What exactly happened to Megan Markle?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh its all just a misunderstanding -

When the powers that be told Harry and Megs that they needed to "Work a little harder" on their 'Royal Deportment' -

They got the wrong end of the stick and decided to fuq off Stateside, before the immigration officials turned up...

Of course on first sighting the tabloid press lauded Meghan as a ' breath of fresh air ', after all the usual stuffy nonsense, and tightly buttoned up coats - (oh and 'that tricky business' with Andrew)

But then - outrageously !! She and him, started having 'opinions' - 'preferences' even, about their privacy - and worse still voicing them -!!

Well now, that won't do will it ??

I guess Harry naively believed that the press would try to behave decently towards his new wife, after the shameful way they treated his mother -

But then the tabloid press has a seemingly insatiable appetite for insinuating gossip, and soap opera, underpinned with no small amount of double standard sexism, and mild to moderate racism - so they couldn't help themselves getting 'stuck in' really could they ?? .

The whole 'royal family' shebang is ridiculous outdated nonsense anyhow - but to my mind, this current episode serves to illustrate how just pointless and harmful, both to individuals and to this supposedly 'modern' nation the whole 'monarchy' cavalcade really is.
I want to like this post but am not sure I fully agree with it. Royalty is outdated and overly privileged, but it is what it is, and everyone knows that. It is not known as "The Firm" for nothing. Anyone with an ounce of sense should know what they are letting themselves in for when they join it, but they are either too naive, or so arrogant that they think they can change it (perhaps Meghan can be excused as she, as an American, has clearly not done her research).

You have to take the whole package or none of it. I would put Meghan and Di as naive in that they probably had romantic ideals at the start but Di couldn't see or accept that she was just the well-bred virgin bride to provide an heir and spare for the future king, and Meghan just couldn't take the restrictions that are part of the job description. I don't fully agree with your point about voicing their opinions as I believe that, like many celebrities, their opinions were little more than platitudes or homilies that we used to get from contestants in Miss World.

As for the press/media everyone knows the damage they can do. I don't know if they will fare any better if they figuratively bare all for Oprah Winfrey, but I find it ironic that the one thing that is giving them so much money and exposure in the US is their link to the very establishment they are trying to escape from in the UK. I hope they make a success over there by their skills and abilities rather than their celebrity.

I don't particularly mind having a ceremonial Queen/King to wheel out now and again for state occasions but I do object to the huge amount of hangers-on, within which category I place Harry/Meghan, and feel that they have made the right choice both for them and the Royal family in the long run. Provided they stay together of course, as Royal & Hollywood marriages don't always have a long shelf life.
 

mudsticks

Obviously an Aubergine
I want to like this post but am not sure I fully agree with it. Royalty is outdated and overly privileged, but it is what it is, and everyone knows that. It is not known as "The Firm" for nothing. Anyone with an ounce of sense should know what they are letting themselves in for when they join it, but they are either too naive, or so arrogant that they think they can change it (perhaps Meghan can be excused as she, as an American, has clearly not done her research).

You have to take the whole package or none of it. I would put Meghan and Di as naive in that they probably had romantic ideals at the start but Di couldn't see or accept that she was just the well-bred virgin bride to provide an heir and spare for the future king, and Meghan just couldn't take the restrictions that are part of the job description. I don't fully agree with your point about voicing their opinions as I believe that, like many celebrities, their opinions were little more than platitudes or homilies that we used to get from contestants in Miss World.

As for the press/media everyone knows the damage they can do. I don't know if they will fare any better if they figuratively bare all for Oprah Winfrey, but I find it ironic that the one thing that is giving them so much money and exposure in the US is their link to the very establishment they are trying to escape from in the UK. I hope they make a success over there by their skills and abilities rather than their celebrity.

I don't particularly mind having a ceremonial Queen/King to wheel out now and again for state occasions but I do object to the huge amount of hangers-on, within which category I place Harry/Meghan, and feel that they have made the right choice both for them and the Royal family in the long run. Provided they stay together of course, as Royal & Hollywood marriages don't always have a long shelf life.
Maybe Harry convinced himself, and Megan that things could be different, this time round.

I agree, it is what it is, a whole heap of nonsense, albeit weirdly popular nonsense.

I can't see the monarchy dissappearing in the next couple of decades, anyway..

Despite my petitioning for a ceremonial goat to replace the whole lot..

Hay is 'spensive.. But not that spendy :rolleyes:

Maybe shrinking, and fading into the background a bit once Liz has signed out.

Go on Rusty - you can like my post if you like.

I'm sure no one will read anything untoward of it :angel:

Although I hear 'court records' of such matters are kept in some quarters :wacko:
 

Dwn

Well-Known Member
The royals grow up in what appears to be an atmosphere of emotional frigidity, astonishing levels of deference from others, and freedom from material wants. I would imagine that it’s pretty hard for them to be balanced individuals, given the upbringing.

And the hierarchy that ruled their lives is changing; Charles will be King; William will be King; George will be King. Harry is just another in a long line of unused ‘spares’. Except that celebrity has altered the old certainty - Harry appears to believe that his and Meghan's popularity should give him a bigger role than tradition would dictate. You can see why the Queen and her advisers would be opposed to this. If strict hierarchy counts for less, then why would we even need an institution like the Monarchy (in my view, we don’t)?

Add in the voracious British tabloid press; a man who appears to have a grudge against the media on behalf of his late mother; and a wife brought up in a Republic. A recipe for trouble.
 

Tribansman

Senior Member
OK, "hits" on their website(s)?

I just find the assumption that the "gutter press" have such a significant influence, interesting. Personally, I have not bought or read a Newspaper, in the past 5-10 years (unless you count Private Eye as a Newspaper), and, I don't think I am unique, but, surprise, surprise, I still have views/opinions.
According to Ofcom, 30+ million combined weekly readership (taking into account print and digital) of the main tabloids.

Whilst some people read multiple papers and also both print and digital so will be less than 30m unique readers, even half this figure gives significant reach - especially if you consider that TV news and radio will also be covering the stories they print.

Agree that their influence is overstated, but I think anyone is entitled to have a problem with sh1tbag coverage and reporting that reaches millions of people.
 

mudsticks

Obviously an Aubergine
I can't be bought that easily.

Too many likes will devalue the currency even further. :whistle:
Quite right too, dear boy

Fillial standards must be upheld :okay:

If we start quantatively easing, with our affections like that, we'll have a republic by a week on Wednesday :stop:
 

Edwardoka

Prolix Maximus
The Daily Mail's website is ridiculously popular though.
Yes, their search engine-fu is very strong. Search any "human interest story"-type subject and the chances are high that the top entry is their bastard website, except where Royals are concerned, as the Express have cornered that sordid little market.

This is why such websites post a huge amount of filler articles with titles like Who is the Duke of so-and-so, when did he die, who is he married to, who is he related to, what is his net worth?

They're targeting both the people who don't go out of their way to visit news websites and get all their news from google searches, and boosting the search rankings for when new events occur by re-using web addresses that already existed.

Fun fact: if you're a celebrity, the big websites already have an article ready to go about your death. Isn't that nice of them?
 

marinyork

Resting in suspended Animation
Location
Logopolis
Yes, their search engine-fu is very strong. Search any "human interest story"-type subject and the chances are high that the top entry is their bastard website, except where Royals are concerned, as the Express have cornered that sordid little market.
Spot on. It's just crazy for celeb stuff. For any minor Z-list celebrity there'll be several stories on there. For big ones, it's just and endless stream.
 

BoldonLad

Veteran
Location
South Tyneside
Spot on. It's just crazy for celeb stuff. For any minor Z-list celebrity there'll be several stories on there. For big ones, it's just and endless stream.
Not having been there, I will take your word for it.

Doesn’t sound like it would hold any interest for me.
 

Pale Rider

Legendary Member
Fun fact: if you're a celebrity, the big websites already have an article ready to go about your death. Isn't that nice of them?
The likes of The Times has always had some obits prepared in advance.

They've even published at least one before the person died.
 
Yes, their search engine-fu is very strong. Search any "human interest story"-type subject and the chances are high that the top entry is their bastard website, except where Royals are concerned, as the Express have cornered that sordid little market.

This is why such websites post a huge amount of filler articles with titles like Who is the Duke of so-and-so, when did he die, who is he married to, who is he related to, what is his net worth?

They're targeting both the people who don't go out of their way to visit news websites and get all their news from google searches, and boosting the search rankings for when new events occur by re-using web addresses that already existed.

Fun fact: if you're a celebrity, the big websites already have an article ready to go about your death. Isn't that nice of them?
The problem is they know what the public clicks on most. Trash sells. It's our fault.
 

BoldonLad

Veteran
Location
South Tyneside
......

Fun fact: if you're a celebrity, the big websites already have an article ready to go about your death. Isn't that nice of them?
"Celebrities" and "media" are a symbiotic relationship, good to see that one side at least has good forward planning. After all, one certainty is death, when is a little more tricky. ;)
 
Last edited:

Pale Rider

Legendary Member
The problem is they know what the public clicks on most. Trash sells. It's our fault.
The public also know much of what's in Mailonline is not trash.

There was a recent example on here.

Someone started a thread about the restoration of a Lancaster bomber, linking to a Mail article.

Cue the usual childish squawking 'I'm not clicking on that', so a BBC link was posted.

The BBC had eight pictures and a couple of hundred words.

The Mail had a couple of thousand words, graphics, info panels, and 34 pictures.

Nowt wrong with the BBC article, but on any view the Mail one was far more comprehensive.
 

MrGrumpy

Huge Member
Location
Fly Fifer
I'm not sure it's all down to Megan. He's bound to have some negative feelings after seeing what his mother had to endure. Understandable that he doesn't want his wife and life to face the same scrutiny. I think he's quite right to get out if that's what he feels he needs to do to guarantee success in life but I would think even more of him and her if they could do it quietly and preferably without the chat show nonsense.
This ! The gutter press seemed to turn on her quick style . His mother ended up the same. Some times I think it’s curse being part of the Firm ! Personally I wish them all the happiness in the world . Please do it quietly though and as you say don’t want to hear or read about the latest chat show interview .
 
The public also know much of what's in Mailonline is not trash.

There was a recent example on here.

Someone started a thread about the restoration of a Lancaster bomber, linking to a Mail article.

Cue the usual childish squawking 'I'm not clicking on that', so a BBC link was posted.

The BBC had eight pictures and a couple of hundred words.

The Mail had a couple of thousand words, graphics, info panels, and 34 pictures.

Nowt wrong with the BBC article, but on any view the Mail one was far more comprehensive.
Obviously not everything on the Mail is trash, and I never said it was, but they know what sells so they have their fair share of it.

Like some other newspapers, but the Mail's trash is trash for what they like to pretend are their more discerning and aspirational readers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom