This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/greenslade/2016/nov/08/press-feeding-frenzy-over-harry-and-meghan-has-echoes-of-diana-coverage
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 3 | Version 4 |
|---|---|
| Press feeding frenzy over Harry and Meghan has echoes of Diana coverage Press feeding frenzy over Harry and Meghan has echoes of Diana coverage | |
| (about 3 hours later) | |
| A handsome prince and a beautiful actor. This is the sort of story made in tabloid heaven. So Prince Harry’s relationship with Meghan Markle was bound to excite popular newspaper interest. | A handsome prince and a beautiful actor. This is the sort of story made in tabloid heaven. So Prince Harry’s relationship with Meghan Markle was bound to excite popular newspaper interest. |
| If royal advisers thought editors in the post-Leveson age had cleaned up their act then they were surely in for a shock. | If royal advisers thought editors in the post-Leveson age had cleaned up their act then they were surely in for a shock. |
| All the old tricks of the royal rat-pack trade from the era of Prince Harry’s late mother, Princess Diana, were there from the moment the story of their relationship was broken by the Sunday Express nine days ago. | All the old tricks of the royal rat-pack trade from the era of Prince Harry’s late mother, Princess Diana, were there from the moment the story of their relationship was broken by the Sunday Express nine days ago. |
| The traditional feeding frenzy was evident in the increasingly intense coverage in the two best-selling daily tabloids, the Daily Mail and the Sun. | The traditional feeding frenzy was evident in the increasingly intense coverage in the two best-selling daily tabloids, the Daily Mail and the Sun. |
| Both ran a succession of articles last week and were able to draw on a huge portfolio of photographs of Markle to illustrate stories of sometimes questionable merit. | Both ran a succession of articles last week and were able to draw on a huge portfolio of photographs of Markle to illustrate stories of sometimes questionable merit. |
| Much of the material was laced with innuendo and informed by little more than speculation. The sexism was obvious in the Mail’s first front page mention of Markle as “Harry’s new hottie”. | Much of the material was laced with innuendo and informed by little more than speculation. The sexism was obvious in the Mail’s first front page mention of Markle as “Harry’s new hottie”. |
| In the following days the Mail ran page leads in which headlines often carried question marks: “Did Harry cancel tryst with new hottie after cover was blown?” (Tuesday); “Dreaming of a white wedding are we, Meghan?” (Friday); and “Is Meghan the minx really Prince Harry’s Miss Right?” (Saturday). | In the following days the Mail ran page leads in which headlines often carried question marks: “Did Harry cancel tryst with new hottie after cover was blown?” (Tuesday); “Dreaming of a white wedding are we, Meghan?” (Friday); and “Is Meghan the minx really Prince Harry’s Miss Right?” (Saturday). |
| The Sun, making much of a revealing pose, began with “Prince’s royal thighness” on Monday and claimed the following day that “smitten Harry” had “bombarded Meghan with texts until he got a date”. | The Sun, making much of a revealing pose, began with “Prince’s royal thighness” on Monday and claimed the following day that “smitten Harry” had “bombarded Meghan with texts until he got a date”. |
| On Wednesday, both the Mail and the Sun carried pieces based on an interview with Markle’s half sister, Samantha Grant. This elicited a critical headline from the Mail: “Watch out, Harry! Prince ‘would be appalled’ if he knew truth about his new girlfriend, warns her sister”. The Sun, meanwhile, wrote “Prince Harry’s new girlfriend is a pushy diva who is unfit to be a member of the royal family” in the intro to its front page story. | On Wednesday, both the Mail and the Sun carried pieces based on an interview with Markle’s half sister, Samantha Grant. This elicited a critical headline from the Mail: “Watch out, Harry! Prince ‘would be appalled’ if he knew truth about his new girlfriend, warns her sister”. The Sun, meanwhile, wrote “Prince Harry’s new girlfriend is a pushy diva who is unfit to be a member of the royal family” in the intro to its front page story. |
| The Mail’s piece on Thursday had a sharp edge: “Harry has spent past week with lover in Canada, and by strange coincidence she’s just launched her own fashion range!” while the next day’s Sun claimed “Dirty Harry” had enjoyed “a romantic stay at Balmoral” with Markle. | The Mail’s piece on Thursday had a sharp edge: “Harry has spent past week with lover in Canada, and by strange coincidence she’s just launched her own fashion range!” while the next day’s Sun claimed “Dirty Harry” had enjoyed “a romantic stay at Balmoral” with Markle. |
| Not content with that, the Sun told its readers that the prince had wooed Markle during “a dirty weekend” at a friend’s house in Los Angeles. The source was an anonymous “pal”. | Not content with that, the Sun told its readers that the prince had wooed Markle during “a dirty weekend” at a friend’s house in Los Angeles. The source was an anonymous “pal”. |
| The Sunday red-tops had weighed in with similar claims. According to the Sunday Mirror, Prince Charles’s former butler confirmed the romance in an interview given “with official authorisation from Clarence House”. | The Sunday red-tops had weighed in with similar claims. According to the Sunday Mirror, Prince Charles’s former butler confirmed the romance in an interview given “with official authorisation from Clarence House”. |
| And the Sunday People relied on an unnamed source to suggest that Markle was due to spend Christmas with Harry, although not at Sandringham. | And the Sunday People relied on an unnamed source to suggest that Markle was due to spend Christmas with Harry, although not at Sandringham. |
| None of this was unduly surprising. It is redolent of the coverage of royal romances over the last 50 years, from Princess Margaret through to Prince Charles and Prince Andrew. | None of this was unduly surprising. It is redolent of the coverage of royal romances over the last 50 years, from Princess Margaret through to Prince Charles and Prince Andrew. |
| What is new is the unprecedented strength of the statement complaining about the coverage. It makes claims about “outright sexism and racism”, some of which were obvious from the coverage. | What is new is the unprecedented strength of the statement complaining about the coverage. It makes claims about “outright sexism and racism”, some of which were obvious from the coverage. |
| A Mail on Sunday column by Rachel Johnson was unwise in stating that Markle’s union with Harry will thicken the Windsors’ “watery, thin blue blood and Spencer pale skin and ginger hair with some rich and exotic DNA”. | A Mail on Sunday column by Rachel Johnson was unwise in stating that Markle’s union with Harry will thicken the Windsors’ “watery, thin blue blood and Spencer pale skin and ginger hair with some rich and exotic DNA”. |
| Clearly, the “smear” mentioned in the prince’s statement referred to a Sun front page story about Markle’s appearance on Pornhub, an adult website. But the clips taken from her TV show, Suits, were not pornographic. | Clearly, the “smear” mentioned in the prince’s statement referred to a Sun front page story about Markle’s appearance on Pornhub, an adult website. But the clips taken from her TV show, Suits, were not pornographic. |
| Other allegations in the statement were less easy to narrow down, such as Markle’s mother being harassed by photographers (who, presumably, were not all British). | Other allegations in the statement were less easy to narrow down, such as Markle’s mother being harassed by photographers (who, presumably, were not all British). |
| Similarly, it does not specify whether reporters and photographers attempting to “gain illegal entry” to Markle’s home were acting on behalf of UK newspapers. | Similarly, it does not specify whether reporters and photographers attempting to “gain illegal entry” to Markle’s home were acting on behalf of UK newspapers. |
| This does not let Britain’s press off the hook, of course. But editors will doubtless argue, unless proof is presented, that they are not responsible for overstepping the mark. | This does not let Britain’s press off the hook, of course. But editors will doubtless argue, unless proof is presented, that they are not responsible for overstepping the mark. |
| One other notable point: an early Mail Online report of the Kensington Palace statement made no mention of press intrusion, merely using the statement as confirmation of the couple’s relationship. A later version did mention media intrusion. | One other notable point: an early Mail Online report of the Kensington Palace statement made no mention of press intrusion, merely using the statement as confirmation of the couple’s relationship. A later version did mention media intrusion. |
| The Sun’s website article also viewed it as an acknowledgement that its previous speculation had been correct, but it did refer to the statement’s complaints about unwarranted media attention. | The Sun’s website article also viewed it as an acknowledgement that its previous speculation had been correct, but it did refer to the statement’s complaints about unwarranted media attention. |
| There are bound to be cries from editors that Harry is benefiting from undue protection and that Kensington Palace is engaged in some form of news management. | There are bound to be cries from editors that Harry is benefiting from undue protection and that Kensington Palace is engaged in some form of news management. |
| But newspaper claims that the people have a right to know will need to be carefully balanced against the possibility of a public backlash as memories are summoned up of Diana’s death while being chased by paparazzi. | But newspaper claims that the people have a right to know will need to be carefully balanced against the possibility of a public backlash as memories are summoned up of Diana’s death while being chased by paparazzi. |