It's a quote usually misattributed to Einstein, and it appears on thousands of inspirational posters, tea towels and coffee mugs: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Whoever originally said it, the quote is apt when it comes to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's participation in a TV documentary about their recent trip to Southern Africa.
They didn't like us despite all of the flattering magazine articles about us.
They didn't like us after we paid for glossy newspaper and online articles praising us to the skies.
They didn't like us when we seeded commenters on message boards to say that anyone who fails to support us is an ugly racist.
Maybe they'll like us if we release a TV documentary about what wonderful people we are?
Journalist Tom Bradby, the man behind the show, says it will "explain a lot."
Whoever originally said it, the quote is apt when it comes to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's participation in a TV documentary about their recent trip to Southern Africa.
They didn't like us despite all of the flattering magazine articles about us.
They didn't like us after we paid for glossy newspaper and online articles praising us to the skies.
They didn't like us when we seeded commenters on message boards to say that anyone who fails to support us is an ugly racist.
Maybe they'll like us if we release a TV documentary about what wonderful people we are?
What do you expect?
What do you expect from the documentary?Journalist Tom Bradby, the man behind the show, says it will "explain a lot."
Comments
Does that mean the truth? because it appears we are getting everything but the truth when it comes to the Sussex's and Archie
I expect more of the contrived Me, Me, Me fakeness, exaggerated hand waving, more tossed word salad and the 'make no eye contact with crazy MM & the 'get me out of here' bored look on people faces
I expect to see:
more rocking, hugging and clapping from Octomum's doppelgänger
It’s not the first time a documentary has been made about royal tours, I’ve seen many over the years.
Not sure how to decipher Tom’s words of ‘it will explain a lot’., I’m open minded at the moment, I know he’s not the usual sycophantic type, but we’ll see.
On another note, tomorrow night on Channel 5, we have a documentary about the scandal surrounding Prince Andrew, that might be interesting.
It would also explain a lot of the choices Mm has made while in this tour - hiring student photographers before the tour began, the rewears which were basically meh. Much cheaper and high street (aka relatable clothes), the shirt dresses, solid block colours ( because prints and fancy designs don't come off as flattering on screen), all the sound bites and speeches, the over exaggerated laughter and expressions, giving an unprecedented number of interviews to the press present, bringing out Archie, the many private engagements that would make her seem very involved and busy while Harry's working in another country, bringing the range rovers over from UK (makes them seem more important than they are).... I could go on, but you get the gist. It also explains the unnecessary drama of releasing the statement in the second last day instead of waiting to get home and consult their family.
Ellen makes people watching during the daytime feel - hey, you're not stuck at home folding the laundry! You're at a party! We're dancing. Here comes Will Smith!
Oprah used to make people watching during the daytime feel - hey, you're not out of the loop. Here are some things to be concerned about. I know you're a person who is concerned about our shared future.
Even Donald Trump makes people feel - hey, you can give the finger to all those people telling you that you're stupid or not good enough.
How is Meg supposed to make people feel? Hey, I'm better than you. Hey, I'm richer than you. Hey, envy me, because I'm famous and you're not.
That's not a sellable feeling. People don't like that.
This documentary is being broadcast in the UK; it's apparently directed at a UK audience. If Meg really wanted to turn that around for herself, she'd spend a year going around the UK learning about British culture and film that. Be humble, admit what you don't know, admire what's great about Britain and the British people.
That's a sellable feeling.
BUT...and this is a big BUT, its the Sussexes! And they never do anything unless it serves their agenda somehow. So I'm pretty certain they had a lot of input into how this documentary would potray them. This is after all, an out and out PR move, so they would kill this opportunity to the last drop.
Also, I was wondering why Mm suddenly cleaned up and upped the fashion antics once Harky left. It's because she was filming a documentary which she was basically the star of.
I think Meg is trying to sell herself as an "international humanitarian" again. Perhaps the documentary will be picked up by Netflix for distribution outside the UK.
I had coffee with an American business acquaintance yesterday, a young guy from the Bay Area. We were talking about cultural differences and the mistakes people make unintentionally when interacting with other cultures, and I mentioned Meg's insistance that all the African ladies sit on the floor - they weren't too pleased about that.
"Oh, but Meghan Markle is such a lady," he said. "I'm sure she sat on the floor in a very ladylike way."
So, some people are still buying her crap.
FWIW, he was a SJW type of guy, likely to be getting his Royal perspectives from The Guardian.
Oh I don’t doubt that the Sussex’s were very clear about how ‘they’d’ like to be ‘portrayed’, it’s unclear just how much clout they’d have in that. If it’s on ITV and I strongly suspect it is (because Tom only appears on that channel), then I wonder whether the Sussex’s could be heading for a bit of a royal stitch up. It wouldn’t be the first time that royal members haven’t been shown in a less than favourable light.
Everything mention in your comment is the very reason she is so disliked and why this documentary will tank and do nothing to salvage their reputation. Tom Bradby is attempting an Andrew Mortan or better still, Martin Bashir, and has basically played into their hands by yet again allowing them to play the Diana card. They would market this as something similar to Diana's panorama interview which finally told the real story poor suffering, saint Diana. Hence the quote that it would explain a lot.
Is it though? Have other memebers of the royal family participated in 'behind the scenes' documentaries about their royal tours? I don't remember any, but I could be wrong.
Also, note that it's on ITV, not the much more prestigious, taxpayer funded BBC. Prince Andrew was reportedly quite unhappy when BBC turned down coverage of Eugenie's wedding last year, so he had to slum it at ITV. Sounds like more self-promotional American-style nonsense from Preach and Leach. I do not predict it will be a ratings hit.
A documentary *about* a royal tour? Maybe.
But a behind hte scenes 'documentary' with the 'royals' themseles actively participating? I don't recall anny. We are looking at the full Kardashianisation of the royal family. Keeping up with the Saxe Coburgs.
"I think that what Meg (and her PR team) don't realize is that a celebrity is not about himself or herself - the celebrity is about how he or she makes the audience feel.
Ellen makes people watching during the daytime feel - hey, you're not stuck at home folding the laundry! You're at a party! We're dancing. Here comes Will Smith!
Oprah used to make people watching during the daytime feel - hey, you're not out of the loop. Here are some things to be concerned about. I know you're a person who is concerned about our shared future.
Even Donald Trump makes people feel - hey, you can give the finger to all those people telling you that you're stupid or not good enough.
How is Meg supposed to make people feel? Hey, I'm better than you. Hey, I'm richer than you. Hey, envy me, because I'm famous and you're not.
That's not a sellable feeling. People don't like that."
And then, combine that with what I have mentioned before, where MM has only been a 'deity' for over 2 years, and before that she was a nothing actress. It sticks in your craw a bit when she tells you what to do and how to act.
And finally, your coffee with the Bay area person reinforces what I have been saying that MM knows she can't win over everyone. All she has to do is issue the cry of racism and sexism to deflect criticism and she will bring a statistically significant section of society with her that will keep her in diamonds and pearls for the rest of her life.
https://www.instagram.com/p/B3KVSUjAXWe/?igshid=cdktqlxhsjot
All these have been one-on-one sit down interviews, royal tour documentaries are not like that and don’t take that form, normally. There’s usually the narrator (in this case Tom), with possibly him following the Sussex’s during the tour and maybe a few brief chats. If it’s far more than a brief chat, then there’s an agenda on the Sussex’s part.
As I said in my original comment.....I’m open minded, inasmuch saying how the Sussex’s could be portrayed; it could be a mixture of both positive and negative.
I'd be interested to see how the documentary handles the rather unfortunate 'white saviour' optics of this whole trip. The usual SJW types have been pretty quiet about it, but it's only going to take one Guardian opinion column or one blue check-marked Twitter post to set them off into a feeding frenzy. For someone who accused the British public of 'unconscious bias' towards MM on account of her heritage, Harry has been pretty tone-deaf about the optics of using the people of Africa like human props during this tour. It's decidedly uncomfortable to watch the beauty and culture of the continent reduced to little more than a backdrop for a wealthy western couple to LARP as humanitarians for their Instagram feed. So whatever soft-focus, buzzword riddled fluff piece ITV produce (and we all know that there's going to be little real journalism involved) I'm very interested to see how the right-on types in our intelligencia react to it. I think they've been given a pretty obvious pass on this behaviour during this trip, but personally I think it's a spectacularly bad idea to draw attention to the dynamics involved with a documentary. This is going to bite them in the arse.
I agree with what you say about the colonial-style optics.
A smarter way to handle it would have been, we are coming to Africa to learn from you.
Britain is becoming a multi-cultural society; South Africa has been multicultural for hundreds of years, how do you handle it? (Not always well, of course, but they could have still framed it as part of a learning process.)
Meg could have worn South African designers - the continent is bursting with creativity and the clothes are wonderful, as the photos from last weekend's wedding of two male TV presenters show.
A talented Royal could have managed to show off local designers' work without tipping into tourist CosPlay. (Meg's wrap dress on the first day, sourced from Malawi, was an interesting start with no follow-up.)
Harry could have approached his conservation work with much more humility - more, what can we do to help you?
Off topic and as an aside, PH will be in Nottingham on Oct 10th.
From Omid Scobie:
Prince Harry returns to St Ann’s, Nottingham on Oct 10 to mark #WorldMentalHealthDay. He will:
—Join an @epic_partners session with @NottinghamAcad students to discuss emotional wellbeing and share his own experiences.
—Visit @CrsStudioNotts, who teach youth music/video skills.
But I do think she's found what she's going to offer people as a celebrity, and I agree fully that her only goal is to become an Instagram-quotable humanitarian on the level of Mandela and Tutu. Before the Africa tour and certainly before her pregnancy, I would have actually wondered what she is offering to people. But I think with Sunshine Sachs, she's beginning to stitch together the pieces she was laying out willy nilly, like alienating the youth from the previous generation a la Greta Thunberg, saying the previous generation messed up, doesn't get you like how we understand you. Or look at her recent IG posts about creating a community. She's basically creating a humanitarian form of a fandom via encouraging her vision of hashtag activism. Look at her recent speech - it's jumping on fear, saying that the world is a scary place. But if you join me in my creation of community and celebrating forces for change, you'll make a better place for the world. She's a bit becoming like an bizarro-world, alternate-reality form of European extreme rightwing parties. They use similar arguments of stoking up fear in how terrible the world has become, sow seeds of discord by saying how the current generation of politicians and liberal elite have failed you, and then offer a solution in the form of accept my vision of the world and all will be well for your children (the next generation).
I've said it befor: If Meghan wants to endear herself to the British public, then it's really very simple. All she needs to do is go home to Froggie Cottage, cuddle her baby and basically not be seen OR heard for a while, except to do a few low key events in Scunthorpe or Dundee. That's how the British people like their royals. Shaking hands, cutting ribbons and showing a bit of decorum and dignity. Definitely not in their faces, promoting themselves and acting as though they are something special. That only draws attention to the fact that, other than their fancy titles, which are their for birth or marriage, not for any achievements, they're just ordinary folks with no particular talents.
But Meggsy simply cannot adapt to her new role and still thinks she's a Hollywood wannabe. Maybe she is.
You reference the "obvious rudeness to the female reporter."
Not according to Page Six of the New York Post, which has written the story as if the reporter were the rude one and Harry was nobly standing up for himself.
https://pagesix.com/2019/10/03/prince-harry-snaps-at-reporter-amid-tension-with-press/
The Sun (online) has the HM lawsuit as the top story, with the angle being that Meg herself released copyright when she gave her friends permission to leak to People.
Sigh. I am a Canadian, now American, reduced to looking up the Sun to get my Royal fix LOL!!!
When MM was pulled into the dancing she was uncomfortable, obviously off script. I read somewhere that the school children at one visit were recruited in uniform even though it was a school holiday. The MM out-of-context laugh walking beside that dignified but perplexed woman. It is all so surreal. A fabricated fairytale.
At this point, all they are doing is testing our gag reflex. Isn't oversaturation a big PR no-no?
But, I too discussed MM with two female "woke" colleagues. Their reaction was disturbing. Fists in the air ... she's bringing down the patriarchy, she's bringing down the Monarchy. OMG. Is this what she's aiming for? Champion of the new world order? (not That NWO, but you never know)
Honestly, from the first time I saw the clip, I was a bit hesitant to believe he was being rude. I thought there may be more to the interaction, but we were seeing just a tidbit of it. This crap happens all the time in the US; the media will creatively edit to show what they want you to see. This all occurred after he released his rant filled letter, so he was probably fairly defensive and her questions were not very clear as to what she was asking about. So, my thinking is, there was some misunderstanding and it was blown out of proportion.
I could very well be wrong, but my gut tells me that there's more to the story then what we saw.
Seems someone who does very brief "light shining" visits on tours and in the UK and who has been on the world stage since birth would be prepared to say something other than what Harry did even if the question was "unscheduled." Like "we hope the excellent coverage of this event you provide will shine a light...." or "however short the visit, we didn't want to miss the opportunity to highlight the importance..." Some boilerplate. But to me his response came across as rude as well as dismissive of the event especially with the "ask them" part. (Hey, they wanted me to come, I came, now beat it) But maybe that just me.
"Oh, but Meghan Markle is such a lady," he said. "I'm sure she sat on the floor in a very ladylike way."
As an African, the thing that made me wince was twofold. We only sit on the floor at funerals out of respect of the dead or if we are showing respect to our elders and betters. Sitting on the floor is not something we do unless one has a very specific reason to do so otherwise it's considered dirty because the floor will never be clean enough. And's especially woolly to sit on the floor when there are chairs about. Those ladies would have been in their best clothes to meet her and sitting on the floor would have been anathema to them, but in the end, out of respect for the honoured guest they sat on the floor. And i'm positive they will bitch about it for years to come that they were forced to sit on the floor for no good reason.
Secondly, Meghan sat cross-legged on the floor. This way of sitting is considered extremely vulgar. We kneel or we sit with our legs to the side, never cross-legged. My grandmother is still in shock that a princess sat in such a vulgar way on the floor. I couldn't convince her that it was a yogic style of sitting and quite popular in Asia and the west. And that's another thing those ladies will bitch about Meghan
This is a fawning article that he wrote about Smirkle in Nov 2017:
https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/tom-bradby-for-country-royals-and-prince-harry-meghan-markle-is-the-perfect-choice-a3703981.html
"As this summer drew to a close and Prince Harry contemplated an upcoming holiday to Africa with his girlfriend, Meghan Markle, his close friends had unanimous advice: get on with it, mate. It had been clear to his inner circle for many months that Meghan was “the one”"
" She’s amusing, approachable, down to earth and thoughtful. If she has a downside, it is hard to work out what it might be. "
"So far, even inside the system, she hasn’t put a foot wrong. Sometimes, what the royal family is alleged to think and feel about a variety of individuals and issues, including one another, is exaggerated for effect and occasionally untrue, but when Kensington Palace briefs that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have taken forcefully to the new arrival on their scene, that is, as I understand it, true."
" If you haven’t seen the programme [Suits}, you should. It’s good and Markle is excellent in it. "
It is clear that this will be no more than a long promotional advert, produced by a friend.
If he actually said that, then his opinion is tainted. I've seen ONE episode (long before Harry and MM became an item) and she was horrible! She totally made any scene she was in worse. He's an idiot, clearly.
Thanks, I learned something today! Thinking back, I realized I have never seen an African woman sitting cross-legged. I didn't know it was considered vulgar, but that makes sense.
This is the sort of cultural coaching Meg should have received before visiting Africa as a represenative of the Queen.
Or maybe she did, and simply ignored it.
A better documentary would be rebuilding the Bahamas. They need the help, however, the royal Sussexes may have to get their hands dirty. Meg can wear her ripped jeans, but best leave the high heels at home.
Or the documentation could be in position to film the beginning of the end....
I'm not interested to watch it
Me, too.
I agree with previous commenters here that the best antidote is for the media to blacklist the toxic MM-PH couple and for us to boycott this documentary.
What do I think?
I think that this will be added to her IMDB page (no I have not checked it yet). Will it be reviewed by Rotten Tomatoes?
There is a part of me which wonders if it will be in black and white or color?
Oh man, I just got the obvious we do black and white photos as we are. Subtle. As a side note, black and white photos can be jaw droppingly better than color sometimes. I was watching PBS on the JFK, RFK and maybe Johnson, and the black and white photos were really good. They would not have been as striking in color.
I think that doing a Netflix would allow for greater criticism. When I think of their Making a Murderer, they unleashed all kinds of comments that anything which did not conform to the agenda, was edited out.
Doing a get to know my new country would have been really cool. And, not just people in the states without much interest in this probably would have watched it too. Greater viewing audience. Now, people will watch. Not because they thing she's so wonderful but because they want to see what this makes her look like and is it likely to be accurate. The difference between Respect and Not Respect/just want to watch the train wreck.
To open the section you, you do <> and end the section, you do
For italics, you put an i. Bold is b.
example but it has extra spaces between all the parts because otherwise it would do the HTML thing and you couldn't see it.
< i > copied sentence < / i >
Does this help?
That sounds scarily like you may have nailed it. God, how awful if you are right!
https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/very-hard-harrys-longtime-friend-slams-critics-over-royal-backlash/news-story/7fb0e8afc13c3ecc55b2ad38b40c445b
- a person noted for courageous acts or nobility of character:
He became a local hero when he saved the drowning child.
- a person who, in the opinion of others, has special achievements, abilities, or personal qualities and is regarded as a role model or ideal:
My older sister is my hero. Entrepreneurs are our modern heroes.
But would a member of the press make a documentary in which the press are the villiains?
Also, the public is a lot more media-savvy than they were in the 1980s, when Diana was pursued by the press.
Anyone who has ever made a video with their phone and cut it together for a family birthday, class reunion, etc. knows how to manipulate an edit.
Does anyone know what grant was given to the Johannesburg university? Whose money was it ? A radio announcer mentioned on air, that Markle provided the funds. Hard to believe that.
It really is fascinating, in a bizarre sort of way, to observe such people. One can only hope there are't too many of them out there.
If he can make out that it's just the OTHER members of the media - not himself and not his channel of course - who are rotten, then yes he could.
It's kind of like how you papers like The Guardian rush to say how poor Meghan has been so terribly mistreated by the media (though they are often vague about specifics). By media they of course do not mean classy, intelligent, right-on outlets like The Guardian, but the tacky tabloids.
That sounds scarily like you may have nailed it. God, how awful if you are right!
I concur. Bravo!
Now, for Harry playing the Diana card on a regular basis, I believe that it is quickly becoming meaningless, much like the racism card is in the states. In about 11 months, he will be the same age as she was at her death. Is he still going to be hiding behind her death when he turns 40? When he turns 60? Diana was a very flawed person (I was not under her spell) yet she made two little boys feel loved and at the center of her world. She did cause real change to the good for the causes that she championed.
Prince Charles was absolutely excoriated by the press. His causes were derided. Camilla was ridiculed for her appearance, her character, the way she dressed. Every word dripped vitriol on them. They persevered regardless.
Prince Harry and MM, with the mild and, IMO, completely justified criticism that they have endured, seem whiny brats in comparison.
I'm guessing you are referring to Argentine polo hunk Nacho Figueras, who is probably a 'friend' of Harry's in the same way Serena is a 'friend' of Meghan's - they live on different continents and probably see each other at most a few times a year.
He also grovelled about Harry during privatejetgate this summer. Turned out he has business interests in the private jet company the Harkles supposedly used to fly to Ibiza. That's the thing with all these 'friendships' - scratch the surface and there's pretty much always some kind of PR or financial connection. Harry's real friends - the ones he hasn't ditched since Meghan came along - would never speak to the media.
user error
to close HTML is < / letter of what is to be done >
the example (with all the extra spaces) is correct
apologies
I think that would very much depend on how much support - if any - the Harkles are beleived to have from the rest of the royals. If the Harkles are on their own in this - as the evidence suggests - then there would be no reason to back down as they don't give 'access' to British reporters, other than their mouthpieces, in any case. If however they do have support from senior royals, despite appearances to the contrary, then Arbiter might be right.
He uses the Diana death card when he's in a hole, like use of private jets for his family's safety, or why he gets drunk and uses drugs, or how the press is to blame for Diana's death. Blaming the messenger is always a cowards way out, but hey, what can we expect from a vacuous prince and his pompous wife who won't listen to their advisers?
I cringe whenever I hear that Harry did or said this or that because, ya know, his mom died. That does not give him a free pass to behave the way he does. Note that JFK Jr. never played that card game with his dad's death. And JFK Jr. was no bright bulb either, but he kept on trying and passed his exams. He didn't say, "I flunked the bar exam because ya know, my dad was killed..."
Richard Nixon was credited once as he was watching one of Robert Kennedy's campaign speeches. In the speech, RFK made references to his late brother and the crowd cheered. Nixon said at that moment something like, "Bobby would ride on top of Jack's coffin straight into the White House to get elected." I'm not sure if Nixon really said that; it was in the movie about Nixon, but the meaning stuck with me. Nixon lost his brother when he was very young to tuberculosis, so he was no stranger to such a loss.
Harry is not the 12 year old boy walking behind his mother's coffin any longer any more than John Kennedy Jr., may he rest in peace, was the 2 year old who saluted at JFK's memorial. In fact, John Jr. hated it when people reminded him of that salute because he didn't remember doing it and said he was sick of people using that to define him. Harry needs to quit letting himself ride Diana's coffin to define himself and deflect and defend his immature, selfish excuses for bad behavior. If you compare and contrast Harry with JFK Jr. it can really "shine a light." (I hate that term)
Prince Harry and MM, with the mild and, IMO, completely justified criticism that they have endured, seem whiny brats in comparison."
I am not a particular fan of Prince Charles, but what you point out irks me to no end.
I would add that Charles was ahead of his time about most of his pet issues, eapecially organic farming/gardening and architecture. What's more, Charles actually puts into practice what he preaches. He completely transformed the Highgrobe gardens through organic methods, and has been instrumental in saving and redeveloping homes, buildings, and small villages throughout the U.K. He is an accomplished watercolorist and is dedicated to British culture.
Harry OTOH has nothing that he is passionate about that stemmed from his own interests. Does he have interests other than partying and hunting and polo? Even Invictus was handed to him and is a copy of the Warrior Games in the US. With the arrival of Rachel from L.A, everything they pontificate about is just the latest celebrity cause...gender, race, climate, plastic straws, blah blah blah. You can tell they don't really care one way or another because they do not live it. What has happened to Sentebale?
Even Beatrice and Eugenie support causes close to their hearts--dyslexia and scoliosis--because they have lived through them. Same with William and Kate, and how they champion mental health issues, because they have affected their own families.
Harry and Rachel don't seem to genuinely care about anything other than Harry and Rachel. It's palpable.
So any documentaries or other PR nonsense just furthers the public's impression that this is a real life version of "The Emperor's New Clothes." They are fake, and phony, and more people realize this every day.
I can absolutely see them withdrawing the suit because as you said, it has served its purpose (even though I doubt it actually has). If that does happen, it will likely happen Oct 14.
The truth is that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the royals will benefit of Meghan wins because they ALL hate public scrutiny and criticism. They all have a LOVE-HATE relationship with the press. Left to them, only sweet PR fawning pieces should be written about them.
RF may win, but the public that PAYS for their lifestyle, loses. They are public figures who are being taken care of by the taxpayers, so they can complain all they want, but at the end of the day, the British taxpayer has the right to know who/what/where and when. Deep down, BP is very well aware of this and probably more so in this current environment.
Re Page Six. That is Sunshine Sachs at work. Of course the firm being a NY firm first makes many deals with Page Six.
The truth is the woman journalist (Rhiannon Mills) Harry picked on has always been favorable to him. He was being a typical sexist patriarchal male who thinks he can tell a woman what to do. Behave! Gets my hackles up.
There is no doubt the Tour Documentary is a Markle production. It will be 80% about Meghan and will just be more of the demand to accept their narrative about themselves. It seems her belief in filmed illusion is so complete that she is still adamant that she can carve and manipulate public opinion with it. Despite how many of us tell her otherwise. How deeply unconscious are these two?
She fashions herself after Angelina Jolie in her desire to be a global humanitarian and earth mother figure and she wants her and Harry to be the new Jolie/Pitt duo (sad she hasn’t noticed how that turned out) only with a WOC slant.
Harry’s part will be Diana, Diana, Diana. Africa, Africa, Africa. He seems to forget that he is NOT African and is a visitor only and that marrying a biracial American woman does not make it so.
Of course there will be a sickening dollop on their grand love affair thrown in.
@Stacy1985 “Harry has been pretty tone-deaf about the optics of using the people of Africa like human props during this tour. “
THIS. My feelings exactly.
The doc will be more of the same.
https://blindgossip.com/her-own-game/#comments
On another note, I keep checking, but there is not one story about Meghan or Harry in the DM today. Is the press about to dump them?! We can only live in hope!
I never understood Harry's popularity in Britain ever because he seemed like an oaf and spoiled rich kid having his dad's people get him jobs, have his dad's people clean up his racist messes (Nazi, towelheads, Pakis) and pay his unpaid hotel bills, having his brother's people find him charity initiatives in the UK, but it seemed that likability is all that matters i.e. people can imagine having a beer and a good time with, instead of character and responsibility. This is part of why Meghan and Harry are probably always going to be popular with people who don't pay taxes towards their upkeep.
The doc will only show hordes of cameras while conveniently not showing the tiny number of actual people paid to show up for their photo ops. However the hilarious James Weir pieces in News.com.au puts the lie to all of it. “Marnie!”
I also note that it feels like Fleet Street may have made a collective decision to cover Meghan as little as possible. Oh! The perfect punishment! Withhold attention, even if it hurts clicks. I hope it is true.
We've been through this before, haven't we?
The statement was not made on an official royal site. The lawyers were not those used by the royals. The lawsuit was announced while a royal tour was still ongoing. This obviously is not absolute proof, however it is pretty convincing evidence that this action was not approved by the senior royals. I understand you want to believe otherwise, but the facts appear to be against you.
"The truth is that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the royals will benefit of Meghan wins because they ALL hate public scrutiny and criticism"
I think you are overestimating the significance of this suit. The royals have sued the press before, and won. This suit is mostly about copyright issues, not libel. Even if Meghan wins, it's highly unlikely to be a gamechanger as the costs will be easily absorbed by Associated Newspapers. If anything, it might make them less deferential twoards the royals, or certain royals at any rate.
Drastic Climate Action Needed Now... Let's Ban Private Jets!
We could reduce CO2 output by over 22 billion kilos per year by banning private jets immediately and with no exceptions. Further, it would affect the least number of people, who could most afford to make alternate arrangements...
#BanPrivateJets
"I never understood Harry's popularity in Britain ever because he seemed like an oaf and spoiled rich kid having his dad's people get him jobs, have his dad's people clean up his racist messes (Nazi, towelheads, Pakis)"
Harry was really only popular for a few years. For quite a while he was indeed perceived as an oafish, intellectually challenged spoiled brat. It was palace PR which came up with the idea of Harry the charming, 'people's prince' and which found the Invictus charity as a way to bolster his image and help people forget the stories of him partying naked in Las Vegas. It was working very well.... until Meghan came into the picture. At the time of his wedding, I'd say he was one of the most popular royals and while many were sceptical of her suitability, most were prepared to give Meghan a chance and hoped they'd be happy. The pair have done a great job in destroying that goodwill in little over a year.
*gifts it to Sir Splainsalot*
This is my guess as to what MM has been planning-her long game. She is known for taking other's ideas and making them her own. She is also known for dropping people as they become "useless" to her, after she's used them for whatever purpose, and then dropping them when she's finished with them. Her father is an excellent example.
I'm thinking that MM and PH plan to open a chain of elite private clubs across the world, based on the Soho House. She's now seen the inner workings of the club, and this would be right up her alley. The use of the Soho House decorator let them see that side of the operation. Could Frog Cottage be the blueprint? I believe MM and PH plan to use the success of the Soho House as the guide to starting a chain of private clubs in direct competition to them. This is how MM has always gotten her ideas- from others (from writing on bananas to the Vogue cover), and then makes them appear to be her original ideas. Watch out, Soho house insiders! She'll use you, and then throw you away when she doesn't need you anymore.
She, and now Harry, believe that it will make them rich beyond belief, powerful in Hollywood and global politics. They will start in Harry's "beloved" South Africa for the first club, then expand from there on a global scale. She can tie in merching her self-exaggerated expertise in clothing (Vogue), travel, jewelry, home decor (Frogmore), baby clothes and other items (Archie), food and wine (Grenville cookbook), even looking to start a lifestyle, blog/magazine (like The Tig, but on the Oprah scale). She's getting close to the big money/power people of Hollywood and Washington,DC. As we've seen, both Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton have endorsed her, as have Clooney, Oprah, Elton John and Ellen. Now we have Desmond Tutu and the widow of Nelson Mandela to add to the list.
Their lives will consist of travelling from club to club (partying), around the world, making money off of the clubs, merching, etc., and they believe they can make it happen. Unfortunately, MM is using PH as a stepping stone to great wealth, and he's drunk her Kool Aid. What he doesn't realize is that he, too, is a stepping stone, and she will probably land a billionaire if this is successful. Then, bye bye Harry.
Look again at their movements in business ventures during the last year- the foundations, the copyrights, the renewal of The Tig, etc. It seems to add up to me, and all of this will happen as they travel under the guise of humanitarian work and travel. Another guess is that she and Harry split up during their trip to SA so MM could do some groundwork on this plan behind the scenes.
I'd love to hear what others here think of this idea.
That all being said, wondering what happens when the U.K. ratings for the doc tank? In the US, third party services (I.e. Nielsen) measure and report tv ratings. If the doc tanked in the US it would be known. Does the same hold true in the U.K.?
Watching them "prance around SA" would make me feel quite uncomfortable actually.
It's not exactly a place one prances around in.
I think that's where all the public discomfort stems from.
She even acts like an Ugly American complaining about avocado in ENGLAND. What is there to complain about in England FFS. 🥑
Whose brilliant idea was it to put the two sort jesters in such a politically-charged country?
Autocorrect being being an eff-ing clown 🤡👽
I have an idea. Maybe they can sue MM for copyright/image rights violations:)
"I'm thinking that MM and PH plan to open a chain of elite private clubs across the world, based on the Soho House."
LOL. You know how I know what "SoHo house" is?
I learned what it was from Anna Delvey.
LMAO.
WHAT I watch a lot of true crime.
Including "Killer Women with Piers Morgan" lollolololo
But like I said yesterday, none of these people care about Rachel Meghan Markle. They care about HRH the Duchess of Sussex, and being associated with the prestige and mystique of royalty.
Not one of these people would have given one minute of their time to Meghan 3 years ago. If and when she no longer has the allure of royalty behind her, how many of her new 'friends' will continue to support her?
Watch video and hear audience applaud panellist.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1186419/Meghan-Markle-fury-BBC-Question-Time-Duke-Duchess-of-Sussex-latest-royal-family-news
It’s ma one off, our ratings are given whether a programme is e.g okay, mediocre or great, e.g say 1 star out of a possible 5. Instead we have viewer numbers. So if 2 million watched it wouldn’t necessarily be seen as bad or good. Because, it doesn’t actually show or prove how popular they are, people might just watch to see how they come across, to be nosey, and not because they like them.
But isn't Piers Morgan supposed to be like this right-wing Fox News type of guy in England?
(I'm assuming this is the same Piers Morgan from the American show "Killer Women with Piers Morgan" because that guy had a British accent too.)
Well Piers Morgan claims that allegedly (ALLEGEDLY) woke Meghan slid into his DM saying she's a BIG FAN.
ALLEGEDLY.
IDK what should be more allegedly: The notion that Meghan is "woke" or that Meghan slid into Piers Morgan's DM.
I wish you all could see how I cackle on this blog. 😂🤣😂😂😂
I wish we were in some coffee shop lol-ing over literal tea ☕
He used to edit the 'Mirror', a tabloid newspaper which is considered left-wing(ish), so no.
Now he's considered a bit of a sad sap more than anything else.
Please don't call him a sad sap that makes me kind of sad for him. 😢😢😢🤣 I like him on that show. I wouldn't slide into his DM tho.
Meghan is a public servant, an extremely privileged one. But a public servant nonetheless. It's her job to serve the public, not whine about being 'badly treated'.
"I can't imagine Associated Press was not aware about the law when they did it, neither were they ignorant about Harry's previous threats to sue for allegedly mistreating his wife. So I firmly believe MoS has something up their sleeves"
I don't know enough about the law to speculate on how good a case they may have, and neither does anyone else here. However, I would think that they know that even if they lose, the financial damage will be relatively small and easily offset by the publicity for their paper. Indeed, even if Meghan wins, it could be that so many embarrassing details will come to light during the trial that it will be a hollow victory for her.
As Liverbird has just stated, he used to edit the Mirror which is a left leaning tabloid.
As for his current incarnation, he is essentially now a shock jock who is purposefully rude and pugnacious about a variety of subjects, and is rude and combative towards guests simply in order to gain attention and ratings. Sadly this is all too common a ruse in media nowadays.
Well that might be because you don’t agree with what he has to say. I don’t always agree either, but it’s his job to challenge people. To bring up and touch on sensitive subjects, and he often brings up some very valid points, like it or not, agree or not.
I guess that explains a lot.
October 4, 2019 Byline Investigations
For allegedly hacking his phone.
BTW Murdoch does not own The Mirror.
https://www.bylineinvestigates.com/murdoch/2019/10/4/world-exclusive-now-prince-harry-sues-the-sun-and-mirror-in-war-on-tabloids?format=amp&__twitter_impression=true
Initially found on NotMyDuchess blog
The phone hacking was when he was in his twenties. Would he really be starting an all-out war about that now? (BTW Prince William and Kate Middleton also had their phones hacked.)
This might be fake news? If not, no wonder he was stumbling about during that first engagement on the last day of the tour! (BTW I have had a badly pulled muscle in my back. It is agonising and immobilising, BUT a couple of over-the-counter medications enabled me to move around without pain when I needed to while it healed. The medications did NOT make me woozy at all.)
Here's the link: https://www.bylineinvestigates.com/murdoch/2019/10/4/world-exclusive-now-prince-harry-sues-the-sun-and-mirror-in-war-on-tabloids?
It was originally printed by bylineinvestigates.com. Here's the original story, with the filing papers:
https://www.bylineinvestigates.com/murdoch/2019/10/4/world-exclusive-now-prince-harry-sues-the-sun-and-mirror-in-war-on-tabloids
And one thing that seems to be evident from all this mess is that the uneasy relationship between the press and the royal family is a house of straw. Just as the press has the power to make an "image," it has the power to destroy that image. Hence, the repeated plays of Harry being rude to the reporter. Now, perhaps his back hurt. I've thrown out my back, and it hurts like a mofo. But did he turn around and say, "You know, Rhiannon, my back is killing me. Do you mind if I beg off?" No, he did not. I don't care what excuses he has. They set up a press event, and then he turns on the press because he'd done his shtick and that's all he wanted to do. It doesn't work like that.
I understand that there was a strict playbook for their tour, what the press was allowed to ask and what they weren't. Except that all those "secret" meetings Ms. Markle attended weren't, in fact, secret. They were nothing more than footage for the ITV documentary. Imagine how furious the rest of the press core is this morning, finding out that they'd been completely duped into playing by the rules, and there were all these other secret events going on that they had no invitation to. This is the birth announcement all over again. Single access given to one media outlet, while the other media outlets are left in the dust and out of the loop.
And this is exactly why they do not command any respect nor do they deserve any.
Totally agree. There’s a lot of fake news and stories out there, there’s nothing on any of the official sites, as yet anyhow.
Try again!
I agree with Piers Morgan on many things (MM for one). My issue is that he is purposefully rude and obnoxious, which results in his show being one big argument which isn't really constructive and means that interesting topics aren't covered with detail and clarity. Instead, he sits and shouts at people, interrupts them and antagonises them just to cause conflict. Great.
It's all over Twitter.
Hugh Grant has already had a *pop* at Piers Morgan who retaliated.
https://twitter.com/piersmorgan?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
Now, IF his private information has been hacked and used for news stories, he has every right to file a case as that is appalling behaviour, no matter how much of an annoying fool you are. But what really negative stories using this alleged data breach have run about Harry in recent years? I genuinely can't think of any.
Also, from what I know most cases like this are solved out of court, with substantial pay-outs. The cynic in me - and cynicism is rewarded when it comes to the Harkles - wonders if this could be yet another money grabbing mission?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/oct/04/prince-harry-begins-legal-proceedings-against-sun-and-mirror-meghan
Also wonder if it's a PR thing - they launch the frivolous Meghan lawsuit. The press, as to be expected, furiously publish articles say they're whinging and to suck it up and that they're exaggerating and that journalists are acting responsibly and it's not the whole industry. Then Harry drops this lawsuit, to make his point to his fans and win over some skeptics, even though this alleged incidents happened years before Meghan. It also gets back at Piers Morgan and does reputation damage, because he's gone after Meghan publicly. Maybe it's their way of getting back indirectly. Doesn't always have to be about money; could be about pride too.
"The new cases mean that the royal couple are now pursuing active legal action against half the UK’s national print newspaper proprietors, with only the Telegraph, Guardian and Financial Times unaffected."
So basically it's all out war with the British media.
All out war, and I don’t think it’s going to well.
At this stage, these two just need to leave Britain. It's obvious neither of them like it very much, though it has given them everything. Feeling's mutual. I'll even drive them to the airport - or whereever it is that private jets use - if they're short of the few quid for the taxi fare.
Totally agree, they need to leave. The downside, they will still want all the current privileges they enjoy and abuse. One might hope that Prince Charles would cut them off from all that, it’s sadly, unlikely to happen.
Prince Harry filed claims at the High Court, Buckingham Palace has confirmed.
So much of their behavior is tied up in politics, but this isn't the place for that discussion. My only comment is, the royal family did not appreciate what they were in for with Smeg and now the ever deafening roar for a republic. I really think that when the Queen steps aside (which is already planned and in the works with Charles taking over more duties) the end of the monarchy will not be too far behind.
I was thinking that too. British law is based on precedent, and if they won this case (if it gets that far) or the MoS backs down then it would potentially stop the publication in the UK of any personal correspondence that MM has sent. Let's face it, she has been married already and has had boyfriends before meeting PH so I would guess there are a lot of embarrassing emails/letters out there. Of course, if they were published in a US media outlet then that's a different set of laws. Not sure too many people care about her over there to bother reading anything:)
I agree! I doubt that Harry would have done this had he been on his own. This has Meghan's paw prints all over it.
Well, if politics is something they or she wants in the USA, trying to keep unpleasant parts of your past unprinted is file called Unlikely.
I thought that the phone tapping had been handled years ago.
Interesting stuff. Piers Morgan, who is constantly sniping at MM and calls her a social climber, was a previous editor of the Daily Mirror and was part of the phone hacking scandal. Wonder if the lawsuit covers the period when he was editor.
For the record he was never found guilty of anything in a court of law. And as a comparison, neither was Michael Jackson. Not quite the same as being innocent!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfbAlsJhIaY
"Paxman: Piers Morgan told me how to phone hack | Channel 4 News"
Piers Morgan and the Mirror were not involved in the phone hacking scandal. Morgan left years before it happened.
Both Prince William and Prince Harry have been mentioned in previous phone hacking court cases, along with the Duchess of Cambridge and members of palace staff.
Previous allegations over accessing voicemail messages have related to the Princes when they were in their 20s.
Why would Harry bring (retrospective) legal action all these years later? I thought he and William did so at the time of the phone hacking incident ? This would have to be allegedly new stuff he’s suing against surely?
I guess they might. We can disliked the Harkles, but let's not pretend the tabs are anything other than appalling. But I'd say it's unlikely.
So either this case is connected to a more than decade old hacking incident, or to a more recent story which has yet to break. While the latter would be more scandalous, my money is on the former, as a way to win a financial settlement and/or frighten the media into silence. Dimwit Harry is taking a massive gamble.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/phone-hacking/11854703/Computer-hacking-probe-dropped-after-four-years.html
Bylineinvestigates----->Lainey------> major British newspapers. Would anybody have known about this if not for Lainey? Hmmm. Lots of press for H&M, and even bad press is good press to actress types. If it was filed on the 27th, the press didn't pick up on it, so she needed another way to get this story out. Lainey.
https://spectator.us/please-america-take-meghan-markle-back/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
I think it’s the above. He sees it as a win-win, whereas others would probably see it as foolish. Fans of the Sussex’s are besides themselves with rapturous joy, whereas most sane people are just fed up to the back teeth with them.
I guess it's only foolish if Harry sees his long-term future with the royal family and knows that like it or not, they have to keep the press onside.
However, if he's already got one foot out the door and wants a down payment in the knowledge that royal funds will soon be cut off, and also wants to bolster the back-story of the horrid British media bullying himself and his mixed-race wife, then it may be a smart move. Or not. We shall see.
Incorrect https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/phone-hacking-the-piers-morgan-connection-mirror-admits-some-stories-during-morgans-tenure-may-have-9817258.html
Considering that Rebekah Brooks was actually cleared of phone hacking then it's no surprise he wasn't charged (or tried).
We'll have to wait to see what PH is talking about r.e. this phone hacking and how long ago it occurred. Might be another form of hacking rather than the voicemail hacks in 'the golden years.' Lots of celebs have their phones hacked and pictures stolen so.....
As someone mentioned already, it would be the dumbest thing ever for the Press to have hacked his phone after the original scandal. If they have done it then good luck to him and I hope he wins his lawsuit.
@bootsy and@Louise500, ‘Interesting stuff. Piers Morgan, who is constantly sniping at MM and calls her a social climber, was a previous editor of the Daily Mirror and was part of the phone hacking scandal. Wonder if the lawsuit covers the period when he was editor.’ Wondering the same - so far the initial article BylineInvestigates certainly has said so, but don't know this publication at all or its editorial quality.
Buckingham Palace have only confirmed that documents have been filed on behalf of Prince Harry by his legal firm.
Nothing more.
That's because it likely isn't true, no matter how clearly desperate are you to believe it. Did BP 'announce' it? Or did they just confirm enquiries from the press? Because it is not the same thing. I don't see it on their twitter site.
If you genuinely believe that the queen supports her thick grandson taking on basically the entire British press, after years, indeed decades of building up a relationship with them, then I don't know what to say.
The BBC has not yet established when the duke's allegations date from.
However, Jonny Dymond, the BBC's royal correspondent, says: "The presumption is this goes back to the phone hacking scandal of the early 2000s."
Why? And why now?
Has he actually taken leave of his senses?
Reporters start their day reading all of the news wires, every paper on their beat (I read 12 newspapers a day when I was reporting) and today, blog posts, insta, facebook, snap,etc. Lainey is one of the leading bloggers about MM. It doesn't matter where she lives.
The story was first floated on a fairly obscure British website, then made its way to Twitter, hence the MSM. Some small-time gossip colomnist from Toronto had nothing to do with it.
isn't there a statute of limitations for suing about certain claims? when did the hacking occur? There's got to be a statute otherwise it will be hard to find evidence going that far back.
That was my first thought, and I went looking through their (UK's) limitations. My best guess
is that he's trying to keep something from being published. If they/he made their/his own sex tape, I can only pray that he succeeds.
Thanks for the interesting and informative posts. It's always good to gain a professional insight into how things work in any profession. I'm starting to think, no that's not true, am now thinking that the media in general is one big sham as the internet (via twitter and numerous other 'news' sites) bombard us with 'info' that is carefully managed in ways a layman like me will never quite understand.
"Has he actually taken leave of his senses?"
Very likely.
As a money grab, this doesn't make sense. He has a $30mil+ slush fund. What does he really need to pay for? He has a home provided by the British taxpayers, travel expenses picked up by "friends" when not traveling for official duties, and a clothing allowance for official duties. What does he ever actually pay for? The nanny? Heating and electricity? Personal expenses? I know avocados are expensive, but come on! BBC license? He's known to be tight and there have been many instances in the past where others have covered his expenses... Wynn excusing or personally covering his partying in Las Vegas to the tune of $30K.
This isn't about the money. It doesn't matter that in their circle others have more money. They have something more valuable than money. They have access to world leaders and movers & shakers in every industry. They don't need money, they need to bolster their image, be seen as authorities on whatever has the political class chatting at the moment (climate change), charitable, and likable. As long as they are liked by the masses, they have something to offer those seeking access to their circle.
This is about controlling their image, preventing ordinary people from commenting negatively, and protecting their brand. They just want people to shut up about them already, giving them a pass on their behavior and hypocrisy. These lawsuits are aimed at us, not the media.
What they don't understand is that the plebs are pushing back against the elites. We no longer live in a time where the royals, politicians, celebrities can dictate the message and the plebs will gleefully and silently follow along. They also don't understand that the internet is forever. I can't help but get the image of the little boy who stick his finger in the leak in the dyke out of my mind. With every hole that is plugged, a new one pops up.
Yes, I did what Lainey should and could have done. I looked up the info for the original website that published the news. It's a pay to be published site, and it lists only one reporter, the owner of the site. Anybody can write for it, reporter or not, and their are paid by crowdsourcing for money- asking for donations. Then, to make more money, they have to "climb up the ladder". Almost like a multi-level marketing scheme, and not the way a legit news organization works.
Here are the FAQs for its website.
https://www.byline.com/faq
Now, why couldn't Lainey take the five minutes it took me to find this info before publishing it on her blog?
That's all true so long as Harry is a member of the firm. But what if his plan is to leave? He'd still be a wealthy man but he'd actually have to use his own money rather than depend on the taxpayer or dad to fund his lifestyle. And the very expensive lifestyle of his wife. Speculation obviously, but more and more I do think these two are burning their bridges and setting themselves up for a life in LA. It will be the biggest mistake of Harry's life, worse even than the decision to marry her.
But agree that this is definitely about trying to control the press. He's taken on basically the entire British media, and who knows where he'll finish? Over allegations that are over a decade old?
He needs psychiatric help, not a law suit.
"That's all true so long as Harry is a member of the firm. But what if his plan is to leave? He'd still be a wealthy man but he'd actually have to use his own money rather than depend on the taxpayer or dad to fund his lifestyle. And the very expensive lifestyle of his wife. Speculation obviously, but more and more I do think these two are burning their bridges and setting themselves up for a life in LA. It will be the biggest mistake of Harry's life, worse even than the decision to marry her."
He would lose having his expenses covered for official duties, however, he would still have the free housing from grans. There are other non-working royals that live in grace & privilege housing. He would likely still get the allowance (if he receives one) from Charles until Charles becomes king. We know about his $30mil trust, but we don't know of other trusts or assets he may own or at least benefit from.
This is about protecting the brand so they have access to royals and politicians. Merching is insignificant compared to what he can earn through peddling access.
He needs mental health intervention and new advisers. No one he has surrounded himself with is doing him any favors.
Megs must have egged PH on with her assertions that they're being abused by the media. It was reported somewhere that PH is using his trust funds to pay legal fees. Meg got skinflint PH to spend money on a form of PR, because that's what this is all about. If PH continues to be under the spell and direction of Meg, he will soon find his trust has dwindled to almost nothing. Between the lawyers for all their multiple lawsuits, and formally paying Sunshine Sachs for PR, Harry will soon find himself broke. Then Meg will find a way to leave, after Harry is broke.
Nelo - Harry & Meghan haven't respected the Queen in ages so why are you insisting she is backing this? If she were backing it the statement would have appeared on the royal sites & not a new site they created for that purpose. They are truly on their own now - I hope whatever big scandal they are trying to suppress is released - if you are going to get sued for it might as well print it & let the public decide. It is the public Harry & Meghan are truly trying to suppress right now.
That would be the ase only if he were to stay in GB, but the plan would obviously be for them to relocate to America.
" He would likely still get the allowance (if he receives one) from Charles until Charles becomes king."
He doesn't receive one. The Duchy of Cornwall covers the expenses of the Prince of Wales' children, but only on official duties.
"This is about protecting the brand so they have access to royals and politicians. Merching is insignificant compared to what he can earn through peddling access."
He's not clever enough to work that out though. And he's married to the would-be queen of merching. However, nobody will be interested in either of them once they've split from the royals and are into middle age. They're just both too arrogant to see tht.
"He needs mental health intervention and new advisers. No one he has surrounded himself with is doing him any favors."
Yes I agree. He is clearly deeply troubled. This is only going to make it worse.
An above poster's hero Dickie Arbiter was just on Sky News saying that 'someone' (!) had advised him to do this but it certainly wasn't the BP communications people. I fear Haz has alienated those around him so much that it's hard to see a way out, at least not so long as he's married to Meghan.
Maybe this is Meghan’s ‘end game’. She’s broken all her previous relationships in one way or another. She breaks Harry in every way she can, in order to get what she wants. Then leaves him for a different and wealthier life.
It will be VERY interesting to see what - if any - coverage he gets from the British media. Given that pretty much all of them are currently being threatened with legal action from the Harkles, it would be in their interests to band together and just act as though they don't exist. You don't want us around? Fine. Have it your way. Let's see if your beloved CNN will come out to cover your trip to an old folks home in Bognor Regis in the depths of winter.
Also, if they're going after Piers Morgan, that makes me think that some of the commenters' speculations may be true. Piers has dirt on MM.