Harry & Meghan: Legal Actions against the Media

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by muriel

Lack of judgement, being badly advised, not understanding the basic role of a second tier royal, not seeking or listening to sage advice from Charles, William or the BP staff, or perhaps just not being very bright: not sure which of these is driving these actions.

Do we actually *know as fact* that H&M willfully did not seek or listen to the advice from those you've mentioned? For all we know, they could have advised Harry and Meghan just how to do all of this and are behind him 100% in these lawsuits. Personally, with the long period mentioned that these lawsuits were "in the works", that advice was not sought or heeded from other senior members of the BRF seems to be preposterous to me.

My thinking is that as this is a personal matter regarding Harry and Meghan, their lawyers and those that are named in lawsuits, the public will only see these claimants statements as the lawsuits, themselves, do not pertain to anyone else in the BRF. Like Thomas Markle is irrelevant to the MoS case, the other members of the BRF are also. They're not going to drag the "Firm" into this.

Just my thoughts from a semi-caffeinated mind. I need more coffee.

[Madame Verseau]

Thomas is back on the front pages because MoS wants him to take the fall for the lawsuit. Meghan wrote the letter asking him to stop talking to the press in August 2018 and sent it to Dad. Dad does an interview with GMB in December 2018, trashing Meghan and made no mention of the letter. The friends went to People to talk about the letter, most likely with Meghan's permission in February 2019. Dad sends parts of the letter to the Mail, leaving out parts that may show Thomas was really a bad father to Meghan when she was younger and there could be evidence and witnesses to back that up. It blows the loving and self sacrificing image of Thomas Markle out off the water if true. Meghan wanted to keep it private with the letter, Dad going on GMB months later proves he doesn't care about Meghan's feelings just his image and it justifies keeping him away from Archie.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by muriel

[....]

Lack of judgement, being badly advised, not understanding the basic role of a second tier royal, not seeking or listening to sage advice from Charles, William or the BP staff, or perhaps just not being very bright: not sure which of these is driving these actions.

How do you know that there is a lack of judgement, poor advised, not seeking or listening advice from the Prince of Wales, the Duke of Cambridge or Buckingham Palace? What is your backing for this allegation?

Note that in 2012 the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge took legal action against a French magazine. Six people were convicted and the publisher had to pay 100.000 Euro in damages.

In 1988 the Queen took legal action against The Sun for publishing a stolen family photo. This was a breach of copyright (!). The lawyers of The Sun agreed to an out-of-court settlement with an unknown financial arrangement.

In 1992 the Queen again took legal action against The Sun. Now for publishing the Christmas Adress two days before transmission. The lawyers of The Sun agreed to an out-of-court settlement. The publisher had to pay 200.000 Pound in damages.

In 1993 the Princess of Wales took legal action against The Mirror after they published photos of her exercising in the gym. The lawyers of The Mirror agreed to an out-of-court settlement with an unknown financial arrangement.

In 1995 the Prince of Wales took legal action against former housekeeper Wendy Berry, who published a "tell all book" in the United States. The Prince later obtained an injunction that entitled him to all profits from her book.

Were the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, the Prince and Princess of Wales, the Queen herself also gambling with goodwill, have had poor judgement, or not seeking or listening to advice? They all won their legal cases. One by one. And with the severe infringements on their human rights (the right to respect for private life, family life, correspondence and home) the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are by no means without a fair chance on legal success.

[ACO]

Originally Posted by wyevale

The goodwill generated by the tour is now forgotten , at least in the UK [hopefully not in Africa], and Mr Markle is 'front page' again..

What a triumph for Mrs Clintons [newly imported] PR team...

I mean it would have been gone by the week anyways as proven by the Oceania tour. They were barely home when the attacks started up again. This would have been no different.

They have legit legal cases. Good for them for taking action now when the press are in their nice phase to really prove point cause we all know it’s fleeting.

The courts will have the final word.

[US Royal Watcher]

Originally Posted by carlota

i agree! but although i have blamed their PR team in the past (along with H&M) i no longer do. no respectable, experienced PR team would have advised them to do this. to me, this is the making of H&M - despite the well intentioned advice that their PR team, Charles, William or the BP staff will have given them.

they are carving their own grave. we all know who will suffer from this: whilst harry was always seen as a bit of a 'black sheep' whose actions were forgotten/ignored (his naked pictures, his racist costumes, etc...), meghan's popularity has never been high. harry is trying to help meghan with this, but he's actually going to do more damage than good IMO, as evidenced by the events mentioned before by muriel:

> Meghan's broken relationship with her father back on the front pages

> Potential for uniting the Press in fighting H&M's potential "war"

> Recent very successful charitable endeavours, including SmartWorks, all forgotten

> Goodwill of recent official trip to Africa eroded.

I believe that Harry has the full support of his family and advisors in this instance. With respect to the phone hacking aspects of the suit, almost every member of the royal family has been victimized by hacking, it is an incidious practice and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Regarding the copyright suit, if Harry and Meghan did nothing, the media may become emboldened and publish other private correspondence of members of the royal family.

The family tries to take the strategic long view when addressing these types of issues. Right now, the media is using the contents of Meghan's letter to deflect from the hacking story. As a result, there may be a short-term hit with public relations now (although I am not convinced there is, I think she is pretty sympathetic). However, imagine if the media publishes a damaging royal letter in the future, the family would have a bigger public relations problem. Better to set boundaries as soon as possible to prevent larger issues down the line.

[Fijiro]

Whatever happens with their Court Cases, Harry and Meghan are already winners in my book for standing up to the "powerful forces" aka the bullies.

...

[Gawin]

Apologies if this has already been posted. Sean O'Grady is the Associate Editor of the Independent.

"Prince Harry ad Meghan aren't blindly attacking the media - they have a right to protect their privacy"

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a9129226.html

Edited to add Omid Scobie's take:

"This industry of 'fast' news is incredibly toxic and I think Harry wants to change this, not just for himself and his wife, but for the entire royal family in general and the future members of the royal family like the Cambridge children and Archie," he said. "This is Harry feeling confident enough to take on what he sees as dark force."

https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/c...ption-66066764

[wyevale]

The courts will have the final word.

Rather, i'd suggest Public opinion will 'have the final word'.

[Gawin]

Originally Posted by wyevale

Rather, i'd suggest Public opinion will 'have the final word'.

Well if public opinion sides with the VERY TOXIC media what does that say about the British public? Do the British think it's perfectly fine to hack cellphones or publish very personal letters without the letter writer's permission? Some very twisted moral values there.

I remember how the tide of public opinion turned against the Queen following the death of Princess Diana. "Show us you care" and all that nonsense. Criticized for taking William and Harry to church (gee, isn't that what Christians do?). Apparently the British public never got the memo that grief isn't a spectator sport.

I'm sorry but I'm not always impressed with the British public. After all, the tabloids wouldn't exist without their clicks & support.

[Dman]

Originally Posted by muriel

Well said. So within a few days, Harry & Meghan's misjudgements have led to:

> Meghan's broken relationship with her father back on the front pages

> Potential for uniting the Press in fighting H&M's potential "war"

> Recent very successful charitable endeavours, including SmartWorks, all forgotten

> Goodwill of recent official trip to Africa eroded.

Lack of judgement, being badly advised, not understanding the basic role of a second tier royal, not seeking or listening to sage advice from Charles, William or the BP staff, or perhaps just not being very bright: not sure which of these is driving these actions.

Don’t fall for what the DM and others want its readers to fall for. They will fight back by trying to turn everything against the right thing Harry and Meghan are doing.

Also, The Queen is the boss. None of this is being done without being run by her first.

[Rudolph]

At the end of the day the Sussexes have to deal with the British press. It doesn’t matter what Good Morning America thinks or opinions from foreign correspondents.

[ACO]

Originally Posted by wyevale

Rather, i'd suggest Public opinion will 'have the final word'.

Public opinion will be there regardless. Our thoughts mean very little in the legal scheme of things. That will be up to the courts to decide if wrong doing occurred.

Also public opinion doesn't always mean much. Once upon a time public opinion saw someone who looked like Meghan as less than a person. Heck in 2019 many still do. So it is what it is. We all have opinions. We can only do what we feel is right.

Originally Posted by Rudolph

At the end of the day the Sussexes have to deal with the British press. It doesn’t matter what Good Morning America thinks or opinions from foreign correspondents.

Very true. And the British press also have to properly do their jobs. Many have admitted things have gone overboard. We have seen them being issue apologies for their lies. So yes the royals have to deal with them but they don't have to put up with them when they are in the wrong. History shows all royals from the Queen to the Cambridges have called issue on them. Not sure why people are surprised the Sussexes are as well.

[Zaira]

Originally Posted by muriel

Well said. So within a few days, Harry & Meghan's misjudgements have led to:

> Meghan's broken relationship with her father back on the front pages

> Potential for uniting the Press in fighting H&M's potential "war"

> Recent very successful charitable endeavours, including SmartWorks, all forgotten

> Goodwill of recent official trip to Africa eroded.

Lack of judgement, being badly advised, not understanding the basic role of a second tier royal, not seeking or listening to sage advice from Charles, William or the BP staff, or perhaps just not being very bright: not sure which of these is driving these actions.

So many assumptions in one post.

How has the goodwill evaporated? With who? The press? That was never going to last.

I've seen mostly positive responses from the public tbh. But even so, I think we should perhaps not be so arrogant to assume we know the public goodwill has "evaporated" or not. What is our metric? Online comment forums or sections? They certainly were not friendly toward Meghan even during the tour so what goodwill was there to sour? Anecdotes with friends in our orbits? I can point to those same things and say people support these actions. Again, there is truly no way to suss out the public goodwill yet.

We also have NO idea who they did or did not consult. When the story first broke, reputable sources said Harry consulted a great deal with the Queen and talked to Charles. They were both fully aware of the lawsuit, and possibly the statement, we don't know. Its possible William wasn't but he isn't Harry's boss. Now, the reporting is changing and saying they consulted no one about any part. So which is it? And do people really think a legal action in which an HRH is named can be filed and the Queen not find out posthaste? The hacking lawsuit was filed on the 27th of September, after all.

It is just truly funny to me to see people go around the bend on all of this. Falling for the media's alarmist tones and biased reporting. The media has been biased against them from the very beginning, from the tabloid press on up. There have been some spots of fairness, sure, but not much.

Harry acknowledged the risk of this action. It seems he is pretty clear-eyed about this actually. How about we not cast aspersions on someones intellect? Or assume we know the inner workings of this complicated matter. There are lots of questions still to be answered.

[Gawin]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

At the end of the day the Sussexes have to deal with the British press. It doesn’t matter what Good Morning America thinks or opinions from foreign correspondents.

Omid Scobie (quoted in GMA) and Sean O'Grady aren't foreign correspondents.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by Gawin

Well if public opinion sides with the VERY TOXIC media what does that say about the British public? Do the British think it's perfectly fine to hack cellphones or publish very personal letters without the letter writer's permission? Some very twisted moral values there.

I remember how the tide of public opinion turned against the Queen following the death of Princess Diana. "Show us you care" and all that nonsense. Criticized for taking William and Harry to church (gee, isn't that what Christians do?). Apparently the British public never got the memo that grief isn't a spectator sport.

I'm sorry but I'm not always impressed with the British public. After all, the tabloids wouldn't exist without their clicks & support.

I would like to paraphrase the eminent German theologist and victim of the Nazis, Dietrich Bonhoeffer: "Gegen die Dummheit sind wir Wehrlos" (Against stupidity we are defenceless). Or, more befitting on the Royal Forums, the Jungfrau von Orléans in Friedrich Schiller's words: "Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens" (Against stupidity even the Gods themselves struggle in vain).

With other words, the Duke and Duchess should not care for the blindingly clickbaiting public of trash media. Today it is Hosanna, tomorrow it is Cruficy. The Sussexes are indeed right to focus on unlawful infringements. Not on what "the tabloids" think.

[Rudolph]

Originally Posted by Gawin

Omid Scobie (quoted in GMA) and Sean O'Grady aren't foreign correspondents.

True but Sean O’Grady writes for a republican newspaper and Omid is a ‘commentator’ for the American media who’s never said a critical word of the Sussexes in his life

The Sussexes are ‘British’ royals and need to figure out a way to deal with the British press.

[Zaira]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

True but Sean O’Grady writes for a republican newspaper and Omid is a ‘commentator’ for the American media who’s never said a critical word of the Sussexes in his life

The Sussexes are ‘British’ royals and need to figure out a wat to deal with the British press.

So...does the fact that the Independent is republican make it less British?? Or the Guardian for that matter lol?

Omid has never said a critical word about any of the royals. Same with Emily Nash of HELLO! They are the "soft touch" press as it is. They are the other extreme from the tabloids.

And as it is, Harry and Meghan (as far as we know) have not taken aim at the Telegraphs or the Times and similar of the rota despite their extremely critical or problematic articles. Still plenty of press for them to build with outside the Sun and MoS/DM

[Gawin]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

True but Sean O’Grady writes for a republican newspaper and Omid is a ‘commentator’ for the American media who’s never said a critical word of the Sussexes in his life

Good grief! Are you serious?

How does writing for a republican newspaper make Sean O'Grady any less a member of the British media than a reporter for a trashy tabloid? And because of that his opinion on the Sussex lawsuits doesn't count? Wow! So much for freedom of speech (or the press).

Ditto for Omid Scobie. He's never said a word against the Sussexes so he's simply dismissed?

And please note that neither of these two reporters write for trashy tabloids which in IMO makes them even MORE believable.

The Sussexes are ‘British’ royals and need to figure out a way to deal with the British press.

They are. They're taking them on and exposing the rot in British civic life, with the support of Sean O'Grady, Omid Scobie, and other members of the British press. If some members of the British public are willing to settle for the rot, I guess that's their problem.

[Zaira]

It is curious to me that more are not focusing on the fact that Harry isn't going this alone. He has joined a group claim:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...mpression=true

He is joining scores of other people in a group claim that alleges editors and executives at Mirror Group Newspapers, publisher of the Daily Mirror, and News Group Newspapers (NGN), publisher of the Sun and the defunct News of the World, mounted an industrial-scale cover-up over more than 20 years.

Harry joining adds a lot of power to the group claim, but there being a group claim shows the scale of the issue.

[Rudolph]

Well good luck to them. There’s an article in the Sunday Times today titled “Does Prince Harry want to tear down the monarchy? On his strange week of self-sabotage”

As there’s not much more to add to the conversation I’ll wait until the court action proceeds.