal clear even when they were in the UK that they don't engage with the tabloid press.

And there are no "palace sources" who can speak with any kind of plausibility about the Sussexes, so the tabloids make it up as they go along, whipping up headline after headline, driving their readers into a frenzy over things they create ...

While ignoring the important news, like the damning questions by the judge in the Mirror Group case, who asked why the journalists, among them Piers Morgan, have not come to court to testify in the phone hacking trial ...

Oh no, that's not as important to report on as Meghan's fictitious Dior deal, completely implausible rumours of her presidential ambitions, and the speculated upon plans to best Gwyneth Paltrow!

https://graziadaily.co.uk/life/in-the-news/meghan-markle-smear-campaign-dior-spotify-faking-interviews/

Could we please not have such a reductive debate about Trevor Phillips? Could posters please stop assuming all black people must agree with other? Do you expect all white people to agree with each other? Then please understand that there is diversity of opinion with black people too.

Put it this way, Owen Jones and Boris Johnson are both white men.

They have vastly different views on everything.

Please give black people the courtesy of the same humanity.

Meanwhile, in the DM, Camilla gave ANOTHER "nod to Meghan" in her choice of outfit for Ascot.

No word yet on whether on Day 2, she and Charles were talking about Meghan but I am sure the press will let us know!

Once more, these are Trevor Philips 'peers'. And what he says with them.

You're right and my apologies for getting drawn into it.

Every event they go to will be a chance for the press to write something about what message an outfit, or gesture, gives about what they think of two people who are no longer there and apparently nobody in the country cares about. Its tough isn't it, they can't stop writing about them but every time they do its a big neon sign saying ' the royals are boring and we haven't got anything newsworthy to say about them'.

Sorry, OP. X post, didn't mean to derail.

So now it's called a 'nod to Meghan'? Guess not much to twist. I did find her white outfit and gloves odd the other day.

So you think it’s acceptable for someone earlier in the thread to call a black man with an unflattering view on MM an “uncle tom”, but you think me pointing out a statement of fact, that this is his field of expertise and his life’s work, is unreasonable? By the way the whole “you’re not poc so you don’t understand racism” is bs - antisemitism IS racism. Trevor Phillips knows that!

The post you're referring to is removed so I did not see it, I am talking about what YOU said. There is no need for your comments about other posters. Please don't use quotes to quote something I didn't say to goad me. Poc have different opinions and the one I and others here hold is a very common one about this politician, so you are not entitled to speak over us and imply we are either uninformed or not progressive. This was meant to be an article about Windrush. Not Meghan. What he did was insulting to many. We are allowed to say so here.

Then well done insulting me without any context. Calling someone an “uncle tom” is in fact demanding poc behave and think in a certain way. That is clearly what I was objecting to. So you agree with me. Trevor Phillips IS an expert, HAS done decades of work in this field, and IS respected by his peers, these are all statements of fact. It’s also enormously misleading to call him a “politician” - he was for about 2 or 3 years or something like that! People should have respect for people who have actually made significant positive social change, and not just posted a tweet or something.

@Iwantcakeeveryday don't take the bait - we can see it don't worry.

@tigger2022 I responded to your words, nobody else's. I do not agree with your assessment and that does not mean I am uninformed. Please stop.

thanks @skullbabe

you know what it’s absolutely unbelievable that nobody seems to see a problem with racial slurs like that

Once it is deleted, nobody can see it. Its not cool with @KimMumsnet MNHQ to keep discussing deleted posts and expecting other posters to comment on them. It is also not what I was referring to in any of my posts. I have asked nicely, please stop.

I don’t understand why you’re still more shocked at my response (which surely makes sense now given the context) than hearing what I was responding to?

Then perhaps we should also have a convention where posters don’t jump down the throats of people who are responding to posts they can’t see. Because in defending myself against unfair and extremely offensive attacks, I have to explain the context. Surely.

Lets focus on what @MrsMaxDeWinter wanted this thread to be about. Its interesting because I think the current argument which I will no longer address, is exactly the kind of thing they wanted from it. They want to create a divisive society, they write these sorts of offensive articles for that purpose.

I mean if Camilla chose her outfit specifically to get at Meghan it speaks to her being small minded and petty. I'm not sure why I would be speaking of it as if it were a good thing. Luckily - I don't think of Camilla as being necessarily mean spirited.

Yes, back to OP's original post.

Now that there are no 'palace sources' and no one is buying the 'sources close to Harry and Meghan' or 'friends of '.

The new buzzword is ' those who know about the subject' or 'those in the know'. lol

Oh wow, how did I miss this.

And why do I get a feeling that the morning shows on ITV and Ch5 will not be reporting it either - despite directing all other nonsense on Harry and Meghan.

So they won't talk about it because it doesn't fit into the "failing" narrative

Yes I don't understand what they're trying to do here. It doesn't;t make Camilla look good to imply that's how she chooses her outfits. I guess maybe a small amount of people will think its great but generally it makes her look bad too.

Could posters please stop assuming all black people must agree with other? Do you expect all white people to agree with each other? Then please understand that there is diversity of opinion with black people too.

Thank you for this! Never stops surprising me how some people seem to assume we are one homogeneous lump and don't all have different views, thoughts and opinions; it's very reductive.

Easy on the Emmy nominations celebrations ... we will only see the final list on July 12, Variety reports that Harry and Meghan the series has been nominated in multiple categories.

But you are all right to point out that the preferred narrative is one of failing and anything that gets in the way of that is ignored.

Another thing I hope we do on this thread is to take a closer look at the polling and comparisons they do.

I was very amused that the Daily Express was forced to report the results of its own poll: they asked the public who their favourite Royal was at the Coronation ... and it was Harry with about 30 000 votes!

The failing narrative is not actually supported by things like books sales etc. Even the stuff Meghan wears sells out within a day of her wearing it.

I am on a flight in an hour, but when I land, I hope we take a closer look at Meghan and Harry's polling in Commonwealth countries unaffected by the "niche" press.

Great discussion so far, and to keep it going, I recommend that we not comment on deleted posts.

By the way, I have finally read both Finding Freedom and Revenge. Oh boy, have I got things to say about both, because both books have fed narratives into the tabloid press. More on that soon!

Oooh enjoy your flight - look forward to hearing about those books. Barely have any time to read these days.

Have a safe trip. Looking forward to the polls conversation. I have to say, I don't really know anyone in real life that hates Harry and Meghan.

Most don't think about them, others see the smear for what it is.