Before Harry + Meghan’s Oprah interview, it’s worth noting how the narrative re: why they left royal life has been twisted by the (UK) media to “They want privacy.”
But that isn’t their issue w/ the press. It’s double standards + false/biased reporting
Last year I compared UK media coverage of Meghan Markle + Prince Harry to that of Kate Middleton + Prince William.
Limited scope: only stories from the same news org written AFTER weddings + only outlets in the royal rota.
And there’s more. If you look at the coverage of Meghan from after she married Harry (aka once she was royal) until they “stepped back,” you’ll see thousands of negative, sensationalist stories, which are often thinly sourced and of somewhat dubious news value.
Yes, all the royals get clickbait coverage, sometimes it’s unfavorable, but in the almost 2 years Meghan was a working royal, DATA shows that the overwhelming number of the stories about her were negative.
But the issue isn’t negativity. Harry and Meghan have explicitly said they won’t complain about criticism that’s fair, i.e:
1.) Is based in fact
2.) Is written w/o bias or malice
3.) Judges them by the same standards as their peers — the other members of the royal family
The Sussexes have said for years that THEY BELIEVE there is a "divisive" anti-Meghan agenda in the UK tabloid media and the press knowingly publishes lies and violates the journalistic code of ethics in order to support that narrative:
On Friday, YouTubers @joshua_pieters and @archiemanners got 4 prominent “royal experts” who regularly appear on TV and in print to react to Harry and Meghan’s @Oprah interview — even though NOBODY had seen it.
For the record, since I'm seeing some confusion on Twitter and I've received a few reader emails:
Media practices in the UK are different than in the US.
It's standard practice in the UK for reporters/commentators to be paid for appearances on TV/radio/documentaries.
(A spokesperson for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex confirmed to me that they are not being compensated and will be receiving no $/£ in exchange for their interview with @Oprah@CBS)
Something interesting:
2/15: @CBS announces 90min Harry + Meghan + @Oprah special
3/1: CBS says now 2hrs
3/2: @thetimes pubs Meghan bullying story w/ H&M response
I'm told interview extension= to allow more conversation to be shown "in full context" 👀
The video's 4th "royal expert" — who gave an opinion on Meghan supposedly telling Oprah about donkey sanctuaries and being an anti-vaxxer — is Dickie Arbiter, @RoyalDickie, a palace press secretary from 1988-2000
According to loud UK media people, Harry + Meghan left royal life for "privacy."
Nope. The Sussexes say they only want the same privacy rights as anyone else and those guaranteed under the law, i.e. don't fly drones over our house to photograph our kid.
"No special treatment."
In a legal document — a criminal complaint about drones invading their literal privacy —
HARRY + MEGHAN SAID they moved to North America to "escape the incessant UK tabloid fabrications."
Not for privacy. To escape what they say are press lies.
Lol, because of this tweet, BuzzFeed disabled all of the settings that would have allowed us to do this. (As in, they literally changed settings overnight.)
Lovely to know how much you mean to a place after 10 years.
HELP REQUEST: Despite pleas from employees who have been here for most of their careers, BuzzFeed has decided not to adjust its Google Workspace settings to allow us to download our Google Drives or email inboxes. If anybody knows a workaround to do this, we’d all appreciate it.
In particular, not being able to access our old inboxes will make it incredibly difficult to maintain relationships with sources, experts, and other valuable contacts. You know, people you need to talk to when you’re a reporter.
(We still have access to our inboxes and our Drives because unions are great, ILU @bfnewsunion)
It looks like YouTube has once again deranked anti-Meghan Markle channels from search results in order to keep the often hateful and conspiracy theory-laden videos from unsuspecting viewers.
A search for her name yields only results from legitimate media outlets:
You can tell that some sort of filter has been applied to the YouTube results for queries about Meghan because a search for "Kate Middleton" yields videos from unverified channels / fan-made channels.
Specifically, I confirmed this with a Sussex spokesperson when I asked for comment on WHY Harry didn't go to his family for help with Meghan when she was suicidal. Their PR team confirmed she sought inpatient treatment.
Oh, and also, it took about 2 minutes of Googling to find a private mental health hospital in London that allows patients to refer themselves for inpatient care without needing anything from a medical/psychiatric practitioner.