Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 180 comments are related to the topic:
Harry and Megan
Harry and Megan
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 180
|
By:
Now Known by the police s
Harry and Meghan Like Bob and CAROL!!!    |
|
By:
Brilliant from the Queen. She's basically told them to 'fork orf'.
|
|
By:
She has done a great job injera.
Next time their maybe a tunnel. |
|
By:
Good riddance.
Their 'brand' has bombed (didn't know they had one) and their mugs, plates and towels now up to 70% off. Wonder if DrC bought any? |
|
By:
The new coin
[ This image is no longer available. ] |
|
By:
Hopefully betfair will put up a market on what year harry returns to the uk, wont need a big spread on the years imo.
|
|
By:
Charlie still patrolling them?
What’s a commercial rent on Frogmore? £0.5m a year? Mind you, if they have already got £10m - so who needs to work anyway? |
|
By:
Harry is a spineless lapdog, a marriage/partnership is a two way thing and requires compromises on both sides. That doesn't seem to be the case with Meghan. She says jump and he says how high? Quite frankly the pair of them are are a complete and utter embarrassment and good riddance.
|
|
By:
patrolling = payrolling.
|
|
By:
megan yak
|
|
By:
when harry gets his eyesight better i think he will want a divorce
|
|
By:
Thought this was quite interesting on the press's treatment and what may be behind it.
To understand the “real” story of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, it helps to think in three dimensions. On one level, we have a story about a couple who, for perfectly understandable reasons, want a different kind of life: a new start, a fresh role, less scrutiny, more peace of mind. All eminently reasonable and not very remarkable. But there is, of course, the second level: they’re inescapably royal. This is hardly the abdication: the constitutional ramifications of the sixth in line bailing out to a new life in Canada are not earth-shattering. But, whether you are a pope or a prince, there are undoubtedly complications in trying to assert a private identity that is decoupled from your apparent destiny or birthright. The third level is the storytellers. Almost everything we think we know about this couple is filtered through journalists. It is unusually difficult to judge the reliability of most royal reporting because it is a world almost devoid of open or named sources. So, in order to believe what we’re being told, we have to take it on trust that there are currently legions of “aides”, “palace insiders”, “friends” and “senior courtiers” constantly WhatsApping their favourite reporters with the latest gossip. It has been known to happen. Maybe they are, maybe they aren’t. We just don’t know. But trust in this third dimension is further compromised by the fact that none of the major players filtering this story for our consumption is exactly a disinterested bystander. All three of the major newspaper groups most obsessed with Harry and Meghan are themselves being sued by the couple for assorted breaches of privacy and copyright. There is, to any reasonable eyes, a glaring conflict of interest that, for the most part, goes undeclared. For some years now – largely unreported – two chancery court judges have been dealing with literally hundreds of cases of phone hacking against MGN Ltd and News Group, the owners, respectively, of the Daily Mirror and the Sun (as well as the defunct News of the World). The two publishers are, between them, forking out eye-watering sums to avoid any cases going to trial in open court. Because the newspaper industry lobbied so forcefully to scrap the second part of the Leveson inquiry, which had been due to shine a light on such matters, we can only surmise what is going on. But there are clues. Mirror Group (now Reach) had by July 2018 set aside more than £70m to settle phone-hacking claims without risking any of them getting to court. The BBC reported last year that the Murdoch titles had paid out an astonishing £400m in damages and calculated that the total bill for the two companies could eventually reach £1bn. Last October, Prince Harry added his own name to the list of people claiming they had been hacked by both the Sun and the Mirror. To understand why this is, to put it mildly, a bombshell, you would have needed to be following the patient work of Mr Justice Mann (and before him, Mr Justice Vos) in the anonymous Rolls Building, home to the chancery court, just off London’s Strand. Publicly available court documents detail the alleged involvement of Rupert Murdoch’s son James and the reinstated CEO of News UK, Rebekah Brooks, in suppressing or concealing the true extent of wrongdoing within the Murdoch titles. The Sun’s official position is to “not admit” any unlawful activity, while simultaneously shelling out enormous sums so that this position can never be tested. Over at the Mirror Group, there is a similar shyness about allowing daylight into the activities of past executives. Former Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan, one of the most vehement critics of the royal couple, does not find time or space to let his readers or viewers know that his name crops up very many times in the generic phone-hacking litigation particulars of claims in front of Mann. Morgan may be entirely innocent, but if you spend your time pouring venom over a claimant in a case that might touch on your own conduct, you’d think there was at least an interest to declare – every single time you do it. And then there is the further legal action by Meghan against Associated Newspapers claiming assorted breaches of copyright, privacy and data protection. The Mail on Sunday claims “huge and legitimate public interest” in publishing extracts from a private letter from Meghan to her father. We shall see, but meanwhile there’s no harm in portraying her as a ruthless hypocrite and gold-digger. If Morgan’s on hand with the vitriol, everyone’s happy. So, when reading about Harry and Meghan, it really does pay to keep your wits about you. There is a surface level to the story – not all of it untrue – and there are many anonymous sources of varying degrees of reliability to give colour and context. And, in the background, there are quite a lot of worried newspaper executives and former editors, who have absolutely zero interest in treating the couple kindly or even-handedly. The metrics are irresistible: this couple sell newspapers and attract eyeballs by the billion. There is little hope that editors are going to dial down their coverage. But there is kindness; and there is fairness; and there is honesty. A little bit of each of those would help the rest of us understand better and trust more. |
|
By:
slippy -you nailed it the guys a wimp
|
|
By:
someone who has courted media attention from day one now trying to sue people for giving her that
court cases get even more attention and an attempt to garner sympathy |
|
By:
on the other hand you have that nice katy price or is it katy princess such a nice girl in comparison -well bred and knowing her place and duty unlike the america upstart
she was visiting some friends at a clinic or something for the disadvantaged(poor) and expressing common feeling and circumstances about how lonely she felt talk about faux empathy - rich privileged visiting the deprived ho ho ho what a bunch they are there couldn't be a bigger gap between her and those women |
|
By:
Get the sick bucket ready for this one ..........
Ellen DeGeneres appears to confirm she WILL hold first sit-down interview with Meghan Markle since she and Prince Harry quit the Royal family Asked if she was excited to interview Meghan, Ellen replied: 'Sure, I'm excited' It seems to confirm rumours that Meghan will have a tell-all interview with Ellen Meghan Markle told her close friends she is planning on giving Ellen DeGeneres her first interview, insiders exclusively told DailyMail.com They said: '[Meghan] said Ellen understands her pain and suffering. That she epitomizes authenticity. [Meghan] feels like they are kindred spirits' |
|
By:
This farce is turning into Jeremy Kyle. People going on tv to have a pop at their own family.
Embarrassing but predictable scenes. The more dirt Meghan dishes the more noughts on the cheque. |
|
By:
this meghan bint really is a cunning sort
|
|
By:
Amazing how many people on here know Meghan and her motives so well. So much hatred directed in her direction without a shadow of evidence (and don't start quoting newspapers, they're the worst thing about this country)
|
|
By:
Her motives and actions are hardly opaque...
|
|
By:
Saw a programme about Thomas Markle on C5.
Had got the impression from the media that he was a bit of an idiot, but he came across a lot better than that. Still some discrepancies between his version of events and hers and a few unasked questions, but he took loads of pictures and videos when he looked after her which seemed as if they genuinely got on well. |