- Awards
- 52
Thomas Markle: "The Royal family aren't racist"
Me:
Me:
- Awards
- 4
It's fascinating reading the UK and US responses to the interview.
We in the UK watched the Oprah interview last night. I think Harry and Megan are telling the truth, as I was sceptical when it was first announced that Meghan as a mixed race woman was entering the Royal Family.
The British Monarchy and the British public aren't ready for a Mixed Race Duchess/Princess or mixed race grandchildren of the heir to the throne. Just as they aren't ready for a Black James Bond.
Harry must have inherited Diana's preference to dark skinned companions (her affair with the Indian heart surgeon). Harry also had a poster of Halle Berry on his wall when he was a teenager.
It's a shame that it didn't work out - but I think Harry and Meghan expected too much as well and should have either stuck it out a bit longer or not have entered into it at all.
We in the UK watched the Oprah interview last night. I think Harry and Megan are telling the truth, as I was sceptical when it was first announced that Meghan as a mixed race woman was entering the Royal Family.
The British Monarchy and the British public aren't ready for a Mixed Race Duchess/Princess or mixed race grandchildren of the heir to the throne. Just as they aren't ready for a Black James Bond.
Harry must have inherited Diana's preference to dark skinned companions (her affair with the Indian heart surgeon). Harry also had a poster of Halle Berry on his wall when he was a teenager.
It's a shame that it didn't work out - but I think Harry and Meghan expected too much as well and should have either stuck it out a bit longer or not have entered into it at all.
- Awards
- 10
- Awards
- 52
His relentless trolling of Meghan lead to 41,000 complaints to OfCom and now he's left the show.
- Awards
- 6
I watched that on YT yesterday. The weatherman deserves much credit for what he said! It was just the right thing to do but sadly it happens too seldom in a society that applauds accustomed bad behaviour. I never understood why ITV gave Morgan a job. Every year this tabloid Freddy Krueger produced multiple negative headlines - worldwide! That was a kneel down to a certain audience one better doesn't cater to because it's toxic. The man who constantly whined about Meghan and Harry leaving the firm and the country walks off a TV studio where he is supposed to work! The irony... But I tend to think Morgan doesn't see it. He never had a work ethic!
Alex Beresford - my hero for the month and a special hot daddy alert!
Last edited:
- Awards
- 4
What bothers me about this whole sordid affair is how it has become completely inconceivable that the Royal Family is full of racist tone-deaf fuddy-duddies stuck in the 1930s and that Piers Morgan is a pompous, repellent & nauseating piece of human excrement AND that Meghan Markle may at the very same time happen to be a disingenuous opportunist Hollywood D-lister discontent at being a second-fiddle princess who's found herself a golden goose (and I obviously don't mean Harry).
And I'm not saying she is, because unlike others, who speak of this with such vigor and conviction, I keep in mind I'm not privy to what REALLY goes on behind those walls and what these people REALLY say or do when the cameras are off. But my point is: why is it mutually exclusive -- either you believe Meghan OR you believe them? It's too superficial of a dilemma. Life is not that black and white of a fairytale. People are messy and complicated. And Blanche Hudson turned out to be a real bitch.
And I'm not saying she is, because unlike others, who speak of this with such vigor and conviction, I keep in mind I'm not privy to what REALLY goes on behind those walls and what these people REALLY say or do when the cameras are off. But my point is: why is it mutually exclusive -- either you believe Meghan OR you believe them? It's too superficial of a dilemma. Life is not that black and white of a fairytale. People are messy and complicated. And Blanche Hudson turned out to be a real bitch.
- Awards
- 6
I'm always for the one who leaves the Truman Show. I'm a bit surprised that many people think Meghan "acts". Everyone is in front of cameras. Who has more media experience? The actress who wasn't a veteran in her job or the people who hire "private secretary", "communication chiefs" and people in similar job positions whose only purpose is to be a "bridge" to the public (in Meghan's job they're called producers, directors and writers)? The advantage is obviously with the institution who does it for hundreds of years. Meghan and Harry spoke in their own words at the interview. No one knows how many people have written the answer from Buckingham Palace "on behalf of her majesty the Queen". They act safely like a government when confronted and that's a pattern with them that I find more suspicious than anything about H&M.
- Awards
- 44
Yes indeed. Wherever I look discussion around this is very bipolar.
Depending on your source the British royal family are either evil, outdated, lawbreaking bigots who need taking down or they are being betrayed by family members they care for and love.
Harry is variously a protective husband righting wrongs who has been robbed of what is his; an ungrateful brat who doesn't know where his loyalties lie or he's a hostage being manipulated by a narcissistic bully who'll say whatever it takes get her own way.
Meghan is either an attention-hungry social climber who pursued Harry with an end game of having both title and Hollywood lifestyle or she's a naïve victim who didn't know who the royal family were and was bullied out of a country of racists after her voice was stolen.
I'd hazard a guess the truth is actually a pot pourri of any number of these elements. And a whole lot more.
- Awards
- 52
This is the Queen's response to the Harry and Meghan interview with Oprah:
It took her 2 days for her and her advisors to come up with those 61 words. Nowhere in it does she condemn racism which is really disappointing. She's meant to the be the head of state but where is the leadership from her in condemning racial injustice in this country? She's happy to criticise people who refuse to get a covid vaccine but she won't criticise racism. She appears not to care.
It took her 2 days for her and her advisors to come up with those 61 words. Nowhere in it does she condemn racism which is really disappointing. She's meant to the be the head of state but where is the leadership from her in condemning racial injustice in this country? She's happy to criticise people who refuse to get a covid vaccine but she won't criticise racism. She appears not to care.
- Awards
- 44
"Some recollections may vary..."
- Awards
- 18
The same criticism was made about her speech after Diana died. I don't think "appearing to care", at least in a way that we've grown to expect from people in the public eye, is something she knows how to do.
- Awards
- 5
This has really opened my eyes. Prior to this I thought the royal family was benign, they were antiquated and didn't serve any real purpose but they didn't do any real harm. I thought of the Queen as the young woman who drove an army ambulance during WWII. I thought of Diana as the woman who held the hands of AIDS patients when anyone else would have been afraid to touch them. Surely, the good these people did, out of a sense of noblesse oblige, made up for the downside of having a monarchy into the 21st century.
I've never been a fan of Oprah Winfrey. She was on one of my local TV stations (WJZ in Baltimore) when I was growing up. I remember when she got her syndicated talk show my Mom asked "how the Hell did she make the big time?!" I'm still not a fan of Winfrey - for many reasons.
I questioned the logic of this interview. Why air family grievances in public? If Harry and Meghan want to leave the spotlight of being members of the royal family why are they sitting down for an interview with Oprah Winfrey? Isn't Meghan, a modestly successful actress, simply seeking the spotlight?
I no longer think of the royal family as "benign", I don't even think of them as a "family". They are an "institution", "the firm", they are a business. Monarchy, with its emphasis on bloodlines, is inherently racist; people aren't judged on merit or accomplishment - only on their ancestry. I think the mistreatment Meghan has received is largely due to racism. I read a Buzzfeed article (I'll link it below) that compared 20 times Kate and Meghan did the same things; while Kate was praised in the most glowing terms, Meghan was strongly criticized. It reminded me of a similar article showing how the conservative media was harshly critical of Barack Obama for doing many of the same things their sainted Ronald Reagan had done (removing his suit jacket while in the Oval Office, putting his feet up on his desk and - oh the horror! - wearing a tan suit). Of course, politicians are subjected to criticism from the opposition but it usually isn't as ugly as what was directed at President Obama. What do Meghan Markle and Barack Obama have in common? Race.
I think Meghan and Harry were left with little choice but to agree to a sit-down television interview. Members of the royal family rarely agree to television interviews (except for Harry's Mum) but they wield great influence over the British tabloids. "The firm" has enough wealth and influence (and British libel laws are very different from those in the U.S.) that they could have put a stop to the vilification of Meghan in the tabloids - if they wanted to. Harry and Meghan had to respond to the frequent attacks in the press and the interview with Winfrey appeared to be the best way of doing that.
Meghan appears to be naïve about what she was getting into when she married Harry, that doesn't justify the way she was mistreated. Harry probably could have done more to prepare Meghan for life as a royal. Again, that doesn't excuse his family or the press. When Meghan was in pain and needed help she reached out to H.R.! She's a member of a family, supposedly "the best family" in the country but instead of feeling like she could reach out to one of them (or one of them having enough empathy to realize she was in pain) she thought her only option was the Human Resources Department. I repeat, they are not a family.
I think Winfrey did a good, not great, job interviewing Harry and Meghan. Winfrey obviously was chosen for the interview based on her reputation, not her skills. She should have dug deeper with her questions and asked more follow-up questions. But Winfrey did what she really set out to do: she got ratings and she has generated a lot of attention in the media. The next time a public figure wants to spill their guts in public, Winfrey will be the interviewer they choose.
Hopefully this interview has helped clear the air about a few things. Piers Morgan is now out of a job, if nothing else happens as a result of this I'll still score it a "win". Is this the "final nail in the coffin" for the monarchy? Probably not but I hope I live long enough to see it come to an end.
www.buzzfeednews.com
I've never been a fan of Oprah Winfrey. She was on one of my local TV stations (WJZ in Baltimore) when I was growing up. I remember when she got her syndicated talk show my Mom asked "how the Hell did she make the big time?!" I'm still not a fan of Winfrey - for many reasons.
I questioned the logic of this interview. Why air family grievances in public? If Harry and Meghan want to leave the spotlight of being members of the royal family why are they sitting down for an interview with Oprah Winfrey? Isn't Meghan, a modestly successful actress, simply seeking the spotlight?
I no longer think of the royal family as "benign", I don't even think of them as a "family". They are an "institution", "the firm", they are a business. Monarchy, with its emphasis on bloodlines, is inherently racist; people aren't judged on merit or accomplishment - only on their ancestry. I think the mistreatment Meghan has received is largely due to racism. I read a Buzzfeed article (I'll link it below) that compared 20 times Kate and Meghan did the same things; while Kate was praised in the most glowing terms, Meghan was strongly criticized. It reminded me of a similar article showing how the conservative media was harshly critical of Barack Obama for doing many of the same things their sainted Ronald Reagan had done (removing his suit jacket while in the Oval Office, putting his feet up on his desk and - oh the horror! - wearing a tan suit). Of course, politicians are subjected to criticism from the opposition but it usually isn't as ugly as what was directed at President Obama. What do Meghan Markle and Barack Obama have in common? Race.
I think Meghan and Harry were left with little choice but to agree to a sit-down television interview. Members of the royal family rarely agree to television interviews (except for Harry's Mum) but they wield great influence over the British tabloids. "The firm" has enough wealth and influence (and British libel laws are very different from those in the U.S.) that they could have put a stop to the vilification of Meghan in the tabloids - if they wanted to. Harry and Meghan had to respond to the frequent attacks in the press and the interview with Winfrey appeared to be the best way of doing that.
Meghan appears to be naïve about what she was getting into when she married Harry, that doesn't justify the way she was mistreated. Harry probably could have done more to prepare Meghan for life as a royal. Again, that doesn't excuse his family or the press. When Meghan was in pain and needed help she reached out to H.R.! She's a member of a family, supposedly "the best family" in the country but instead of feeling like she could reach out to one of them (or one of them having enough empathy to realize she was in pain) she thought her only option was the Human Resources Department. I repeat, they are not a family.
I think Winfrey did a good, not great, job interviewing Harry and Meghan. Winfrey obviously was chosen for the interview based on her reputation, not her skills. She should have dug deeper with her questions and asked more follow-up questions. But Winfrey did what she really set out to do: she got ratings and she has generated a lot of attention in the media. The next time a public figure wants to spill their guts in public, Winfrey will be the interviewer they choose.
Hopefully this interview has helped clear the air about a few things. Piers Morgan is now out of a job, if nothing else happens as a result of this I'll still score it a "win". Is this the "final nail in the coffin" for the monarchy? Probably not but I hope I live long enough to see it come to an end.
Here Are 20 Headlines Comparing Meghan Markle To Kate Middleton That Might Show Why She And Prince Harry Are Cutting Off Royal Reporters
Over the years, Meghan has been shamed for the same things for which her sister-in-law, Kate, has been praised.
www.buzzfeednews.com
- Awards
- 5
.."and will be addressed by the family privately." In other words, mind your own business and as the saying goes, "Nothing to see here, move along." What a bland statement The Establishment has released. The lack of words speaks volumes.
- Awards
- 52
A better response would have been "Some recollections may vary but the Royal Family condemns all forms of racism and are committed to efforts to challenging and eliminating it in all parts of society". By not addressing the central point at all and dismissing it with that throw away statement is frankly a disgrace and a slap in the face of all people who have and are experiencing racism.
Exactly!
Last edited:
- Awards
- 44
Agreed. She's nothing if not phlegmatic, which is deeply embedded as part of her public face. Didn't The Crown recently cover similar cries of "not enough" regarding royal response to Aberfan?
People do expect more these days, and I don't think she's ever going to appear to care in a way that's demonstrative enough to satisfy twenty first century culture.
It could have been more strongly worded, yes, but I'd say the response is one of restraint all round. These statements are often about reading between the lines.
It did at least single out the issue of racism as the one of most concern. And more than anything I thought the statement showed a great deal of warmth towards Harry, Meghan and Archie, which is nice (and very gracious, considering the manner in which the concerns were raised).
- Awards
- 15
I actually think she DOES care, but like you say protocol is so deeply embedded in her along with the ‘never complain, never explain’ motto she has abided by, that at 94, she probably genuinely doesn’t know what to do to appease people. But it doesn’t make it right. Charles or William can speak for her. Say something, saying nothing makes it look like no one cares.