George Floyd Protests

It's good that it was able to be restored, but this is not Manchester's most shining moment:

(It is also, unfortunately, not remotely surprising.)

I'm not really sure that posting lots of tweets on here, particularly from people who have selective views, advances the "discussion" very much, which is supposed to be the point of a discussion board.

If I want to read lots of tweets from people with entrenched views, I can go to Twitter for that. I'd rather engage with individuals here. What are your views? Does your retweeting of Goodwin imply approval, disagreement, or just an opportunity to encourage people to argue?

OK. I haven't made up my mind on every aspect of this story, or any other either. But I try to read sources that express arguments in more than 280 characters.

Although my politics are very different from Ash's I do like listening to her as she explains her views clearly and will back up her line of thought. Plus she is a great role model for young women and does her own thing regardless of what conventions she may be expected to follow.

I actually tweeted words to this effect to her and got a thank you reply saying it was good I was considering her standpoints.

Is that the same poll that the Mirror ran a headline about saying that 38% thought Harry a liability (I.e. the majority do not) while ignoring the staggering 80% who think Andrew is a liability?

Lies, damn lies, and statistics!

Harry and Andrew, both the second sons, both playboy princes, both made questionable wife choices?

Andrew and Fergie do remain friends though. Andrew is a totally busted flush. That interview was the final nail. If he'd kept his mouth shut carried on with his duties. Done the rumored preferred piece for his 60th birthday and with Harry departing he could have been seen as a solid member of the family. The Maxwell lady stuff would still have hit but not the force it has done.


Harry was seen as very popular and when he married Meghan they looked deeply in love. I don't think he would have gone to America/Canada unless he'd have wanted to. He doesn't seem to be a submissive husband. I've no concern if Meghan was white/black/Chinese or had been in a spice Girls Tribute act personally. She was as successful personally, probably more so than Kate and if she did throw her weight around a bit I'm sure Senior Royals would have bought her back into line.

If Harry had remained in the UK and been at the forefront of the Royal efforts to support morale and help during the Covid Crisis, his popularity would have gone through the roof. Meaghan didn't have to join in, she was with her young son at home. But both could have done the zoom calls that Kate, Wills even HM herself have done and Harry as the fittest youngest Royal could have done a few bits out and about locally.

Harry and Meghan's Riyal Role would have been one of support not leading like William will do.
 

Rumour has it that Harry and Meghan’s popularity was part of the problem - there was danger of them outshining Kate and William.

Hence the mutterings about her being ‘uppity’ and blatant briefing against them to the press, and all the leaks.

Got to remember with the Royal Family stuff that it’s not just the individuals themselves involved - it’s the whole court system. Courtiers jockey for position for themselves as much as for the Royals
they serve.

It’s an utterly ridiculous system and totally outmoded
- you’d think they’d realise that a rising tide lifts all ships and actively help each other against a tabloid market that uses them as gossip fodder, instead of stoking it by leaking and briefing against each other.

Goodwin is a well off middle aged guy professing to be in tune with the working class. Give me a break, he’s just a user, piggy backing on grievance to fluff up his own importance, whilst simultaneously mischaracterising and misrepresenting the people he professes to ‘know’.

I’d put money on his real views being a lot darker than he lets on.

The British press are racist - no-one who has spent any time studying them can have any doubt about it. Of course, racism is deeply embedded in our society and most others, so this is not surprising.

I am not sure that they did think that pointing out the racism would make the press unpopular. The press are already unpopular - circulation figures have been falling for years, advertising spend has nosedived, it’s an industry in crisis. I think they underestimated the extent to which the court institution are beholden to the tabloid press, given that they are so unpopular.

This is why the press are so vehemently anti The Sussexes. The threat is existential - if they’d persuaded the rest of The Firm that they don’t actually need to cooperate with the tabloids because hardly anyone reads them, that they should stop trying to curry favour with them because actually they can reach people directly via social media, and that they don’t need to put up with the outrageous and often illegal behaviour, then the tabloids would have lost considerable influence. The Palace still act as though the tabloids have the same circulation and influence as they did 20 years ago, and of course the owners and editors need them to believe that. The truth is more people read Facebook every day than a newspaper - and they trust what they read on Facebook more. Which is a huge problem in itself for the spread of misinformation, but that’s a different subject.

A quick look at newspaper front pages reveals why the press as it currently exists, as a mouthpiece for its wealthy and privileged owners, needs to be destroyed.

Firstly, ranting about holiday plans being affected by rises in cases across Europe when it was they who were reckless in agitating for for and glorifying foreign holidays during a global pandemic in the first place. Secondly, doubling down on their vendetta against the Sussexes with spin that would have done Malcolm Tucker proud.

Mass media in the hands of a few privileged individuals is a recipe for disaster and our society has been weakened and twisted as a result of it for far too long.

Bit socialist that mate

[/div][/quote]

The tabloids are effective at influencing the Court - and when the Court decides to take action the more established news services report it. But they are giving the tabloids that power.

They hand them their influence. If they stopped, there would of course be a lot of noisy howling and tantrums thrown initially, and it would all die down eventually and everyone would get on with their life.

I am old enough to remember a number of tabloid scoops about The Royals. I remember Prince Charles envying Camilla’s tampons. I remember Fergie getting her toes sucked. I remember the divorces, I remember the bitching about Diana - oh, there was so much bitching about Diana, there was always something to bitch about - I remember the bitching about the Queen after the posthumously-sainted Diana died. I remember the stuff about ‘Princess Pushy’, I remember the ‘fake Sheikh’ catching Fergie out, I remember the persistent rumours about Edward being gay and bitching about Sophie being a PR girl when he turned out not to be. I remember the topless photo of Sophie on Page 3, the the commercial conflict-of-interest accusations.

I remember the bitching about Kate’s family being middle-class and William being lazy because he wasn’t doing enough official engagements.

The bitching about ‘tax payers’ money’ is perpetual.

I remember the Freedom of Information Requests about the ‘black spider memos’ (that was the Grauniad, and at least had a public interest basis - although the results turned out to be totally underwhelming).

Most people don’t remember this stuff even if they read it at the time. People have amazingly short memories for anything that doesn’t directly affect their own life. It doesn’t noticeably affect the long-term popularity of The Royals or lead to an increase in Republicanism.

There’s a reason why they think the Andrew-Epstein stuff will blow over if he just hunkers down and stays out of public view - which suits him well enough, as he’s never been the most energetic of the Royals when it comes to work.

There’s literally a case in progress right now where the Mail on Sunday is arguing that they have the right to breach copyright and invade the privacy of the Royals because their position rests on their popularity with the public and that makes anything they do a public interest matter. I wonder how the judge will respond to that. I would argue that the last 30 years of tabloid history actually shows the opposite - it doesn’t matter how badly or scandalously individual members of the Royal Family have behaved, the institution isn’t going anywhere.