"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/

Giving pushback on posts you don't agree with is not attacking by the way. If you want to call it that, you attack too.

Making personal attacks and false accusations against me is what I take issue with. I have received push back from other posters who have disagreed with my views, without making it personal. They just stay on the topic and give their reasons as to why they think I’m wrong based on what I wrote. I don’t attack them for it. I either ignore or acknowledge or disagree without making it personal.

Works both ways. You have insinuated all sorts about me.
I could take issue too

Let's leave it shall we?

Fine. I’ll ignore your posts and you ignore mine. Live and let live.

Of course I did. I stand by what I said, that anonymity online has led to a toxic online culture because people behave so much worse when they can be anonymous. I don't use my real name because nobody here does. I don't remember asking you for yours? It's kind of weird you did tbh and not something MN usually allow, posters asking for private information to be shared.

I would post the same as I do now if anonymity wasn't allowed online. I am not sure people who relentlessly criticise Meghan and Harry every day would continue if they couldn't be anonymous though. That's my point, that it changes how people behave and I think that would improve things. When they have prosecuted people, such as the McCann troll I was talking about, they have been behind anonymous accounts. They haven't used their real names. It obviously does reflect badly on people if they are awful online, people have been fired because of their online behaviour. So I think our online culture would be much improved, and therefore our society in general, if the nastiness and hate online was reduced by removing that ability to remain anonymous. I don;t think my point is lost because I am engaging online under the current rules.

Great, will look forward to you starting another and hopefully being able to stay on track with the topic too!

So one of the main 'experts' on H&M is on an extended break. His 'stories' quoted on here and repeated as fact. While all the time it seems his own life was was more 'interesting'.

Yes, said person was trending on Twitter all yesterday. Watching with interest as this person has always been particularly vitriolic in their reporting.

It has been said that sources for his stories include those close to H's brother and include brothers in laws. Never mind the gossipy magazines and their made up headlines. This person and their 'truth' are mentioned on here to vilify H& M.

It couldn't happen to a nicer man. The arbiter of morality spewing out his hate endlessly, now caught out in disgusting behaviour. I wonder if this will get reported on as much as the BBC presenter.
Nope.

I must have missed something!

Me too !

Between watching Wimbledon and looking after grandchildren I have clearly missed out !

Well yes, stories were allegedly "bartered" to this trending person through friends and family to denigrate H&M.

It turns out that their personal life is rather disturbing, including bullying, blackmail, stalking and workplace harassment.

Go to popbitch and click for the latest email, they name names.

Oh I have found it. Wow. why am I not at all surprised?

Colour me shocked not

No it won't.

Here is Netflix, in their own words.

"The bond with Archewell Productions is one we deeply value. Harry & Meghan launched as Netflix's most spectacular documentary debut to date," a Netflix spokesperson said.

I know you want them to be cancelled by Netflix because they did not get an Emmy nod, but it's really not going to happen.

There is stuff out there mainstream as opposed to popbitch which I think is sometimes a bit made up.

I certainly don't follow this obnoxious person. He is one of the main critics of H&M in the most disgusting way, I think he is a bit obsessed and spends hours on his revolting TV programme talking about them endlessly. And he had a friend who worked for K&W.

The New Statesman article?

Apologies, not the New Statesman. Private Eye from earlier this year:

You may well have to eat your words !

With the strikes in Hollywood , how are they going to get any of their rumoured projects off the ground ?

I think that was the other one. Not this one.

That, of course, applies to everyone. Not just H&M.