The Harry and Meghan fuss

[Metal Biker]

Someone has been on a ninth rate training course and remembered the most stupid element.
You cannot make "ass" from "u" and "me" unless you pixilate the characters and re-assemble them.
Also, "u" is being used as text speak for "you" which makes the whole phrase irrelevant for adults.
Glad to be of service.

Well I know someone who hasn't watched Joe Lycett...

 

[mackenzie]

IMHO, for what it's worth, I think William knew Harry was rushing into a marriage with someone who hadn't had time to fully understand what she was getting into re the press. William warned him to take more time but Harry, being Harry, wouldn't listen.
That isn't to say one side is right or one is wrong, but I think Harry was always going to react the way he has. For many years he had enjoyed good press and then his marriage and the resentment over the "spare" issue triggered things.
There seems to be an immaturity to Harry and the snippets I have seen from his book seem to show either almost schoolboy bragging or victimhood. There doesn't seem to be any balance.

 

[kaz7]

IMHO, for what it's worth, I think William knew Harry was rushing into a marriage with someone who hadn't had time to fully understand what she was getting into re the press. William warned him to take more time but Harry, being Harry, wouldn't listen.
That isn't to say one side is right or one is wrong, but I think Harry was always going to react the way he has. For many years he had enjoyed good press and then his marriage and the resentment over the "spare" issue triggered things.
There seems to be an immaturity to Harry and the snippets I have seen from his book seem to show either almost schoolboy bragging or victimhood. There doesn't seem to be any balance.

You have got all of that from out of context snippets ? His interview with tom bradbury is on tonite , watch that

The media turning on meg is what happened

 

[oldius]

Ah the comeback of the tosspot...

I don't think you "understand" either, so here ya go;

You read the comments section of the Daily Mail, expect anti-Harry and Meghan comments, racism and misogyny as that is the bias they pander to.

You read the comments section of RAWK, expect pro-Liverpool comments as that is the bias they pander to... and racism and misogyny.

You basically read the comments section of the Daily Mail on a story about Harry and were surprised it was *gasp* negative!? How naive are you?

The wider point is that this is the best selling national newspaper in the UK. It is also known for its racist and misogynistic content. Many people here have argued that the basis of the treatment of Megan by the UK media is one of race and misogyny. That this paper and others have so easily been able to create the narrative had been telling of some intrinsic issues in the UK.

Some people, and you may be one, have argued that this is not the case.

I read the Mail, among other publications, to form a more rounded view. If I only read what trots out my own views I may miss something important, or a point worthy of consideration. The use of the word tosspot is beneath you, I think.

 

[mackenzie]

You have got all of that from out of context snippets ? His interview with tom bradbury is on tonite , watch that

The media turning on meg is what happened

Not all from the snippets, no. Just going off his behaviour generally and the mountains of other stuff that he has said. The snippets from his book just seem to confirm it.

 

[Metal Biker]

The wider point is that this is the best selling national newspaper in the UK. It is also known for its racist and misogynistic content. Many people here have argued that the basis of the treatment of Megan by the UK media is one of race and misogyny. That this paper and others have so easily been able to create the narrative had been telling of some intrinsic issues in the UK.

Some people, and you may be one, have argued that this is not the case.

I read the Mail, among other publications, to form a more rounded view. If I only read what trots out my own views I may miss something important, or a point worthy of consideration. The use of the word tosspot is beneath you, I think.

So? Liverpool are one of the most supported clubs in the UK, doesn't mean EVERYONE has a favourable view of them.

For every anti-Meghan, Daily Mail viewpoint there will be a contrasting, supportive Meghan opinion in the Mirror and/or Guardian (as examples).

And yeah, that is what i'm arguing. Comments on a news publication website do not reflect anything other than the opnions of the individual that made them. The fact they are all collected in the same place is also only connected to that publication, which is no surprise.

 

[oldius]

So? Liverpool are one of the most supported clubs in the UK, doesn't mean EVERYONE has a favourable view of them.

For every anti-Meghan, Daily Mail viewpoint there will be a contrasting, supportive Meghan opinion in the Mirror and/or Guardian (as examples).

And yeah, that is what i'm arguing. Comments on a news publication website do not reflect anything other than the opnions of the individual that made them. The fact they are all collected in the same place is also only connected to that publication, which is no surprise.

We are talking about racism and sexism, not a football club.

The comments are also extensively moderated to toe the editorial line, so the pattern of comments does not only reflect the opinion of the individuals that made them: viewed as a collection, they skew the narrative in support of the story.

 

[nellyonthewing]

 

[Metal Biker]

We are talking about racism and sexism, not a football club.

The comments are also extensively moderated to toe the editorial line, so the pattern of comments does not only reflect the opinion of the individuals that made them: viewed as a collection, they skew the narrative in support of the story.

So, Liverpool FC then...

No they don't, they reflect the narrative of the publication that panders to its readers. And i'm not so sure that it is 'extensively moderated' as you claim.

In either case you're getting obsessively worried over nothing. (IMHO)

 

[oldius]

So, Liverpool FC then...

No they don't, they reflect the narrative of the publication that panders to its readers. And i'm not so sure that it is 'extensively moderated' as you claim.

In either case you're getting obsessively worried over nothing. (IMHO)

Currently, every royal article is moderated and has been for a number of weeks. Most political articles have become moderated too.