The royals and Dan Wootton: Byline Times part 1 of 3-year investigation into how Wootton got information about the royal family

[queentim]

Following their series about the Crisis in British Journalism and MediaToo movement, Byline Times reporters have recently released the first report of the 3 year investigation into the link between the royals and (disgraced) TV presenter Dan Wootton.

The first report reveals how Charles and William were angered that Harry refused to remove the name of an aide (William's aide in Kensington) who was paid cash to leak stories about his wife Meghan, and son Archie. This included investigations by the Met.

As a result, Charles removed the $700,000 granted to support them, which would have seen Harry and Meghan living in Canada and representing the Queen, in an effort to bring them back to the UK by exposing their location in Canada and removing their security. This was the collapse of the 'Sandringham Agreement', which resulted in the signing of the Sussexes media deals.

Some highlights, but can be bought for £3.6:

▪ It followed news that a partner of a key aide to Prince William received £4,000 from The Sun allegedly for stories about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex when Wootton was executive editor.

▪ The Metropolitan Police looked into the alleged leaking but could not go to a judge for a warrant to search royal staff property without knowing the identity of the whistle-blowers.

▪ Two internal royal investigations followed – one involving Simon Case, who is today the embattled head of the civil service facing questions over the Government’s response to the pandemic.

▪ Byline Times has uncovered new photographic evidence of Wootton, the aide and the aide’s partner at a lavish private birthday party Wootton threw for his close friends in a £1,675-a-night hotel suite.

▪ Prince Harry sent formal ‘letters before action’ detailing the claims about Wootton and the palace to News UK.

▪ When the aide’s name was not removed from the legal letters, the Sussexes were cut adrift financially and left unable to protect themselves despite having a security threat level equal to the monarch.

▪ The royal household had thought the threat of exposure would force Harry and Meghan to return to the UK, where their profile could be controlled preventing them from eclipsing the future King

Exploding ‘Megxit’: How Dan Wootton and a Cash-for-Leaks Scandal Split the Monarchy

You may want to have a read of this report from the Duchy of Cornwall, which shows the efforts it has made over the last two decades under Charles’ control to move to net zero?

Is this the same Charles who travelled 125 miles by helicopter to deliver a speech on reducing carbon emissions?

Royal Family defend Prince's helicopter journey to make speech on carbon emissions (inews.co.uk)

Yes there's plenty of that. But let's not forget the cheese and wine Aston Martin he takes for a spin every other year!

To be fair to him, I think he tries. I don't even see a hint of that with William

From @HaveIgotnews Twitter

King Charles tells COP23 Conference, 'The Earth does not belong to us' – adding, 'But, in parts of Lancashire, Cheshire and Yorkshire, if anyone dies without a will or relatives, I get given all their money, their stuff, and their house'

Off topic here but re the ‘royals’ and the environment
Charles I believe to be sincerely interested in the natural environment, but still an utter hypocrite in terms of his lifestyle.

William I believe to be an utter hypocrite with no genuine interest in the natural environment. Unfortunately for William , everything single PR stunt he engages in comes across as performative and insincere .

I totally agree. Charles has been talking about the environment for decades. That doesn't mean to say he will embrace it if it means a longer journey than in a helicopter but at least he tries. But now he's King, even more private jets will be used.

William champions Earthshot... that's good. I would love to know what he does privately though. Not sure anything.

It's not about bashing 😅 just about observing facts.
You mean, as long as no bashing of this pair? In any case, I am looking forward to the next Privacy Tour push, we could all do with some entertainment.

But that's not what this thread is about? So why are you posting that?

This thread is about the symbiotic relationship between the Monarchy and the media.

Yep conveniently cutting the topic a bit too thinly 😅 let's widen a little and talk about other people's relationship with the media - Marie Claire anyone?

All of them are a mess. This is a point not to be forgotten. If you forget, you are biased.

No idea what article you are pointing to... do link if you would like!

We the issue is... I think there are a few articles, so just google it and you will find!

I actually looked, can't find anything relevant to this thread?

I once linked a Marie Claire article about H&M and had my arse handed to me on a plate because... apparently.. it was just nonsense tattle!

😅 exactly that's a good example! Not your fault though. Wonder who sourced it all. You could say MC do good by giving the opportunity for a good chuckle.

You could also try Variety, or The Cut. Although the latter in the end didn't quite "cut it" for her.

Anyways for a list of "approved" "friendly" media outlets just call their agency - is it WME or something?

They are all for the dollar dear - that's all it's clear to me.

Glad you agree MC is all a load of nonsense!

I don't understand the rest of your post but good night! 😊

Vis a vis Byline Times - the past week has been a really interesting insight into the symbiotic and sometimes almost parasitic relationship between the RF and the media. It has been fascinating watching the creation in real time of a self perpetuating narrative with villains and ever suffering martyrs and heroes.

Do you consider Scobie part of the "media" set? Or Oprah? Or the other set on the morning tv in the US, can even remember their names? You seem to be running a script 😅
(Not a Royalist, ask @Roussette)

Well… yes. Omid is part of the media set (much as people seem to insist that he isn’t and wasn’t on the royal beat). As is Oprah. As are whoever the other people you are talking about (don’t know who you mean but if they are commentators then yes they will be part of the same ecosystem).

Marina Hyde said something quite insightful

“While we wait for more significant investigations to conclude, then, what are we to make of HRH Omid Scobie? I can’t help feeling he adds to the total of human amusement, chiefly in the way he riles pretty much all the other royal watchers and commentators. Absolutely all of that particular professional class of pundits are hilariously ghastly: fawning, vain, hammy, given to intoning with preposterous reverence about the most obviously ridiculous things – and in many cases far grander-acting than the royal family themselves. Their distaste for Omid is the narcissism of small differences, born of the priceless conviction that he is – must surely be? – in some way different to their esteemed selves. In fact, he mirrors them, and if he’d ever emerge on to a balcony to accept a posy, I’d be very glad to offer well-wishes and thanks for that most valuable of public services.”

No idea on your predilections, corona so really don't understand your @ to me.

Back to the focus primarily of Byline Times - going back several RF media threads - I genuinely feel awful for the Faustian pact they all seem to have - the Queen being snubbed by a paper editor, Charles and Camilla getting close to the press who have rehabilitated their image, William getting a settlement to keep things out of the press. It’s all so sad for them all on a human level. But really worrisome in terms of accountability.

I wonder what's your agenda - but not enough to really want to know about it! Your prose a bit bifurcated too.
I for one, have no agenda or connections, just sharing my reactions.

😅

I don’t understand your last set of posts. Anyway moving on.

Yes the froth and self-feeding frenzy has been unbelievable.

The media 'set' I would think would be more likely to be the ones who are in the Royal Rota, can be threatened with non access and are fed stories by the enormous Royal PR machine. Scobie gets fed stories by the Sussexes, but they are not Heads of State or potential Heads of State, no matter how much they want to be, their child is not earmarked to be my child's Head of State whether they like it or not and they are not part of our Parliamentary system. The press's job is to hold truth to power. The Sussexes have no power. The Royal Family do. They are recipients of the largesse of the Public, they represent us on the world stage. They are amply rewarded for this, for generations. Not just the Head of State but his entire extended family gets benefit from us being a Monarchy. The press clearly are not scrutinising the behaviour of the Royal Family to any serious degree. They are not impartial and are easily and willingly manipulated into covering up any wrongdoing by various stories being fed to them. We have a dreadful press who is more or less self governing, run by offshore billionnaires with no interest in this country apart from manipulating the press for their own benefit.

@Angrycat2768 agree with what you say in its great majority. The powers of those who have an invisible hand, and those who have a smaller invisible hand and privilege but want a more prominent invisible hand. It is more easily understood when you look at motives (for all).
It is usually a combination of money and / or power in various degrees, less so about altruistic motives (as much as they would all advertise them).

The ‘royals’ were under existential threat at the beginning of the 20th century - like their European and Russian cousins .
The church came in very handy to help bolster support
But by the end of Elizabeth’s reign only 4 % of uk citizens described themselves as church going Christians .
Elizabeth got away with being head of the church as her main interests were horses and finding ways to take more and money from the state - actually to be fair that push to scrap the Civil List could well have come from Charles

Anyway the media esp tabloid media had taken over by then as the key support beam for the feudal remnants known as Windsor
Are the so called ‘royal rota ‘ acting as journalists ie speaking truth to power ?
Or are they are more akin to the PR arm
of the Windsors
No wonder there was panic in KP when they learnt Harry was suing the media . In my opinion Harry had nothing to lose .He was the human shield thrown to the tabloids when bad press threatened for William or Charles ( who also brief against each other - such a dysfunctional mess of a family )

Endgame dovetails into the Byline Times story . That’s the bit most of the media is quiet about .

On YouTube James o Brien has an interview with Omid Scobie - put up yesterday .About 30 mins in they start discussing Harry and recent events