RF covering for Andrew?

[flippantlydone]

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/28/dubious-use-of-the-freedom-of-information-act-stopping-access-to-files-on-prince-andrew-researchers-say

Suddenly it's a valued source?

Indeed.
And not even the DM itself but those awful "Daily Wail"/"Daily Heil" readers.

Very good point! @dorathexplorer 👍

Are you trying to be disingenuous?

1. I have never said anything about the Daily Mail anywhere on MN, so I am not sure why you are quoting views at me that I have never said?
2. I said the comments section in the Daily Mail show the public backlash to William and Catherine's holidays. This is not about news. But the comments under Royal news in the Daily Mail are normally exceptionally supportive. So for them to be negative, does show a backlash, rather than simply an anti Monarchy sentiment.

Don't forget 'brainwashed'

Come on now @JoyousGreyOrca it's a commonly held and often touted view on here although it is difficult to attribute individually as so many name changes by the people who usually say this. I never thought I would see the DM raised as a valuable source 😂

@JoyousGreyOrca

"
• I have never said anything about the Daily Mail anywhere on MN, so I am not sure why you are quoting views at me that I have never said?"

It's standard practice here for views that someone has not said to be brought up in conversations. Eg " but what about Andrew?"

@dorathexplorer Maybe engage with what I am saying when talking to me than what others say and attributing it to me. I repeat I have never said anything positive or negative about the Daily Mail on MN.

I'm talking about the board in general. Do you therefore credit the DM as a credible source for Royal matters?

I am not the board in general, I am an individual.
Do you credit the DM as a reliable source for Royal news?

Surely the articles about the DM are not necessarily a credible source of fact but the comments below any article gauge what the public think.
After all... it's all about popularity isn't it

Ah come on you first..... . You were the person who told me to read it so therefore I have to assume you meant it as reliable otherwise why say it ?

@Extiainoiapeial it all depends on highly you rate the articles doesn't it? If they are written in a Gotcha style then they are feeding opinions / ideas which are replicated by those responding . This is what propaganda is all about.

Sorry missed out the @JoyousGreyOrca

Where did I tell you to read the Daily Mail as a trusted source?
You know I did not. I said look at readers comments. I also explained that since the readers of the Daily Mail tend to leave positive comments about the Monarchy, and do not tend to be anti Royalty, when they do leave negative comments about the Royal family they are unhappy about something members of the Royal family have done.
Whereas readers comments under a Guardian article might be negative anyway, because there will be so many anti Monarchy Guardian raeders.

So yes I stand by my comment that there is a public backlash to William and Catherine missing the BAFTAs and going on holiday to Mustique.

From what I've read @JoyousGreyOrca was talking about the comments section. The general public. What they think about the article.

I'm almost tempted to go and read them... nah... can't just can't 🤣

it all depends on highly you rate the articles doesn't it?

Not really. I have once or twice read comments by the public below articles in the DM... they just say what they think surely.

You are trying to insinuate that Orca was rating the DM article highly when she was in fact talking about public opinion. She actually said 'look in the Daily Mail comments section'. You're trying to do a gotcha 😅
It's a barometer for what readers think... those who are normally very pro

I do not think the public backlash against William and Catherine at the moment will bring down the Monarchy. But it all has a drip drip drip effect that weakens them. William is the Heir, his reputation matters to the future of the Monarchy.

Yes I agree... the DM is notably very pro Kate & William... and whilst not reading the article, there is this headline which is very unlike good old DM. It sounds a bit catty to me!
I think Kate & William need to be a bit careful to be honest. They need goodwill.

Prince William, Kate and their children flew to the privately owned island on Thursday, days after Kensington Palace announced that the couple would not be at the star-studded ceremony at the Royal Festival Hall. Instead, the family will be on their second holiday in as many months following a New Year ski break

I'm not insinuating anything @Extiainoiapeial. I'm not trying to do a Gotcha as you suggest. I am querying why the DM was given as a source of information even if it was readers' comments. This seems odd to me and you yourself have highlighted you wouldn't click on it. I actually never read the DM readers' comments but do see their headlines as well as other papers as part of my job. It's obvious that their target is to get clicks. It's not rocket science.

Well yes and you are entitled to your views. I would venture that drip drip is not as destructive as a jackhammer but we can choose to disagree there.

The comments under any article about h and m are literally a bloodbath !

I would normally steer clear of reading them.

My point is that they are not the King and Queen currently. Everyone thinks differently of course.

@Extiainoiapeial I agree. I know the Royal photographers were unhappy about Catherine taking photos of her children and releasing them, rather than allowing a Royal photographer to take photos. It looks like the press are now unhappy at the lack of Royal news that makes the press money.

I have noticed for some months that even in comments like the Daily Mail, more people are getting fed up of the stories constantly attacking Harry and Meghan. This is what used to make the Royal press money. But it is a long time since the juicy revelations in Spare or the Oprah interview. Now the manufactured outrage is based on very minor events and I think most people are just bored of it.

The press want real Royal news stories and are not getting any. So are starting to drip feed things they know, but the Royal family may not have wanted them to publicise. This drip feed is relatively minor. William skips his work to go on another holiday. But I agree he will have to tread carefully. This is a warning shot from the Daily Mail.

William si the Heir. His father is an elderly man who has cancer and is undergoing chemo. Most people would expect William to be supporting his father.

I am querying why the DM was given as a source of information even if it was readers' comments

No need to query because it wasn't the article as a 'source of information'. It was all about the readers comments which are a barometer of the public's mood especially those who read the pro Royal DM.

Probably in decades I have read readers comments twice so I am not sure what you mean about rocket science!

In your opinion @JoyousGreyOrca how do you know " most" ?