Critique of columnist Jeremy Clarkson for writing “violent misogynist” opinion piece about Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex
A group of British lawmakers are calling for action to be taken against columnist Jeremy Clarkson after he wrote a “violent misogynist” opinion piece about Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex in the Sun newspaper, which was later retracted.
The letter is signed by 64 other lawmakers from various political parties and condemns the violence of the language used against her.
The Metropolitan Police had to step in after she faced several threats to her life. Hateful articles like the one written by Mr Clarkson do not exist in a vacuum and directly contribute to this unacceptable climate of hatred and violence.”
The London School of Economics associate professor said that the British media regulatory framework is in disarray and that there isn’t many opportunities to take direct action against the newspapers.
The Sun stopped sharing its readership figures in 2020, but the most recent data available showed it had a circulation of 1.2 million in March 2020, trade publication Press Gazette reported, citing figures from the official Audit Bureau of Circulations. This was the highest circulation of any UK national newspaper at the time.
On Monday he apologized for writing the column and also received a lot of backlash from other online commentators.
“Oh dear. I put my foot in it. A clumsy reference to a scene in Game of Throne in a column has gone down badly with many people. I am horrified that I have caused so much harm.
The release of the “Harry and Meg” documentary series on the internet, in which the couple discuss their treatment by the UK press, was followed by another column by the TV personality.
Harry blamed the media for placing undue stress on his wife and linked press coverage to a miscarriage she suffered in July 2020 after moving to California.
They said that a free press is a cornerstone of any democracy, but that there is a real human cost to the way that tabloids go about their business.
How Harry and Meghan Left the Family: Why is the “Spare” of their parents? What is it like to be a “little brother”?
Two books about gender and family, and the upcoming book about women behaving badly, will be published by Simon & Schuster. Her latest film, “King Coal,” will premiere at the Sundance Film Festival in 2023. The opinions are of hers, not this commentary. CNN has more opinion on it.
It is fodder. Among the gossipy allegations Harry lobs at his brother in “Spare” are details of a physical altercation between the two during which William knocked Harry to the floor and left him scratched and bruised, and claims that William and his wife, Kate Middleton, were the ones responsible for encouraging Harry’s controversial Nazi costume in 2005. The book “Spare” spills on Kate’s relationship with Meghan, as well as the claim that Kate demanded that they apologize for suggesting she had baby brain. The palace has not commented on the book.
Good for them. Where Harry used to have some sympathy for being the “spare” of the two brothers, who are now in line for the throne, is running short. Harry and Meghan quit the royal family amid complaints that they preferred a private life as “regular people,” no longer wanting the media attention that came with being royals, including being tabloid fodder. In an excerpt from an upcoming interview, Harry told ITV: “I want a family. Not an institution.
We are seeing a little brother trying to fight back against a life of feeling inferior, but doing it in the dirtiest way possible. And, well, it seems pathetic.
Competition between children is common, and sibling rivalry between brothers even more so, especially when there are just two of them. Most aren’t born into families with sets of rules that remind them of where they came from. The existence of brotherly discord has inspired countless works of art in all spheres. Harry is not special — his is one of the commonest dramas of human nature.
He is not a victim or blameless. By the time they got married, Harry was wounded by his family’s betrayal and went looking for someone to help him break away from them and someone who understood his plight. He found it in her, a woman whose ambition drove her career as an actress and whose own family life included contentious relationships with her half-sister and her father; a woman who was not afraid to express herself, even to royalty.
William will be king and Harry will not. William will fulfill something out of sheer patriotism, or he will fulfill something that he wants. That’s because William is taking the high road of silence. Isn’t it ironic that we know so much more about Harry and Meghan, the couple who resigned from royal life because they wished to remain private, than the couple who opted to stay?
While we can, and should, have some disdain for how Harry has chosen to approach his life circumstances, it’s also possible to have some compassion for him — and understanding. He didn’t completely create himself. He is 38 years old and is most likely immature since he was sheltered and well-off as a child.
Now, he’s pushing back against the machine that made him in the only way he knows how — and possibly doing so because it’s the only way he knows how to make his own money and live independently. He felt exploited as a child and younger adult; he’s now in turn profiting off his family (and earning an enormous amount of money in the process).
The first court hearing on the arrival of the Prince Harry and Elton John in the UK: an action against the publisher of the newspaper Associated Newspapers
The presence of Prince Harry and Elton John, which was done entirely on their own volition and not legally required, fueled media coverage on Monday, turning the press’ eye on the preliminary hearing. Their appearances were the top stories on a number of UK news websites. Even the Daily Mail published an article on their arrival in court.
Associated Newspapers has categorically denied the claims against it. When the lawsuit was filed, the publisher called the claims “preposterous smears” and it said it “utterly and unambiguously refuted” them.
A version of this article first appeared in the “Reliable Sources” newsletter. Sign up for the daily digest chronicling the evolving media landscape here.
Five high-profile figures are joining together in a legal action, including the mother of a man killed in a racist attack.
The newspaper publisher is alleged to have used illegal information-gathering tactics by a group of high-profile figures.
Now it will be up to a judge from London’s High Court to determine whether the case will advance, or be thrown out as Associated Papers has motioned for.
Monday was the first in four days of pre-trial hearings, which are expected to conclude on Thursday, in which the judge will hear arguments ahead of rendering a decision.
The Duke of Sussex and ANL are both interested in the trial of Associated and Gross Privacy Violation in the News of the World scandal
The Duke of Sussex is interested in the case and wanted to be present, according to the prince’s spokesman. He went to shine a spotlight on the case.
The lawsuit was announced by Prince Harry and the others, who said that they had evidence showing that they had fallen victim to criminal activity and gross privacy violations.
At Monday’s trial, the barrister stated that Harryregards Associated’s actions to be a betrayal given the media’s promises to improve their conduct after Princess Diana’s death.
The alleged behavior that was exposed in the News of the World scandal is very similar to the accusations that are contained in the legal action.
It’s unclear whether this case will result in such profound consequence. It is safe to say that if it goes to trial it will be a type of trial the Daily Mail likes to cover.
Prince Harry showed up to the London High Court hearing on Monday, wearing a suit which he claimed was his in a privacy lawsuit.
It was a big surprise for the local media to see the Duke studiously taking notes in a black notebook as he sat next to his fellow person in the courtroom.
In a statement provided to NPR, ANL said it “categorically” denied the allegations and plans to defend itself if the trial moves forward after this week’s hearing.
Some of the events in question took place prior to 2007, which makes it possible for the claims themselves to have obtained evidence against ANL, but not within the statute of limitations.
ANL lost a similar privacy case brought by Meghan Markle in 2021. The Duchess sued after the Daily Mail published parts of a private letter she wrote to her estranged father in 2018.
Why Prince Harry and the Home Office don’t want the same level of protection for their own protection in the U.K. royal court system?
Prince Harry’s family would not be given the same level of royal protection in the U.K., but would be protected on a case-by-case basis, according to the Home Office. The Home Office wouldn’t let Prince Harry pay for his own police protection.
Prince Harry will not visit with William or his father during this trip, according to local media outlets.