The Harry and Meghan fuss

[Roy Munson]

Yes, but you appeared (to me) to be grouping me in with those 'usual suspects'. You certainly didn't caveat your post accordingly. On that basis, I felt compelled to defend myself.

Not at all, GDM. I enjoy your ouput on here and I've never got that impression from you. Apologies for not providing a little more clarity.

 

[stonerblue]

Would that be like how everyone in the Palace has iron clad nda's so nothing ever leaks out of there?

Yeah, and nobody at the priory has ever got a few quid for phoning a hack with a juicy tip-off have they?

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Yes, but you appeared (to me) to be grouping me in with those 'usual suspects'. You certainly didn't caveat your post accordingly. On that basis, I felt compelled to defend myself.

I think it makes complex issues easier for simple people to comprehend if they can make them a binary issue. I'm sure it wasn't personal.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

View attachment 12192

The character she plays in suits has a black daddy.

I think they are both actors and not related?

 

[BlueHammer85]

so many pointing the finger at Meghan for lying when most of the allegations and decisions are actually from Harry, a royal all his life and does not come across as lying media whore to me. the easy target is Meghan and that's why she's being attacked and not Harry

 

[M18CTID]

She's the royal equivalent of raheem sterling. The press know exactly what they are doing, they will simply report the same thing as with someone else, but with a negative angle. They'll make sure never to go overtly racist as they instantly lose if they do, but they know what a certain audience wants and will happily feed them. Its not them being racist, as such, just picking on someone knowing its what the large, racist element of their readers want.

Spot on. The parallels in the differences of reporting on the same thing in one newspaper (Kate getting a free pass when touching her baby bump whereas Meghan didn’t) with the examples Sterling highlighted (Foden and Tosin each buying a house) are staggering. Now I’m not saying every single negative article about Meghan in every single newspaper has a racial motive behind it but in the examples above it’s way too coincidental for my liking to not be linked to race.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Yeh I know, seems obvious now but it wouldn’t be the first time its happened in TV/Hollywood would it?

I have to admit I was unsure whether she playing a mixed race character until I googled it. If you had seen her before she started relaxing her hair, you wouldn't have any doubt that she had mixed ancestry though.

TV and Hollywood isn't a reliable indicator either way though.

Jessica Alba has ambiguous racial characteristics and has gotten away with playing Black or mixed race characters. If you watched Honey, you might have thought she was of partial black heritage.

Honey (2003) ⭐ 5.3 | Drama, Music, Romance

1h 34m | PG-13

m.imdb.com

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Spot on. The parallels in the differences of reporting on the same thing in one newspaper (Kate getting a free pass when touching her baby bump whereas Meghan didn’t) with the examples Sterling highlighted (Foden and Tosin each buying a house) are staggering. Now I’m not saying every single negative article about Meghan has a racial motive behind it but in the examples above it’s way too coincidental for my liking to not be linked to race.

Too many of these to be coincidence, but as said earlier it's exactly the same as raz stories. Personally I conclude from that that the tabloids are cunts rather than the royals.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

And you know these things because you’ve been fed them by the media?

I never said I 'know' anything; it is my opinion of her. I'm more than capable of forming my own opinions, and am well rewarded for giving my opinion on matters too, so I guess that means it must count for something.

I can say with supreme confidence that what the media have to say does not inform that in any meaningful way. This is principally because evaluation of other (to me at least) is very much a subjective exercise; I believe I am a good judge of character (who doesn't?) am supremely self-confident and I consider myself intellectually superior to most people in the media - and so to me, the suggestion I am influenced by the media in forming my opinions on others is utterly flawed.

Seeing as you asked, I am a person who can form strong opinions on people but always try and be as balanced and fair as I can - as I believe I have in relation to Meghan. Just because I don't like her doesn't mean I don't think she has been treated poorly. And I was pleased she won her case against the Mail - and thought it was the correct outcome.

The view I have formed on her is very much my own and one that I readily acknowledge could be utterly flawed, but it is the perception I have arrived at based on my observation of her disposition, body language, actions and wider relationships with others. The same process most other human beings go through when evaluating others.

So, in short, the answer to your question is: 'no'.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Not at all, GDM. I enjoy your ouput on here and I've never got that impression from you. Apologies for not providing a little more clarity.

No worries pal :-)