"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/

Yougov is pretty reputable and unbiased, I think.
They did a poll earlier this year. The old Queen is still the most popular member. 😢 Aw, I miss her.

Harry and Meghan came above Andrew but that's it. Camilla was a 10% above Harry and 15% above Meghan.

@ItsOnlyMeNow & @MarcelProust
Sorry, I misread I thought you were talking about the Express polling not YouTube.

Statista.com did one in May.

Camilla. 48%

Harry. 29%

Meghan. 24%

Apologies, I shoukd have put the two posts together.

@ItsOnlyMeNow & @MarcelProust

Ipsos did one for Sky in 1 April

Camilla. +9

Harry. -22

Meghan. -29

Goodness me, no I never believe polls.

Unless you tell me about actual votes or some such. By this, I mean I'm happy to accept Stats UK (the official Stats government office where you have to fill in the form as obliged by law or you get fined) because everyone has to fill in the forms, so if they have info, I will most likely believe it.

I never forget that votes are based on people who actually went out of their way to vote - you'd be surprised by how many people do not actually vote.
Say out of our almost 70M population, you minus children and others who won't bother to vote and say 40M can vote. I would be fine with stats from around 1M even. As things stand most polls are from 2K people of a certain age. So no, don't consider them for anything really.

I even question the TV ratings - well I used to, because at some point they used to insert a device for a limited number of households, then tell us how popular that show was. Though now, I presume they do things differently with the internet etc.??

Even if I believed in polls, sorry, but I don't believe one bit that Camilla is more popular than anyone in the RF. Even non-descript 'royals' like Beatrice's husband. Even the divorced Autumn from Anne's son. I bet even Andrew bits her.

You can name anyone that no one has ever heard of, I'm sure they would be more accepted than Camilla.😂😂😂

Is this a genuine response or are you just messing around?

She wasn’t praising them……🙄

It has an odd premise no? Poll non working royals against working royals? Why? Where is Zara, Mike, Eugenie, Beatrice and Andrew? It’s completely valid but what’s the point?

Be that as it may - I’ve done polls for YouGov for years and I’m certainly not right leaning. The poll may well be absolutely right but the question is like comparing the popularity of Andrew Neil to Boris Johnson or Owen Jones to Keri Starmer - it’s a nonsense.

I’m really happy that the RF and the media establishment can now rest easy with these polls that there is no risk to them at all by the 2 who left and can get on with it and leave them to it now. Hopefully this spells the end of the endless reporting about them.

Why?

From your lips to God's ears. 🙏

To steal a phrase for the Americans- H&M don’t even go here - why compare them to people who are actually relevant to the auK populace?

IMO these pills are all rubbish
its like pointless the quiz show.
they ask a 100 people a question and it’s always surprising how few people know a simple thing.
because it depends who you ask
ask me and I would answer different to someone who doesn’t like camila for instance

They still call themselves royal - Harry uses his HRH title and she is HRH, too. He's still in line for the throne. He still attends official functions. These polls were done just before the coronation to gauge Charles popularity but they just included lots Royal figures, I guess for comparison. The purpose wasn't about Harry or Meghan

I mean I don't think they particularly influence anything and, like all polls, it's just a snapshot of feeling on that day. But I just thought the word nonsense was an unusual one.

I guess even stupid people know if they like someone or not.
Thats the point of poll agencies that they can tell from small numbers relative to the UK population what people are thinking.

Actually, if you look on the polls in AIBU, the results stay static from just 20 or so people voting up to 1,000. It's very weird to see.

The reporting about them will never end as long as the punters are obsessed with them (MN threads classic examples, I'm sure the haters are the ones who click the most!!)

Definitely - it's negativity bias.

Jemandthehologramsunite · Yesterday 23:16
I'm sure the haters are the ones who click the most!!)

Mustardseed86 · Yesterday 23:34
Definitely - it's negativity bias.

Or might it just be that a far more people are critical of them than are fans? Could explain it - yes?

What I find confusing is why people invest so much time and energy into people they clearly hate. There's a few celebrities that I can't stand and I literally switch anything off if they're on it

See now this is bizzare, why is Meghan hated more than Harry? He's the one who's sold out his family and left his country. If Meghan was on MN she would have been told to NC with the inlaws and LTB a few months into the marriage!

There are many several members in the royal family who are non working, are also in the style of HRH and in the line for the throne. and Beatrice and their father for example. Like I said it was like looking at two different things - of course Harry is part of the family but seeing as he is not expected to be doing things with the British public in his capacity as a representative of the Head of a state, polls looking at his popularity compared to members of the family who do , is bad science (hence my term nonsense which was doing a lot of heavy lifting).

Regardless - let’s hope everyone who doesn’t like them can be satisfied that the outcome of the polls confirm their opinions and they can leave them alone and stop endlessly going on about these people that they don’t like.

Sorry missed * Eugenie and Beatrice and their father for example.

I think Meghan gets it in the neck more as it is widely thought that Harry changed when he met her. We’ve all known ( or thought we did) Harry from birth and to us he has changed beyond recognition. And the change came about after meeting her.
I now think he has actually always been difficult and hard work and his family have managed his anger for years ( and probably happy it’s not their responsibility anymore) but I think that’s why Meghan is more disliked ( arguably unfairly)

I guess that makes sense, I suppose like she's evil and has cast a spell over him. I always feel sorry for her now, she married a total dud. I can imagine at first he probably seemed like a catch, but it's hard to see it now!