Harry Says His Fight Against Tabloids Is a 'Central Piece' of Rift with the Royal Family

[popthepopcorns]

Is there anyone in the public eye more delusional and lacking in self-awareness than Harry?

The Duke of Sussex, 39, sat down for a new interview for ITV's documentary Tabloids on Trial, premiering on Thursday, July 25. In a preview released a day before the airing, Harry discussed his reasons for publicly pursuing lawsuits against publications over allegations of phone hacking and other unlawful acts — a contrast from his brother, Prince William, who reportedly quietly received a "very large sum of money" in a settlement from News Group Newspapers (NGN) in 2020 amid a claimed "secret agreement" with the royals.
ITV's Rebecca Barry asked Prince Harry in the clip, "To what extent do you think your determination to fight the tabloids destroyed the relationship with your family?"
"I think that's certainly a central piece to it," the Duke of Sussex replied. "That's a hard question to answer because anything I say about my family results in a torrent of abuse from the press."
"I've made it very clear that this is something that needs to be done. It would be nice if we did it as a family," he continued. "I believe that, again, from a service standpoint and when you're in a public role, that these are the things that we should be doing for the greater good. But I'm doing this for my reasons."

That should have been numerous interviews, not humorous! The one thing MM has never displayed for all to see is a sense of humour!

But yes, @BigWillyLittleTodger , they seem to think that what they choose to put out into the public domain should be last word, end of story. They and their fans seem absolutely shocked that their output should be questioned and (usually) found wanting in the truth and facts department.

Perhaps so! I haven’t read any of his books.

I do think there is a problem with general obsequiousness with journalists covering their own backs + social and career advancement + the establishment though.

I am interested in different viewpoints.

I just think that there are less and less posters that are sympathetic if not supportive of the couple. Some of their behaviour just can’t be explained or defended possibly. I think debating is good though and I’m more than happy to be wrong or corrected. It would be really boring if we all had the same thing to say. 😊
My post re the FOI article is on page 26. 4/08. Just so you’re not having to hunt through the thread for it!

Yes I am certain that many journalists know far more than they are allowed to print but doesn’t it also follow that that might be the case for both sides too, in relation to Buckingham Palace I mean?

Prince Andrew’s activities took a while to emerge didn’t they?

Bingo! 🙋🏻‍♀️

Reasons they left:

Press intrusion, racism
Press lies
To protect their mental health
Old fashioned royal institution
Wanted to be away from the leaky royal offices
Wanted freedom to plough their own field

Given a year to see if they could survive, they did.

They have far more privacy now and we do not know who pops over to dinner with them, who they are messaging and talking with (other than not talking with the RF if sources are to be believed).

Monetised their own life experiences. Made a f*ck ton of money.
More in the pipeline.

Thank you for the quote ref MummyJ12

and for saying that about debate. I agree that it’s good to be able to thrash out different opinions! 😀

Not a single tabloid was speculating about his penis. He shoved this detail into public life

You could have left the "shoving" out of it, @Theinflictuswithrictusgames; wasn't the mental image bad enough as it stood?

Please grow up. It’s a legitimate point.

Of course it’s reasonable to assume that there are things to cover up on both sides.

I think that online opinion in the UK on mumsnet here is definitely mostly negative now. Lots of posters who like them probably give up posting as when they say something they are often jumped on.

Thanks @MummyJ12 . ☺️

I will post what I like thanks very much, your whataboutery is worthy of my comment, if you don’t like it scroll on by.

I'm still waiting for 'goady'.

I very much agree with this Rosiecheeksandacoldnose

Thanks for the permission!

Oh you mean they are responded to in a way they don't like?

🤮

You mean when they say something patently incorrect/questionable/outright disgusting they are countered? That's a robust discussion for you. The ones you claim "gave up" were hardly delicate flowers. You'd know that if you had been posting on this board for any length of time. Just go back to the Catherine threads from March if you want to see what sort of discourse from the Sussex fans was being "jumped on".

I don’t see that as constituting evidence, regarding Meghan and Harry being responsible for all things said or done in the name of a fan base called SS @MummyJ12 . No doubt there are bat shit crazies in fan groups everywhere but in terms of their responding to charitable fundraisers I am not sure what exactly you think has been proven as wrong behaviour by Meghan and Harry? Considering how many persons of colour around the world are in SS and how many of these individuals raise money it can be lauded in some respects. It is not an official organisation as such, I believe. As with any sphere a few rotten apples will exist, and as these are revealed it is natural to distance from them.

I’ve noticed online that there is a fan base of the royal family who are also rabidly anti Meghan and Harry, who cook up wild conspiracy theories, demonise Meghan, libel Doria ad infinitum but I do not think all of the British Royal family’s followers are like them.

"Palace staff" will all have signed very strict NDA's. No way they are being 'paid off' by 'tabloids'. It would be very easy to identify them and they would lose their jobs and possibly face legal action.

Nobody other than Harry really cares about who may or may not have 'briefed' against whom years ago. It's old news and has been gone over a million times already. Harry and his fanz are stuck in the past.

I don’t need to travel far back my eyes can see what has been happening right now.

They gave up posting - or changed names, often multiple times - when they were caught out spreading lurid rumours about Kate. It didn't really fit in with their supposed 'anti-bullying' stance. Hence the mass exodus and name change marathon.

It was only about Harry planting stories and briefing the press @Rosiecheeksandacoldnose. Nothing more than that. The FOI requests proved that leaks were coming from them or their trusted team. My point was that it was a bit hypocritical of Harry to complain that others were doing the same (if in fact they were).

It definitely wasn’t about SS and I didn’t claim that it was.

Posted this on a different thread here, but if Harry has such a problem with the way the media behaves then why did he JUST give an interview to CBS which infamously in 2004 published pictures of Princess Diana dying of a catastrophic headwound in a car in Paris?

Pictures which CBS were accused of coming by nefariously.

Also not sure why Harry is blaming newspapers for a rift that he caused but then again he is not exactly notable for self awareness.

Harry and his fans are stuck in the past. Harry and Meghan have moved on and so we keep up with them and enjoy the news about them. Going to Columbia, the shows in the pipeline, new charitable endeavours. We are here for it. Everything they do however is being judged by the anti posters who always want to rehash the past. I think it is clear who is stuck in the past and can’t let go.