The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #881  
Old 02-02-2020, 05:00 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
I think it's why the stories are coming, it's a means to get Meghan to drop the lawsuit. Deploying Thomas Markle is the tell when he threaten everything will come out if compelled by Meghan's lawyers to take the stand. It also says I think DM lawyers have not formally subpoenaed him. Markle was repeating media talking points; he was practically giving testimony in interviews (this way he is not subject to cross examination at the moment). Dragging Doria into that interview was another low blow by the media. No Meghan should stay the course in this matter.
I don't think so. T Markle is an unreliable witness. Him doing these interviews just increases it. There is no law suit at the moment. It hasn't come to court yet and won't for about a year. He will not be requested to appear as a witness until all dates are set and they are ready to go. The DM will loose this case but their refusal to settle tells me they couldn't give two figs about that and just want to go for maximum damage. It was a poor decision to bring this case.
__________________

  #882  
Old 02-02-2020, 07:39 AM
Madame Verseau's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 1,770
@poppy7 - this is where we disagree. The media has been coming at Meghan as if she committed a serious crime, while she remained silent. It comes to the point when you say enough is enough and stand up for yourself. The difference is Meghan and her lawyers will fight this out in court and with proper filings and not on the airwaves. Win or lose Meghan I believe did the right thing and file the suit and send a message you don't cave because the adversary is a powerful entity that is used to getting its way.
__________________

  #883  
Old 02-02-2020, 03:45 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Verseau View Post
@poppy7 - this is where we disagree. The media has been coming at Meghan as if she committed a serious crime, while she remained silent. It comes to the point when you say enough is enough and stand up for yourself. The difference is Meghan and her lawyers will fight this out in court and with proper filings and not on the airwaves. Win or lose Meghan I believe did the right thing and file the suit and send a message you don't cave because the adversary is a powerful entity that is used to getting its way.
Yeah I see it as damaging herself even more.

I don't know whether it is a cultural difference or what but people who understand the British media say firmly. Unless they take pictures on private land. Never engage. Those who dont seem to understand them well say to fight back and that you won't loose that way. You can loose because you are not actually fighting anything in the first place and they don't care. What exactly are you fighting against? People gossiping? Because that is all the tabloids are. The British media is a unique thing.
  #884  
Old 02-02-2020, 04:36 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,817
Meghan's case against the Sunday Mail is hardly a case of 'people gossiping' however. It is about the Sunday Mail using a piece of private correspondence she sent to her father in order to gain profit in sales and clicks for themselves. She has a perfect right to sue them under those circumstances IMO and I say that as a person who was born and brought up in the UK. Other royals including the Queen and Prince Charles have sued the tabloid Press in the past and they also had a right to do so.

And no-one has an obligation to sit back and take abuse, sometimes very personal abuse, from a pack of journalists day after day, month after month, year after year, without reacting simply because they are in the public eye. It's all very well to say 'just ignore because they are just gossip mongers' when it's not your reputation and wellbeing that's being assailed for years.
  #885  
Old 02-02-2020, 07:08 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Meghan's case against the Sunday Mail is hardly a case of 'people gossiping' however. It is about the Sunday Mail using a piece of private correspondence she sent to her father in order to gain profit in sales and clicks for themselves. She has a perfect right to sue them under those circumstances IMO and I say that as a person who was born and brought up in the UK. Other royals including the Queen and Prince Charles have sued the tabloid Press in the past and they also had a right to do so.

And no-one has an obligation to sit back and take abuse, sometimes very personal abuse, from a pack of journalists day after day, month after month, year after year, without reacting simply because they are in the public eye. It's all very well to say 'just ignore because they are just gossip mongers' when it's not your reputation and wellbeing that's being assailed for years.
Who will suffer from this? Not the DM.
  #886  
Old 02-03-2020, 04:03 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,817
Sometimes you have to stand up and fight for what you believe to be true and fair and just, whatever the consequences, because the alternative is to allow injustice, unfairness and lies to carry on for ever, unimpeded.

And it's not true that the press is never stopped in its tracks or made to steer another course. The Leveson Inquiry uncovered a lot of underhandness by the Press that was really quite evil. The hacking scandal brought the Press into disrepute and closed one Sunday newspaper down.

Prss Diana was pursued every time she went into public view. She was surrounded and tormented by a pack of papparazi who sold their photos to the highest bidder on Fleet St. That has virtually ended for most royals if not most celebs.

So the tabloid Press can be humbled on occasion, and if it loses a court action then a public apology on the front page of the offending rag would be a very satisfactory and sweet moment for those who have suffered their persecution.
  #887  
Old 02-03-2020, 04:16 AM
Elenath's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nuth, Netherlands
Posts: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Sometimes you have to stand up and fight for what you believe to be true and fair and just, whatever the consequences, because the alternative is to allow injustice, unfairness and lies to carry on for ever, unimpeded.

And it's not true that the press is never stopped in its tracks or made to steer another course. The Levison Inquiry uncovered a lot of underhandness by the Press that was really quite evil. The hacking scandal brought the Press into disrepute and closed one Sunday newspaper down.

Prss Diana was pursued every time she went into public view she was surrounded and tormented by a pack of papparazi who sold their photos to the highest bidder on Fleet St. That has virtually ended for most royals if not most celebs.

So the tabloid Press can be humbled on occasion, and if it loses a court action then a public apology on the front page of the offending rag would be a very satisfactory and sweet moment for those who have suffered their persecution.
And they should be held accountable if it's needed. Just like everyone else. It's not just famous people who suffer from this type of abuse. Ordinary people can be targeted as well and they don't always have the means to fight back. I'm all for a free press, but not a lawless or moral-less (is that a word?) press.
  #888  
Old 02-03-2020, 05:14 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Sometimes you have to stand up and fight for what you believe to be true and fair and just, whatever the consequences, because the alternative is to allow injustice, unfairness and lies to carry on for ever, unimpeded.

And it's not true that the press is never stopped in its tracks or made to steer another course. The Levison Inquiry uncovered a lot of underhandness by the Press that was really quite evil. The hacking scandal brought the Press into disrepute and closed one Sunday newspaper down.

Prss Diana was pursued every time she went into public view she was surrounded and tormented by a pack of papparazi who sold their photos to the highest bidder on Fleet St. That has virtually ended for most royals if not most celebs.

So the tabloid Press can be humbled on occasion, and if it loses a court action then a public apology on the front page of the offending rag would be a very satisfactory and sweet moment for those who have suffered their persecution.
This isn't Leveson in any way shape or form. She allowed her friends to talk to the media, they mentioned the letter and her father obliged by giving it to the media. She played a hugh role in it. Compared to what the media can do. This is nothing and the potential for even more trauma for them is hugh. Sue the media when they do something heinous by all means. Tap your phone. Realise taped conversations. Take pictures inside your home. Of you on your land. Whatever it is. This isn't one of these times and the fact they won't settle tell me that they couldn't care less either.
  #889  
Old 02-03-2020, 05:25 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 893
It’s surprising how rare this sort of thing – the letter affair specifically, not disputes with the press – is. I’m sure the press would love to hear from royals’ disgruntled exes, relatives with whom they don’t get on, old classmates or colleagues who are willing to tell stories in exchange for money and getting their names in the papers, etc, but it doesn’t happen that often. Most people do keep their mouths shut.
  #890  
Old 02-03-2020, 06:04 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
It’s surprising how rare this sort of thing – the letter affair specifically, not disputes with the press – is. I’m sure the press would love to hear from royals’ disgruntled exes, relatives with whom they don’t get on, old classmates or colleagues who are willing to tell stories in exchange for money and getting their names in the papers, etc, but it doesn’t happen that often. Most people do keep their mouths shut.
Does happen. Used to happen more. People now contend to keep their mouths shut. Fifteen or so years ago it used to happen more. It's people who have changed. Not the media. It maybe 5hey juat don't pay enough. Has happened a bit with Meghan though.
  #891  
Old 02-03-2020, 07:31 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
Yeah I see it as damaging herself even more.

I don't know whether it is a cultural difference or what but people who understand the British media say firmly. Unless they take pictures on private land. Never engage. Those who dont seem to understand them well say to fight back and that you won't loose that way. You can loose because you are not actually fighting anything in the first place and they don't care. What exactly are you fighting against? People gossiping? Because that is all the tabloids are. The British media is a unique thing.
The MOS broke copyright laws and is using the public as a means for justifying those actions. They should be helped accountable and the victim of the actions shouldn't be penalized because they are standing up for their rights. Luckily the MOS does have a lot to lose if they get the max penalty (provided the Sussexes win) and they know it...which is why they have used everyone they can (BRF, Markles & their papers) to try to harass the Sussexes into dropping the suit.

The British media cultural leaves a lot to be desired...these are the same people that forced a man to reveal his medical condition...why? Simply because they could. And so many don't even blink and just allow the bullying to continue. I don't get it.
  #892  
Old 02-03-2020, 08:21 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaiSoSo View Post
The MOS broke copyright laws and is using the public as a means for justifying those actions. They should be helped accountable and the victim of the actions shouldn't be penalized because they are standing up for their rights. Luckily the MOS does have a lot to lose if they get the max penalty (provided the Sussexes win) and they know it...which is why they have used everyone they can (BRF, Markles & their papers) to try to harass the Sussexes into dropping the suit.

The British media cultural leaves a lot to be desired...these are the same people that forced a man to reveal his medical condition...why? Simply because they could. And so many don't even blink and just allow the bullying to continue. I don't get it.
They have nothing to loose. Money means nothing. And as far as breaking the law on copyright goes it is a slap on the wrist. They used to hack peoples phones. It is not on that league. Meghan and Harry are not some kind of supervictim. They just play with them so it gets worse.

Do you mean Gareth Thomas. No they shouldn't have done that BUT he could have got an injunction but decided to release it himself on his terms. And was greeted with warmth and acceptance and for a man who spent a large part of his lifefeeling like a liar and an imposter what a fabulous thing for him. He then went on to be an integral part of ITV rugby coverage. You can choose to keep things out of the press and they nearly always get a heads up first and a chance to make a decision about what to do. It is not the straight forward situation most people think it is.
  #893  
Old 02-03-2020, 12:44 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by poppy7 View Post
They have nothing to loose. Money means nothing. And as far as breaking the law on copyright goes it is a slap on the wrist. They used to hack peoples phones. It is not on that league. Meghan and Harry are not some kind of supervictim. They just play with them so it gets worse.

Do you mean Gareth Thomas. No they shouldn't have done that BUT he could have got an injunction but decided to release it himself on his terms. And was greeted with warmth and acceptance and for a man who spent a large part of his lifefeeling like a liar and an imposter what a fabulous thing for him. He then went on to be an integral part of ITV rugby coverage. You can choose to keep things out of the press and they nearly always get a heads up first and a chance to make a decision about what to do. It is not the straight forward situation most people think it is.
I didn't say they were supervictims...they are victims of the British media and luckily have the ability to push back and that is a good thing for both them and others who don't have the same resources. They can afford to bring the lawsuit against the MOS. Harry & 132+ people have lawsuits out about the phone hacking hopefully there will be power in numbers and this unethical behavior will stop or be reduced at minimum.

Yes, I was referring to Gareth....he had to come forward otherwise it would have been looming over his head knowing they had that information and could use it whenever they want. An injunction means little to the media who don't feel they will be penalized for doing whatever they want and won't truly be held accountable. Either the victims don't push back or they get a slap on the wrist by the courts as evident with the phone-hacking scandal that you mentioned.
  #894  
Old 02-03-2020, 12:59 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 893
The treatment of Gareth Thomas was appalling, but it was the work of one newspaper - and, although it wasn't named, everyone knows which one it is, because it's got form for doing that sort of thing. Saying "the British media" makes it sound as if it involved every single newspaper, TV station and radio station, which it did not. I think it's rather unfair to generalise about an entire industry.
  #895  
Old 02-03-2020, 01:12 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaiSoSo View Post
I didn't say they were supervictims...they are victims of the British media and luckily have the ability to push back and that is a good thing for both them and others who don't have the same resources. They can afford to bring the lawsuit against the MOS. Harry & 132+ people have lawsuits out about the phone hacking hopefully there will be power in numbers and this unethical behavior will stop or be reduced at minimum.

Yes, I was referring to Gareth....he had to come forward otherwise it would have been looming over his head knowing they had that information and could use it whenever they want. An injunction means little to the media who don't feel they will be penalized for doing whatever they want and won't truly be held accountable. Either the victims don't push back or they get a slap on the wrist by the courts as evident with the phone-hacking scandal that you mentioned.
A super injunction is taken extremely seriously and no newspaper to my knowledge has ever broken one. And there are many that even around 30 years. Some have come out and explained why they took one out in most all cases super injunctions are granted to protect children. Now twitter. Well you know.

The British media by and large are honourable. There are only a few who are despicable but absolutely no one listens to them anyway. I was appalled by them printing a very well known actors online dating profile recently but the actor was abroad, ignored it and the story literally lasted a day. Thank goodness. I have cringed over things the media have done to people but necer have at Meghan and Harry. It's all tribe ...and her family.
  #896  
Old 02-03-2020, 01:28 PM
Helen.CH's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Chambery, France
Posts: 305
What I really don't understand is why a majority if Britons seem to buy these tabloids.
I mean how do these papers .. exist?
Who reads this gossip and finances it?
Is the British people simply like it?

Compared to other countries this must be another obscurity in the UK.

Sorry, I have to add one thing, the idea behind my questions are,
why on earth do H&M take these things so serious? It's just tabloids.
  #897  
Old 02-03-2020, 01:31 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helen.CH View Post
What I really don't understand is why a majority if Britons seem to buy these tabloids.
I mean how do these papers .. exist?
Who reads this gossip and finances it?
Is the British people simply like it?

Compared to other countries this must be another obscurity in the UK.
they are light reading and most people don't take them seriously. and other coutnries have media that are full of gossip as well...
  #898  
Old 02-03-2020, 01:35 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helen.CH View Post
What I really don't understand is why a majority if Britons seem to buy these tabloids.
I mean how do these papers .. exist?
Who reads this gossip and finances it?
Is the British people simply like it?

Compared to other countries this must be another obscurity in the UK.
It isn't about the celebrity gossip. For a lot of people of is about class and political allegiances. So newspapers like the sun and mirror are really sold on the basis of this. Daily Mail is ultra conservative and again appeals on class grounds. The celeb gossip is unfortunately a guilty pleasure of anyone with a smart phone app. And really they are the only three that exist now.
  #899  
Old 02-03-2020, 02:10 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
The treatment of Gareth Thomas was appalling, but it was the work of one newspaper - and, although it wasn't named, everyone knows which one it is, because it's got form for doing that sort of thing. Saying "the British media" makes it sound as if it involved every single newspaper, TV station and radio station, which it did not. I think it's rather unfair to generalise about an entire industry.
One newspaper is one too many. It still would have been out there in the media and let's not pretend the newspapers (and other forms of media) don't feed off of each other for headlines/topics.
  #900  
Old 02-03-2020, 02:10 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Herefordshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,397
Titles like the Sun and Mirror are picked up by Blue Collar types to look at whilst scoffing 'the full english' at the caff..
The Mail and Express by housewives, at the checkout whilst paying for a Supermarket shop..

Really none of the content of ANY of them 'stays in the mind' longer than it takes to read them.. and class/political allegiance are based on FAR deeper things than the tripe these papers produce..

Its inexplicable to me why they are considered SO important in their influence on the British psyche - ever reducing numbers of people buy them, and even fewer take them seriously..Let alone as 'GOSPEL'
__________________

Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 6 (1 members and 5 guests)
Somebody
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Popular Tags
abdication abu dhabi american american history anastasia anastasia once upon a time ancestry baby names baptism biography british royal family brownbitcoinqueen buckingham palace china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing countess of snowdon cpr doge of venice duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex elizabeth ii facts family life family tree fashion and style games george vi hochberg hypothetical monarchs imperial household intro italian royal family jacobite japan jewellery kids movie list of rulers luxembourg mountbatten names nepalese royal jewels plantinum jubilee pless prince constantijn prince dimitri prince harry princess alexia (2005 -) princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn walailak princess eugenie princess ribha queen louise queen mathilde queen maxima random facts resusci anne royal dress-ups royal jewels royal marriage royal re-enactments. royalty of taiwan royal wedding serbian royal family snowdon thai royal family uae customs united states united states of america videos wittelsbach


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:23 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×