I haven't commented on the #HarryandMeghanOprah interview yet not because I don't have views - I have so, so many - but, call me old-fashioned, I wanted to watch it in full before passing comment. Last night I finally got the time to do it. 1/
I should also say that all accusations of bullying should be taken seriously and investigated properly. Just as all accusations of racism should be taken seriously and investigated properly 2/
I find the split by age of whether you support Harry and Meghan or not rather odd. I am 47, which means I am old enough to remember how Diana was treated 3/
So maybe this, and the fact that I have supported Meghan and Harry in the past, makes me lack objectivity. I accept that. But I wanted to watch the whole two hour interview before tweeting about it. 4/
These are the things that stood out for me from the interview and the fallout: 1. The idea that Meghan, in particular, shouldn’t have given this lengthy interview is bizarre. For more than three years she has had a narrative written for her beyond her control. 5/
That is obvious in the coverage of the last 3+ years and in what we know about Diana and the institution of the Royal Family. She has not been able to give her side of the story, on the record, despite being one of the most written about people on the planet. 6/
That in itself must have been painful, and you could see the palpable relief on her face after being finally able to speak for herself. 7/
2. The two hardest things to listen to, the racist comments about her unborn child and her struggles with her mental health, took extraordinary bravery from Meghan. 8/
To speak about two issues so painful and deep will not have been done lightly - so to have them questioned by others, particularly those who have never experienced either mental health issues or racism, can only add to that hurt. 9/
The lack of empathy for a woman so prominently in the public eye, and carrying a child who will be the newest member of the royal family, is appalling. 10/
3. Harry and Meghan both spoke about feeling a lack of protection and support from the institution of the royal family. Again, to question this is bizarre given what we know about how Diana was treated. 11/
As Harry said, they had their security cancelled because their roles had changed - but the risk had not changed. The royal family surely owe the couple of duty of care. 12/
4. The comparative coverage of Kate versus Meghan is well-documented. The receipts are there. To keep denying this and treading over this old ground is amazing. 13/
5. I think the 61-word response from Buckingham Palace, after 2 days & so many words spoken by Harry and Meghan, was a mistake. It's right to acknowledge the racism, but there was no mention of mental health from an institution which has in recent years championed the issue 14/
To use the phrase “recollections may vary” again casts doubt on Meghan’s version of events and undermines her. Again, this is reminiscent of how Diana was treated. 15/
6. It is clear that a lot of the narrative that was written for this couple is by unnamed “courtiers” and not the Queen herself, of whom Meghan and Harry speak warmly. 16/
Anonymous sources are essential in journalism but we use them to protect people who are telling us things in the public interest and whose jobs would be in danger or would risk consequences if they were identified. 17/
Anonymous “courtiers” who brief against members of the royal family are simply protecting an institution that needs more accountability. 18/
This doesn’t mean a White House-style daily press briefing from the palace, but an on the record spokesman who can give clarity rather than the regular “declined to comment”. 19/
Finally (!) 7. This is not a trivial issue, of some have described it. It goes to the heart of an institution which, after what happened with Diana before and after her death, we were led to believe had modernised 20/
and taken the mental health, independence and value of all of its members seriously. Meghan's marriage to Harry was supposed to be the beacon of that modernity. But even before she walked down the aisle, Meghan says she was losing support. 21/
I think the Queen is an extraordinary person with a lifetime of public service that we should respect. I am not a republican. 22/
But this is a moment for the royal family - both as an institution and as a collection of human beings living in the 21st century - needs to look at itself and ask whether it has adapted to that 21st century. 23/
End of the longest thread I've ever written. Thanks for bearing with me.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I know there are plenty of people in worse situations but I have to ask fellow homeschooling parents something to see if what I’m feeling is common: today I’ve felt pretty low, when I was expecting to feel great after having physical and mental space to focus on work 1/
Not stressed, in fact the opposite. Kind of empty and purposeless. I imagine it’s due to two months of adrenaline of the double shift plus lunches cleaning everything else and it’s like all the air has gone from a balloon. Maybe also a disappointment that my expectation of 2/
feeling <great> didn’t materialise because, well we’re still in a pandemic. So I expect this will pass soon. But wanted to be honest about this and ask if anyone felt the same, and to say, I get it. 3/3
The current terrible situation in hospitals & fatalities is from cases *before* this line started going nearly vertical. So the situation in NHS in 2-3 weeks is going to be horrific. We should have locked down on 18 December, when PM was told the new variant was faster spreading
To those asking what would make the difference between tier 4 London with these cases and full lockdown: 1. Clear public health messaging to stay at home and only do necessary trips (suburban London high streets are currently packed, people gathering in groups) and 2. A lot of
these numbers are from people in London who clearly ignored the order not to mix over Xmas.
PM tells millions of parents unsure of whether to send their kids to school tomorrow "yes absolutey they should in the areas where schools are open" #Marr
Asked whether more schools should close: "we keep everything under review"
PM on #Marr: "There is no doubt in my mind that schools are safe and eduction is a priority"
Have seen different analyses including latest Imperial paper saying there's no evidence the new variant spreads disproportionately faster among children. The data that suggests higher rates among those age groups is because schools were open, not because they transmit more 1/
More evidence/analysis needed, but the point is that, while schools are kept open, even children spreading the new variant on a neutral basis is bad enough. Four days of cases 50k plus should tell you/the government that the best way to control the new variant is to shut down 2/
as many parts of society as possible, until a vaccine can be up and running. The new variant is in control. This is not about economy versus public health, it is no longer a choice. Imperial study says new variant has an extra R advantage (my term) of 0.4-0.7, which means this 3/
<not against lockdown> but I think we need a more honest debate about what is and isn’t working in terms of behavioural/non-pharmaceutical interventions 1/
Cases is London started rising quickly *during the month-long lockdown*. Why? Was it secondary schools? Were people just ignoring the measures and household mixing? Was London always due a sharp rise because northern England had already had its rise and natural fall? 2/
So what are the answers? I’m not an expert, but could it be 1. making people more aware/increasing public health messaging of the risks they’re taking by household mixing; 2. recognising that it’s mass testing, not lockdowns, that really get on top of the virus like in Liverpool;