Harry and Meghan’s war on press freedom

Harry’s statement about the tabloids is an ugly, elitist act of monarchical privilege.

Brendan O'Neill

Brendan O'Neill
Editor

Share

There is a striking irony in The Harry and Meghan Show. This pair present themselves as a new kind of royal: chilled out, PC, green, more likely to visit a Peckham radio station run by struggling youths than a cake-making charity run by women with blue-rinsed helmet hair. And yet scrape away their chilled, chatty veneer and what we have here are two of the most elitist and snobby royals in the Windsor household. And that’s saying something.

Consider Prince Harry’s outrageous statement about the tabloid press, published yesterday. Its censoriousness and elitism are staggering. It echoes the pre-1960s period in which the monarchy arrogantly assumed it could bully the media into telling only happy, agreeable stories about royal personages. It drips with contempt for the tabloid press in particular. Harry describes Meghan as ‘one of the latest victims of [the] British tabloid press’, which apparently pumps out ‘relentless propaganda’ that is designed to ‘manipulate you, the reader’. Oh gracious prince, please save us gullible plebs from manipulation by evil newspapers! What a pompous ass he is.

Harry issued the statement to coincide with legal action that Meghan is taking against the Mail on Sunday for ‘unlawfully’ publishing the ‘contents of a private letter’. This pertains to the Mail on Sunday’s publication in February of a handwritten letter Meghan sent to her estranged father, Thomas Markle. This is a deeply disturbing legal action. It poses a very serious threat to the freedom of the press. Reading Harry’s statement and some of the gushing coverage of it from the tabloid-hating liberal elite, you could be forgiven for thinking that hacks from the Mail on Sunday got hold of the letter by sinister, criminal means. Not so. The letter was given to the newspaper by Meghan’s father.

In her letter, Meghan pleads with her father to stop selling stories to the press. Mr Markle then gave the letter itself to the press – to the Mail on Sunday. If newspapers are to be reprimanded or punished for publishing documents freely given to them by the owners of those documents, that will represent a devastating blow for press freedom. It is astonishing and highly ill-advised that the Sussexes are taking this action; it suggests that in certain quarters of the royal family there lingers a pre-modern disdain for the right of mere mortals and cheap newspapers to question royal personages.

That is the most ill-advised aspect of Harry’s statement. He makes it patently clear that while the legal action relates to one incident only – the Mail on Sunday’s publication of Meghan’s letter – the true driver behind the action is a broader royalist frustration with the behaviour of the apparently low press. The statement goes on and on about the tabloid press’s ‘ruthless campaign’ against Meghan, their ‘false and malicious’ stories and criticisms, their ‘continual misrepresentations’, all of which can only be described as ‘bullying’ – and ‘It is for this reason we are taking legal action…’ (my emphasis).

Think about that. What Harry is saying is that his wife is taking legal action against one newspaper over one incident, but she is doing so with the broader aim of effectively reprimanding an overly critical tabloid media. This is pretty unprecedented, and deeply worrying. What Harry refers to as tabloid ‘bullying’ is really just strong, colourful criticism. Criticism of Harry and Meghan’s lifestyles, of their hypocrisy (remember when they lectured us about the environment and then flew around on private jets?), of their PC nonsense, of their extravagance. This legal action seems designed to send a message that such heated coverage is unacceptable. Who do these people think they are?

This is the return of the pre-1960s monarchy. Of a monarchy that presumed it could influence what the newspapers were allowed to publish. Of a monarchy so distant from everyday life and so cut off from the principles of freedom and open debate that it believes it can lecture the press – the ‘low press’ in particular – about their behaviour and their output. Behind the velvet glove of the younger PC royals there lurks the iron fist of that old-world monarchism that presumed the right to live free of the barbs and insults of the mob. Harry and Meghan might use the PC language of victimhood to assert their monarchical privilege – describing themselves as victims of bullying and racism – but the impact is the same as when earlier royals asserted their God-given right never to be criticised by the lower orders: people are shamed for daring to ridicule the royals.

Sorry, no. The age of deference is over. This is something everyone really needs to get into their heads. From the Remoaners wondering why stupid voters won’t obey ‘the experts’ to Harry and Meghan squirming at the Mail or the Sun for mocking their eco-hypocrisy and their PC posturing – they all need to understand that the era of bowing and scraping is gone. Harry and Meghan are fair game for criticism and ridicule. If you are going to be a woke royal who spouts eco-pieties from the pulpit of Vogue magazine and then takes a private jet to lounge about in Elton John’s house in France, you’re going to get a lot of flak. Suck it up.

Brendan O’Neill is editor of spiked and host of the spiked podcast, The Brendan O’Neill Show. Subscribe to the podcast here. And find Brendan on Instagram: @burntoakboy

Picture by: Getty.

Rod Liddle and Brendan O’Neill in conversation at Podcast Live!

Rod Liddle and Brendan O'Neill
– live in London

Podcast Live

Podcast Live, Friends House, London, NW1 2BJ – 5 October 2019, 2.30pm-3.30pm

To get tickets, click the button below, then scroll down to The Brendan O'Neill Show logo on the Podcast Live page.

To enquire about republishing spiked’s content, a right to reply or to request a correction, please contact the managing editor, Viv Regan.

Comments

Steve Gray

7th October 2019 at 3:30 am

Evidence of the aristocratic set’s prejudices is furnished by well-to-do luvvie-of-the-moment Phoebe Waller-Bridge, whose depiction of, Fleabag, a slightly-dysfunctional young lady of independent means, was lauded by the usual suspects as ‘angry’, ‘brave’ and so on. Waller-Bridge has claimed that Fleabag’s trials and tribulations are universal.

Freshly laden down with awards from the Yanks, she decided to celebrate by going on US-tv in the guise of the Essex-girl version of Fleabag. You can guess the rest.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/tv/phoebe-waller-bridge-sports-a-very-plump-pout-and-does-her-best-essex-accent-as-she-transforms-into-a-love-island-hopeful-in-hilarious-snl-spoof/ar-AAInHfP?li=BBoPJKU&ocid=mailsignout

Hana Jinks

5th October 2019 at 5:00 pm

This is the other side now, babybitch. You’ve come too far.

https://youtu.be/rn_YodiJO6k

Jonathan Mason

5th October 2019 at 1:27 pm

Harry and Meghan are a couple with a small child and naturally they want to protect him from press intrusions. Since the royal family are natural terrorism targets, a lot of the use of private jets may be related more to security concerns than anything else.

While the press, especially the Daily Mail, has attacked Harry and his wife for using private jets on the grounds that it is not “green” the Daily Mail is not crusading for a total ban on private jets, or on air travel, or cruise ships, which is equally hypocritical. If the Daily Mail were consistent on this matter, it would be celebrating the demise of Thomas Cook as a bonus for the planet.

Various media have been paying her father and half-sister large sums to make scurrilous claims about Meghan. For example her father had been claiming that since he missed the wedding due to illness she had not been in touch with him and he did not know how to get in touch with her. Yet when “the letter” was published, this was shown to be a lie.

Prince Harry and his wife have a right to be pissed off at the press and to try to put the press on the defensive. Whether legal action will work for them, I don’t know.

Freedom of the press is fine, but does it really include the right to pay people to tell lies about other people?

Jerry Owen

5th October 2019 at 2:39 pm

What lies are you talking about ?

Anna Borrence

5th October 2019 at 4:02 pm

You have to go, babydill.

Asif Qadir

5th October 2019 at 4:52 pm

Actually babydoll l have better things to be doing than this. Pkark off.
https://youtu.be/mtAkPaChO6c

Asif Qadir

5th October 2019 at 5:11 pm

Here’s how it is, my bitch.

https://youtu.be/V5gFAiPJhvI

I’m gonna keep putting up songs until you go.
And when ur gone, I’m gonna keep putting up songs in your name.

Jonathan Mason

6th October 2019 at 12:22 am

The big lie was that after the father failed to show up at the wedding, Meghan Markle never got in touch with him again and that he has no way to contact her. The letter disproved the big lie. Another is the claim by the sister that the Markle’s were a close-knit family until Meghan married Prince Harry. Another is the bizarre explanation given for the father having photos taken before the wedding (that he wanted to improve his public image), when really it was all for money.

Had he showed up all beaming as the proud father at the wedding in white tie and tails, and hobnobbing with the royals, he would have done so much more for his image, don’t you think? (Except for the possible fact that the bride had been given away by her father at a prior wedding to another man, and had never returned to her parental home., but when the British public wants a bit of pageantry, who cares about the details/)

Patiently Waiting

5th October 2019 at 3:03 pm

The British media has simply reported the facts. Many in the public are NOT impressed with Meghan and Harry’s hypocrisy. If Meghan and Harry do not want any criticism–then they should give up their titles and privileges which are paid by the taxpayers. And, there are two cases:

1) MM’s lawsuit against the Daily Mail re: a letter which she wrote to her father– having NOTHING to do with phone hacking;

2) HH’s lawsuit against the Sun & Daily Mirror over phone hacking that took place 20 years ago.

Why 20 years later??? Hmmm. 🤔

Jerry Owen

5th October 2019 at 5:21 pm

It’s not that the daily mail is inconsistent, the DM is simply reporting on the hypocrisy of the couple.
Thomas Cooke was in the business of flying and as such producing pollution . TC never had double standards the woke royals do.

Anna Borrence

6th October 2019 at 11:19 am

You can’t comment here anymore, Jerry Oven-Kraut.

I’m issuing a KOS order against you, you pos.

Jonathan Mason

6th October 2019 at 2:36 pm

We are all hypocrites. On the one hand we want a cleaner world with less pollution. On the other hand we want to use our cars every day and use planes to go to foreign places for holidays. The royal family are wealthy and they are not going to ride around on bicycles and use sailboats. If they are pulled in a pollution free rickshaw, the press will find some spurious point about human exploitation to trumpet. If they eat fish for lunch, the story will be about the cruelty of fishing with hooks or nets.

There is never an end to it.

Marvin Jones

6th October 2019 at 12:48 pm

Whichever one looks at this, it is total hypocrisy. They want it all ways. Our money, their privacy, their radical involvement in an extremely controversial topic, but also to fly around the globe to justify their extravagant lives. Every trip is an addition to their phoney claim of Armageddon.

Aunty Podes

4th October 2019 at 11:20 pm

I disagree. The media appear to imagine that the “freedom of the press” gives them the right to poke their noses and cameras anywhere, anytime, to print whatever they wish and harass any individual they sey their sights on.
They totally destroyed Diana and are now bent on doing to same to Meghan.
Harry and Edward have suffered enough. Back-off papper-rats-nazis.

Jerry Owen

5th October 2019 at 10:42 am

‘Poke their nose’s .. code for news I guess !

Anna Borrence

5th October 2019 at 1:03 pm

Jerry – Oven Arse hole

You dont have any business here anymore. You need to get that thru ur creepy skull. I don’t want to see even one more post from you on here ever again.

Asif Qadir

5th October 2019 at 3:45 pm

I is the magic man, oven-weirdo.

https://youtu.be/mXOO7QVHgXs

You is my oven-bitch.

Patiently Waiting

5th October 2019 at 3:05 pm

IF Meghan and Harry want privacy when they want it– and to exploit the media for their PR when they want to– then they should give up their titles and privileges funded by the taxpayers… and move to Hollywood and live the celebrity lifestyle they want– they are NOT behaving like royals. There are two cases:

1) MM’s lawsuit against the Daily Mail re: a letter which she wrote to her father– having NOTHING to do with phone hacking;

2) HH’s lawsuit against the Sun & Daily Mirror over phone hacking that took place 20 years ago.

Why 20 years later??? Hmmm. 🤔

Jonathan Mason

6th October 2019 at 10:18 pm

“IF Meghan and Harry want privacy when they want it– and to exploit the media for their PR when they want to– then they should give up their titles and privileges funded by the taxpayers… and move to Hollywood and live the celebrity lifestyle they want– they are NOT behaving like royals.”

Being a public servant and drawing a stipend from the taxpayer does not necessarily mean that one should be subject to constant press intrusions in one’s private life. Suppose, for example, there is some attention-getting terrorism trial going on, should the press camp outside the home of the judge, and go through his trash to see what he/she is eating, take pictures through his bedroom window, describe what transportation he uses, publish how much he pays his gardner, etc.?

It is perfectly legitimate for the press to go through the accounts and comment on the amount of money spent on the royal family, if they are not providing value for money as public servants. For example there has been commentary that Prince William seems to have a relatively uncluttered calendar with fewer engagements than other members of the “firm”, which seems like legitimate comment.

Certainly the amount of money spent on renovating Frogmore Cottage is a possible cause for concern if it is frivolous spending, but it is not entirely clear how much of this–if it is taxpayer money–has been spent on security improvements, and how much on unnecessary spending on pure luxury, or how much of the renovation was actually needed to make the house safe and habitable, for example rewiring, fire alarms, sprinklers, security cameras. If this is public money, the taxpayer is certainly entitled to know how it is being spent.

On the other hand, one might consider that one thing the royals have in common with many citizens is the need for a granny flat, or at least a home close enough to the old lady to be able to pop in to her Windsor pied a terre and check on her welfare, and be close enough to young Archie’s future school for him to attend as a day boy instead of a boarder. (By the time Archie is at Eton, it is likely that his uncle Charles will have inherited the conveniently located castle nearby.

Janet Mozelewski

7th October 2019 at 3:38 pm

Harry and his missus do NOT draw a ‘stipend’ as you quaintly term it. Its a hell of a lot more than that. Frogmore cottage isn’t a cottage in any normal sense of the word and is already located within secure grounds. For the sort of money they have spent it one could build a score of decent homes. Of course it is frivolous. I can’t see how anyone could rationally think otherwise.
The sticking point is and has been hypocrisy. A very privileged Prince has been spouting about stuff he doesn’t apply to himself. He burbles on about the planet then goes on a succession of private jet flights, has gas-guzzlers shipped to his tour of SA and has a house refurbished at VAST expense . A house, no doubt, which due to its sheer size has a carbon footprint that compared to a sensible house is the size of a brontosaurus’ compared with that of a rabbit.
He and his wife spout platitudes in a glossy magazine, her ‘friends’ leak stories to magazines, they do photo-shoots expounding their own worthiness (and to play piggyback on the public image of his mother)….and then bleat about the tabloids printing things they don’t like.
The public were prepared to like this pair. Harry had lots of goodwill in the bank from his childhood loss and his service in the Army. This was extended to his wife. If the public have now largely changed their view of them and now see them as a couple of parasites suffering from a dose of celebrity-itis then that is entirely their own fault, not that of the newspapers.

Patiently Waiting

3rd October 2019 at 6:47 pm

Thinking about the deference that MM-HH demand– and watching an event with William and Kate today… I couldn’t help but observe: William and Kate seem to bring out the best qualities in each other– which requires loyalty and trust. No marriage is perfect– but William was wise to take time to get to know Kate and her family, and she took the time to understand what marrying into the BRF would require. By contrast, Harry who is not a wise man, rushed into marriage based upon an impulse; being besotted– and of course, Meghan’s life-goal of “fulfilling her heart’s desires” with fame and fortune enabled her narcissism and controlling nature to go unchecked. Harry chose the easy path– promises of being able to be wild and crazy from a partner who did not care about values of decency and honour. That probably appealed to him– but there is a price to be paid for a life sans discipline, standards and duty. He is enraged that the media and many of the public are not awarding him with adoration and she’s angry that we’re not all worshiping at the Altar of her Ego. We can see their true natures and this unhappy marriage unravel before our very eyes–and it’s pathetic.

don schott

3rd October 2019 at 3:29 pm

Real story….
Meghan has the balls in this family. She brought in Sara Latham in April as her “secretary.” Latham worked for both Bill and Hillary Clinton and worked on President Obama’s transition team and later helped to prepare Mrs Clinton for the White House.
What fools the Brits are to think these social justice warriors are Windsors.

Sharon H

3rd October 2019 at 11:40 am

Lol – Harry, LaToyah, and little baby Leroy. The gift that just keeps giving.

Bella Donna

3rd October 2019 at 9:51 am

I was gobsmacked to hear Harry had 2 RangeRovers flown over for their use. I don’t know what Harry is playing at but if he wants to cause as much distress and embarrassment to our Queen then he’s doing a great job. The Family are going to very much regret letting Princess Sparkles into the fold. The sooner they leave our Shores and their priveleged positions the better!

Jerry Owen

3rd October 2019 at 4:18 pm

Bella
Either you are wrong or i am .. I read it as four ! Either way it’s disgraceful .

Warren Alexander

3rd October 2019 at 8:58 am

Redundant grandson of queen marries D-list actress. Result? Two people with bugger all to do decide they are qualified to advise the world on solving all its problems.

John Millson

3rd October 2019 at 8:41 am

Cor, Big Balls sp!ked really lets ’em have it.
The ‘age of deference is over’, is it? I don’t think so.
This Brexit malarkey really has gone to some peoples’ heads, hasn’t it?
(Henry ‘Wales’ may have gone over the top but given the foul & vicious treatment his mother received it cannot be that surprising.)
When will sp!ked understand? Brexit will not presage a brave new dawn of egalitarianism, when the ‘people’, all of a sudden, run everything. Brexit was not a ‘peoples’ revolution. There will be no rioting. Don’t delude yourselves.
No, Brexit has now revealed itself as a ‘wheeze’, urged on by a few, small-town, malcontent cockroaches. Selfish & ignorant.
Northern Ireland alone should stop Brexit right now, you idiots.

Janet Mozelewski

3rd October 2019 at 9:49 am

I found your comment rather contradictory. On the one hand you say the age of deference ISN’T over. And then you refer to the ‘foul and vicious’ (and presumably therefore NOT in any way deferential) treatment you feel was given to Diana.
Diana acted like a super-star. What happened came with that territory. It’s the other side of the coin.
Most people I know are totally over being deferential towards anything. I see it all the time, this mistrust, the wariness, the ridicule.
I wonder why you think there will be no riots? There were riots in Britain as recently as 2011. I remember a rash of riots back in the late 80’s in inner cities.
It seems the Remainer attitude to ignoring Brexit voters /working class people/ anyone who disturbs their cosy little lives extends to arrogantly dismissing any possibility that, having stifled these annoying people’s right to express an opinion through the ballot-box they will simply jog on and not make their voices heard by other means.
Most remainers who burble on about Northern Ireland don’t give a monkeys about the place, never have. So they can stick their virtue signalling twaddle where the sun don’t shine.

Jerry Owen

5th October 2019 at 10:52 am

John Millson had for months played the ‘ I voted remain but let’s now get Brexit done ‘ fake approach. I knew he was fake from the off. He has blown his cover on this article. He is a rabid spitting remainer.
I enjoy his pain !

Jerry Owen

3rd October 2019 at 10:04 pm

John Millson
As an avid remainer it appears to me you are suffering a mental breakdown that seems to be afflicting the anti Democrats … Or you just posted on the wrong thread … Please check the title above !!

Jerry Owen

3rd October 2019 at 10:07 pm

Oh and despite your claim to accept the result you still attend anti Brexit demos … We know your true colours .

John Millson

4th October 2019 at 8:22 am

May well be suffering mental problems, afflicting both the ‘anti-democrats’ and the ‘anti-realists’ because of Brexit.

Jerry Owen

4th October 2019 at 8:57 am

John Millson
No , the mental issues are afflicting your side not ours. Just like the eco loons you remoaners are being recognized as having mental issues now, it is being widely reported on now.
How funny !

John Millson

3rd October 2019 at 8:31 am

Cor, Big Balls sp!ked really lets ’em have it.
The ‘age of deference is over’, is it? I don’t think so.
This Brexit malarkey really has gone to some peoples’ heads, hasn’t it?
(Henry ‘Wales’ may have gone over the top but given the foul vicious treatment his mother received it cannot be that surprising.)
When we will sp!ked get it into their heads? Brexit will not presage a brave new dawn of egalitarianism, when the ‘people’, all of a sudden, run everything. Brexit was not a ‘peoples’ revolution. Brexit has now revealed itself as a ‘wheeze’, urged on by a few bourgeois malcontent, cockroaches.

Jerry Owen

3rd October 2019 at 10:11 pm

It’s so delicious to see your real anger at last …all those posts you have written saying you accept you loss and we should just get it done… All bluster .. all P**s and s”it as they say eh John !

John Millson

4th October 2019 at 8:16 am

It’s about ‘fighting on two fronts’ (may as well use military metaphors – everyone else is). One side: the reckless Brexiteers; the other side: the Remainer vote-deniers. Yes, I get passionate about Brexit at times – exasperated. Admittedly not a good idea to post things in that state!
In a no-deal situation, where other countries were affected, I would feel the deep shame of being a UK citizen. That is what is so wrong with Brexit – the damage it is causing and will continue to cause not just to our society.
Ireland cannot just be forgotten about; it cannot be an after-thought.
If it ultimately came down to the choice of stopping Brexit or letting the Irish Troubles start up again, then yes, I would stop Brexit.

Jerry Owen

4th October 2019 at 8:30 am

John Millson
Let me be clear yet again it is whiners like you that have an almost pathological hatred of brexit that are the problem, it is you that is divisive , it is the wealthy remainers in parliament and the courts that are defying the will of the people.
Please don’t dress this mess up as the responsibility of both sides.
This article is about the royals and such is you all consuming hatred of Brexit you write about Brexit on an unrelated thread.
The fault lays with you and your side.. move on you lost.. get over it for Gods sakes. get some help even.

John Millson

4th October 2019 at 9:31 am

Jerry Owen
Brexit’s origins are in self-pity and a sense of entitlement. The original ‘whining’ came from EU-sceptics. The small-town idiot ‘squires’ like d*mb f*ck Bill Cash and Peter Bone and saloon-bar bores like Farage and Banks. The ignorant & prejudiced tabloids and their readers.

****************
The original article is about the royal family’s relationship with the press, but the writer manages to include ‘Remoaners’, i.e. anyone who isn’t for a ‘clean break’ Brexit, in his sweeping denuniciation of ‘deference’, as if everyone who voted to remain is elitist and ‘posh’.

*****************

I despise the Tories for what they have done to this country but I really hope the Irish and the rest of the EU can work with Johnson’s plan so that there is some sort of compromise.
I don’t give a toss about the feelings of the little England/Wales nostalgists, who might be disappointed with a ‘fudge’ Brexit. Let them keep crying in their beers.

Jerry Owen

4th October 2019 at 11:29 am

John Millson
If you believe that people voted remain in self pity and a sense of self entitlement you clearly haven’t taken in the findings of numerous poll since, that show people voted remain for a number of reasons, the main one of course is taking back control. Nowhere in the numerous polls do people mention self pity or self entitlement as a reason to leave, you made that one up..
You personify the remainers beautifully by exposing not only your clearly visceral dislike of Brexiteers , but you also very clearly only see that, that you wish to see even though the evidence is clearly contrary. Chill out .. you lost , get over it !

Jerry Owen

4th October 2019 at 11:35 am

That should of course be ‘leave’ not remain. line 5 @ 11.29 am

John Millson

5th October 2019 at 2:40 pm

Jerry Owen,
‘Chill out .. you lost , get over it !’
I’ve got friends who voted to leave; I’ve met thoroughly decent, kind people who voted to leave. I ‘can move on’, no problem.
But if people like Brendan O’Neill insist on it being ‘Binary’, no compromise, then yes, if there was a repeat of the 2016 referendum tomorrow, I would vote Remain again, of course I would.
Have a nice day/week…

Jerry Owen

5th October 2019 at 5:24 pm

John Millson
Brexit isn’t about compromise it’s about leaving .. as they say leave means leave.
Have a good day yourself.

Asif Qadir

6th October 2019 at 12:10 pm

You is KOS now babydoll. I has been talking with Anna Bortion, and she promised to be on here within the next 48hrs to once again clarify just where all this originated from

https://youtu.be/KEeFNvvR-ng

So you has got that to look forward to, my babybitch.

A Game

3rd October 2019 at 5:46 am

The solution is to stop writing anything about them. No photos, no coverage, no publicity and they are free to do as they please. Without anyone bothering them with attention or assessment. It shouldn’t be hard. They are so f**king boring.

I dislike greatly bringing Diana into it. She was a publicity magnet without doing anything. That this pair are patently finding ways to gain publicity (which is part of the problem. They’ve been found out) because they would probably be overlooked, makes the two situations completely different.
He’s an oaf. Probably always been an oaf.
Moment in their wedding, when the preacher overstayed his welcome, and Harry started fuming and Megs gave him a glistening eyed look. Ew. Mother/wife to a dumb brat. He couldn’t suck it up for 5 minutes… said a lot about him.

Jerry Owen

4th October 2019 at 8:32 am

No photos , no coverage , sounds fine . How about , no money from the tax payer ?

Thomas Swift

2nd October 2019 at 10:52 pm

When Harry met Meghan, I predicted that her rapacious ambition would spell the end of the monarchy. I do agree with other commenters that I hope the Mail take this all the way to trial; that, together with Harry waving his mother’s shroud around, will blow up in their faces a treat.

Bear Mac Mathun

3rd October 2019 at 9:03 am

We can but hope to have this vile institution abolished. Bring it on!

Thomas Swift

3rd October 2019 at 12:33 pm

Actually, I don’t mind us having a constitutional monarch and I do think it is part of the unique British character but I am aware of the fact that they have only survived this long because they have resolutely avoided getting involved in the political realm.

But if the Prince and Princess of Wokeness are going to be inserting themselves into the realm of public affairs, that will all come to an end and right quick. I will regret that.

Pedro Dias

2nd October 2019 at 9:01 pm

The letter might belong to her father, but the content of the letter shouldn’t have been shown or even published without the author’s permission. It’s protected by copyright, like any other original text. I’m not in favour of the monarchy, but in this particular case, the news paper should be accountable for publishing something that they don’t have permission for.

Brandy Cluster

2nd October 2019 at 11:29 pm

Lie down with dogs and get up with fleas. Sorry, but there it is.

Mike Ellwood

3rd October 2019 at 12:11 am

I have to agree. I am not a royalist, either. While I don’t go quite as far as Diderot, when he said “Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest”, I’m slightly more at that end of the spectrum than the average flag-waving Sunday Mail reader.

I find it pretty disgusting the way the Mail group and the other tabloids build up the royals on the one hand, in order to sell copies, and when it suits them print scurrilous stories about them, also in order to sell copies. They have no shame. And it’s true, they have been conducting a war against Megan, almost since she arrived on the scene. I know very little about her, and care less, but it’s been very obvious that there has been an anti-Megan agenda going on for a long time, and that also is to sell more copies. They are playing on the natural xenophobia and racism of their target audience.

I hope they get crippling damages awarded against them, and fold. What they do on a regular basis disgraces the profession of journalism.

Jerry Owen

4th October 2019 at 8:54 am

News is news . It appears there is some news you like and some you don’t when it comes to the royal family. I have news for you, many people like the anti royal stories. Newspapers need readers they will write accordingly, unfortunately your wishes don’t exceed mine , that is the beauty of a ‘free press’ .
In short you want to punish the press for not printing what you want to read.. echo chamber ?

Patiently Waiting

3rd October 2019 at 4:21 am

You are correct about copyright law in the UK– but there are circumstances where public interest outweighs the plaintiff’s complaint. If, for example, the “Daily Mail” (DM) can demonstrate that Meghan Markle’s friends were leaking lies to “People” magazine, and that Thomas Markle provided them a copy of her letter in order to disprove injurious statements made against himself, then the DM may prevail. Many people believe that her intentions vis-a-vis her father were malicious.

Jerry Owen

3rd October 2019 at 10:24 pm

If the letter belonged to him then it’s his to dispose of as he sees fit .. the bin or the press if there’s any difference.
As for copyright I suspect you have to apply for those rights .

Ven Oods

2nd October 2019 at 8:03 pm

I am doing my bit to aid Hazza and Meg, by trying to avoid any mention of them and their woke warblings. But avoidance is so difficult!
If they could meet us halfway by shutting the fuck up, I think we’d be getting somewhere.
One can but hope.
Perhaps if she went back to acting and he donned uniform (preferably not SS) again, things would improve for all concerned.

michael savell

2nd October 2019 at 6:16 pm

How does a fun loving party goer like Harry turn into a led by the leash pet within a few months of getting hitched?

Brandy Cluster

2nd October 2019 at 11:33 pm

Mate, all my 3 sons ended up the same way and 2 of them now being mercilessly destroyed in the divorce court under a system entirely favourable to women. I was the eldest of 4 girls and I never understood how men think. Now that I have 3 adults sons of my own I can see how manipulative, self-serving, controlling and ruthless women are. They don’t go out with any man without checking off a list of how much money they’ve got etc. And they literally seduce them into marriage by playing nice. Well, the old saying “when you’ve got them by the short and curlies their hearts and minds soon follow”. Welcome to the world of Harry!! He’s a slave to his princess.

A Game

3rd October 2019 at 5:41 am

Of course, it is completely beyond men to ever acquire the skill of searching for a person’s worth. If the bells and whistles tick all the boxes, marriage it is. They get what they deserve.

(And I have a theory about confirmation bias going on here. Men who think women are manipulative horrors, for some reason always end up with manipulative horrors. Hey, look, they were proven right about women.)

Claire D

3rd October 2019 at 3:14 pm

Some women are like that Brandy, not all.

Clare Simpson

3rd October 2019 at 8:20 am

Trouser brain?

Jonathan Yonge

2nd October 2019 at 6:13 pm

Please can we move on from having a ‘monarchy’ ?
Its awful, really awful.

Major Bonkers

2nd October 2019 at 7:10 pm

President Blair

Bella Donna

3rd October 2019 at 9:55 am

Exactly so we’d swap the Royals for a President? No thanks. At least the royals bring something to the Treasury a President wouldn’t.

Patiently Waiting

2nd October 2019 at 5:20 pm

MM-HH are desperate to attempt to hide who they really are: Greedy; Luxury-Hungry; Selfish; Fame-Seeking…and worse, jealous of William and Kate. Since HH married MM, they have been on a quest to destroy his brother and sister-and-law; because MM wants to be Queen. Logically, they know that the succession will not permit it to occur– but MM imagines herself Queen of the World, and HH is feeding her fantasy, because she manipulates him via playing the Diana-card. Now, they are exploiting the Race-Card: Today, I notice that her fans and/or paid shills are out-in-force condemning critics of MM-HH as being racist. None of us can hide who we are forever: MM-HH are repugnant.

Janet Mozelewski

3rd October 2019 at 9:55 am

Strangely enough I saw a couple of videos where Markle was giving Kate the mean eye. No mistaking it. It really was the sort of stuff that happened in school. lol

Dominic Straiton

2nd October 2019 at 4:03 pm

George VI would be ashamed of Elizabeth II

Richard Wheatley

2nd October 2019 at 3:33 pm

Madness. One would think that H&M would have some advisers. No doubt their woke supporters will frame response as (perm any woke theme).

Paul Carlin

2nd October 2019 at 2:50 pm

I can’t but agree, but the simile may be askew a little. The main issue is a conjoining of American showbiz with European (and the best of European) royalty; a marriage between dignity and tradition (if Harry could ever be accused of such qualities), and shallowness.

Brandy Cluster

2nd October 2019 at 11:37 pm

Shallow doesn’t even begin to cut it. I actually feel sorry for Harry; he’s well meaning but entirely manipulated by a cliche-spouting celebrity with an IQ of 100 or less. Nobody else wanted Harry because of the gilded cage, but it gave MM the much-needed platform she has sought to legitimize her fame. All the world is breathless for her next pronouncement. A royal Gwynneth Paltrow.

jessica christon

2nd October 2019 at 2:34 pm

I hope they let it go to court because it will turn into a huge spectacle, and Meghan will wish she hadn’t. It was her dad who gave the letter to the press, so he could be brought in as a witness in defence, and so much about her family and her household will come out and it will be just like Nigella but worse.

Harry is a fool for going along with it and he should have refused, but he was always under the thumb in his relationships so this is nothing new. What I don’t like about him is this constant evoking of his mother in defense of Meghan. I don’t think he does it cynically because she was his mother, but Meghan isn’t Diana, it’s beginning to sound like Jo Cox style emotional blackmail and the more he does it, I think the less sympathetic reaction he gets.

James Chilton

2nd October 2019 at 1:23 pm

Here we have a couple of privileged parasites who are eager to preach do as I say, but not as I do. There’s a name for such people, but I’ve forgotten what it is.

Forlorn Dream

2nd October 2019 at 12:55 pm

I’m in favour of press freedom, it’s the people who should decide what’s acceptable by choosing or not to buy the newspaper.
That said, the Mail on Sunday editor should be careful when annoying the royal family. Either that or stay well away from Paris road tunnels.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

2nd October 2019 at 12:09 pm

Why not just do the intelligent thing and get rid of the monarchy altogether? A democratically elected head of state is better than an unelected one.

Major Bonkers

2nd October 2019 at 7:15 pm

As Joseph Stalin, Kim Jong-Un, and Xi Jinping all demonstrate.

Bear Mac Mathun

3rd October 2019 at 9:06 am

None of your examples were actually elected. Live as a slave if you will, I do not.

Major Bonkers

3rd October 2019 at 5:29 pm

On the contrary, they have all been elected. Stalin was elected by the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union; Xi Jinping by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China; and Kim Jong Un by the Supreme People’s Assembly.

Adolf Hitler won a general election based on a popular vote (in 1933).

Jim Lawrie

2nd October 2019 at 11:42 am

I think ‘Arry’s easy led.

Janet Mozelewski

2nd October 2019 at 12:43 pm

‘One look at your foolish faces tells me you are going to be crack troops. Oh and that man there, with the 5 and a half hat-size has the makings of a bloody hero!’ Sergeant Daniel Dravot, The Man Who Would Be King.

Danny Rees

2nd October 2019 at 11:36 am

What’s even more disconcerting is that liberals leftists and progressives who normally challenge the power of the Monarchy are falling over themselves to cheer Meghan and Harry on for taking on the power of the British tabloid press.

I cannot stand the tabloid rags like the Daily Fail and the Sxn but two rich privileged members of the elite ruling classes suing a tabloid rag because their noses have been put out of joint by comments about their private lives does not strike me as a blow to the power of the tabloid rags.

Janet Mozelewski

2nd October 2019 at 12:22 pm

It is as well to include the Broadsheet Rags in this IMO. I find them to be increasingly strident …and utterly joyless. So if anything, even worse. What of the Gridiron’s recent jab at Cameron’s ‘privileged pain’? It’s muck-raking over a private quarrel between Boris and his partner? It is exactly the same…except focused on a different side of the political chasm that has opened in our society.
Yesterday I set up a new mobile. Google suggested that my ‘choices’ for a news app would be between The Gridiron, BBC, CNN, The Washington Post and the Huff Post. The good old liberal-elite being…erm…liberal again. So regardless of their many and well-documented faults, we need the more volatile aspects of the Tabloid press more than ever. Whenever I see such as Harkle try to bridle something….and the rest of the liberal elite crowd queuing up in support….I know its something I should defend.

Thomas Swift

2nd October 2019 at 10:47 pm

Iz it coz they iz woke?

Jim Lawrie

2nd October 2019 at 11:23 am

The trouble with dimwits like this pair is that they end up believing their own publicity. That what they put out about themselves is the set in stone version, and that they are playing the press. This, and the denigration of journalists, leads these dolts into believing they are smart and the press is dumb. This case could challenge these numpties to their very core. Harry and Meghan in the witness box. Tickets, anyone?

In so much of what Spiked publishes we see people of power trying to shut everyone up. It is so common that sometimes it is incidental to the article.

Jim Lawrie

2nd October 2019 at 12:07 pm

It is fitting that the letter was telling her dad to shut up.

Jerry Owen

2nd October 2019 at 10:53 am

What turned the once photographed Nazi into a pc leftist woke… oh… of course there isn’t actually a lot of difference these days ( was there ever ) what with labour’s anti semitism we are increasingly seeing just exactly where fascism lies. It’s on the ‘left’.
I have regard for Kate as a seemingly decent mother on a human level considering the extremely privileged position she is in , narcissism isn’t in her makeup.
Kate and William could help the continuity of the royals.
Meghan and Harry on the other hand with their contemptible narcissistic ways could indeed hopefully be the ending of the Royal family… so from me it’s , hip hip hooray.. long live Meghan and Harry !

Danny Rees

2nd October 2019 at 11:34 am

It’s better he be PC and woke than wearing a Nazi outfit.

He’s still a posh txxt though

Janet Mozelewski

2nd October 2019 at 10:50 am

Dear me yes. The last paragraph does a nifty job of summing it up.
Deference is very definitely done. I remember Tony Benn talking about deference towards royalty and titles and said: ‘ People need someone to bow and scrape to.’
Well things have moved on. There isn’t a crevice of the establishment or our public institutions which hasn’t proved a monumental fraud and disappointment. From MPs expenses scandals, to police corruption (Hillsborough for example) royal philandering and everything in-between.
The present crop of celebrities (and Harry since his marriage has placed himself in that category rather than a royal one) is firmly in the global-elite-woke-liberal camp. If only those pesky plebs would do as they were told and stay underground doing the work and not cluttering up this beautiful planet of theirs.
I have always felt that Harry wasn’t exactly the sharpest tool in the royal box (and that is saying something) but he has outdone himself for stupidity this time. If ever it was a time for royal heads to stay down it is now. Dangerous times. A lot of institutions are being critically examined by an increasingly frustrated electorate. For example: many people I know who always felt the BBC was a sacred cow no longer pay the license fee. They see it as taxation without representation. Harry’s shenanigans will only encourage people who were once at least tolerant of royalty, to consider the Civil List in a similar vein.

Jerry Owen

2nd October 2019 at 11:21 am

Janet
The ‘expenses scandal’ thank you for reminding me of it ! I honestly thought that was dynamite, i really thought ( and hoped ) it was a game changer for the establishment, I thought it would crumble, after all it was tax payers money they were stealing ( in my book ). My disappointment at the next GE where it seemed that it hadn’t made any difference in peoples voting habits was a complete surprise for me. I have not voted for either of the two big parties since the scandal ( although in honesty I have rarely voted for the big two ever ).
The seemingly public forgiveness of the MPs money grubbing is one that gives me the belief that once Brexit is batted out of the park the public will comply.
I despair sometimes !
As for Harry he may not be the brightest but I’m sure he’s a tool .

Janet Mozelewski

2nd October 2019 at 12:37 pm

I think that people have tended to forget that democracy isn’t just a thing that is there for them. The reality is, of course, that it is a fragile concept that has to be continually fought for and defended. It is always under attack. Like a house can appear really strong …but unless it is maintained, first the roof leaks and then the whole lot collapses. We have become complacent, and been lulled into imagining the fight for democracy was won in 1945 and that all that remains is to put a poppy on every November as a nod to not forgetting. The road to tyranny is travelled in small steps and the longer we go down that road the more difficult it is to turn round. A lot of people, myself included, have found themselves in a very hostile place along that road, and with people like Blair, Major, and an ‘elite’ busy installing barbed wire all along it to make sure we keep on it. Very disturbing.
I do think Brexit has done us a service…it has made people notice what is going on and re-examine a lot of small things they hadn’t before and recognise them for what they are: twists of wire in the fence.

Jerry Owen

2nd October 2019 at 1:15 pm

Janet
Government has got bigger and bigger over the years, and I believe deliberately made us more reliant ( not through any freedom of choice ) on the state. It interferes at every level to the stage that we are reliant on its approval before we can do anything.
To use your analogy we are rent paying tenants in a house run by landlords that allow us to survive but with no power to change anything for the better, the metaphorical roof is broken beyond repair, but they live in a different house a gilded house paid for by the tenants.
It’s been a death of democracy by a thousand cuts , the liberal lefts march through the institutions must have seemed painfully slow for them as a long term plan , but how it’s paid dividends in the terms of the power and let’s not forget the wealth they have either.
Brexit and Trump have highlighted the reactions to a problem that people weren’t necessarily aware of but precisely because of Trump and Brexit the liberal left have had to show their true undemocratic colours .. now we can see where we are and where we are headed. They couldn’t hide / win forever this day was always coming.
Human nature wins over human nurture, the history of horrific wars proves that.
My fear is about the EU .. just how hard will it cling to power and of course wealth.. as it always boils down to wealth .. ever seen a poor socialist public figure ?
I fear the EU will cling on for dear life , that means people will die, just look at troubles of just one country trying to democratically leave, a portent of worse things to come.

Jim Lawrie

2nd October 2019 at 4:08 pm

Jerry Owen unfortunately Germany has the option of brazening it out through borrowing. Its debt to GDP has been falling despite very low growth, and thanks in part to the charges and interest paid to them by Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland.
Their private debt ratio is also low, and overseas investments give high returns.

Jane 70

2nd October 2019 at 11:52 am

Meghan has been in celeb circles for many years: part of the shiny Trudeau set in Canada and not averse to publicity.

She’s thrown a staggeringly expensive baby party in New York, posed for her engagement in a £50,000 dress-how can a garment actually cost this much?-graced the editorial pages of Vogue with her A list woke pals, and is now presenting herself and our Harry as the epitome of Green, concerned right on consciousness.

Give us a break!

This posturing and the splicing of enormous wealth and privilege with pc pieties doesn’t cut it.
This pair become more annoying with each piece of news.
Harry and Meghan should put up and shut up.

I keep thinking of the hysterical emoting which followed Diana’s death, and her decidedly flirtatious relationship with the press, and before that, The Duke of Windsor and Wallis Simpson.

And I abandoned the Beeb over 10 years ago.

Michael Lynch

2nd October 2019 at 10:29 am

Just watching Victoria Derbyshire and it’s infuriating. The whole argument is being turned into a row about race. A commentator has been basically accusing the press of treating Kate differently to Meghan because she is white. Kate faced a lot of similar crap before she married William. Since then, Kate has become the epitome of probity and Meghan would do well to learn from her example. Flying around the world in private jets whilst lecturing the Plebs about their flying habits is not doing Meghan any favors. This court case against the Mail will not bode well for them in the end either. They are in effect only painting larger targets on their backs for the future.

Danny Rees

2nd October 2019 at 11:37 am

As did Diana.

But where were the cries of “racism” then?

Clare Simpson

3rd October 2019 at 8:17 am

People who want to frame this as a race issue should ask themselves this: If Harry had married one of his blonde, blue-eyed girlfriends like Chelsea or Cressida, and this blonde, blue-eyed wife had behaved in the same way as Meghan, i.e. the £56k engagement dress, the extravagant baby shower, the jet-setting celebrity lifestyle, the woke politics, the preaching, the hypocrisy, the patronising, cringe-worthy, cliche-laden attempts at ‘inspiring’ the commoners and the general narcissism, would she have been treated differently by the press? Of COURSE she wouldn’t. The criticism of Meghan has been robust but fair and Harry’s attempt to frame this as ‘racism’ is deeply, deeply insulting to the British people.

John W

2nd October 2019 at 10:09 am

It is sad that Harry seems to have wasted the genuine warmth people had for him before he met Meghan. Once a C-list actress always a ………..

Brandy Cluster

2nd October 2019 at 11:38 pm

Even her own family dislikes her!!! That should have raised red flags for Harry; it did for me.

Jonathan Mason

6th October 2019 at 10:23 pm

Is she C-list or D-list? There seems to be some ambiguity in these comments. Even assuming that she is on the D-list (whatever that is), her achievements in being part of a successful TV show, earning millions of dollars, and becoming known world-wide arguably exceed the achievements of more than 99% of people, so being a D-list actress is quite an achievement even if it doesn’t end up with marriage to a prince.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register now.