Meghan Markle 'snubbed by BBC' - Duchess desperate for interview to be shown to UK

[Crimson Dynamo]

THE BBC will not "pull out the chequebook" to obtain rights to the Meghan
Markle exclusive interview with Oprah Winfrey - despite the intentions of the
Duchess of Sussex.

https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/130/590x/secondary/Meghan-Markle-close-up-2351770.jpg?r=1583738013813

But according to the Telegraph, Meghan wanted the 90-minute special to be
broadcasted on the BBC.

However, a source claimed the corporation was not involved in the fierce bid
war for international rights.

The source said: "We're not going to pull out the chequebook for that."

Instead of airing the "tell-all" interview, the BBC will broadcast a
Commonwealth Day celebration.

This special will feature messages from the Queen as well as Prince Charles,
Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, and Prince William and Kate, the Duchess
of Cambridge.

It is believed negotiations for international rights involved Sky and ITV.

https://be35832fa5168a30acd6-5c7e0f2623ae37b4a933167fe83d71b5.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.c om/2512/william-and-kate-laughing__hero.jpg?1461929407

In the past, Princess Diana’s interview with BBC Panorama shook the world,
but she was said to later regret some of the things she said.

Now, the Daily Mirror royal editor Russell Myers said the Oprah interview is a
"disaster waiting to happen".

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1402436/meghan-markle-news-prince-harry-bbc-oprah-winfrey-interview-queen-elizabeth-ii-royal-famil

[Samm]

two mehgan threads in the last 2 days, well LT I'll sign you up to the fan club! :clap1:

[rusticgal]

Good for the BBC....supporting The Monarchy instead of 2 people who just want to trash it.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Finally, the BBC make a correct decision!

[UserSince2005]

Shes poison.

[Crimson Dynamo]

two mehgan threads in the last 2 days, well LT I'll sign you up to the fan club! :clap1:

https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=5139&stc=1&d=1614259063

[Ammi]

https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=5139&stc=1&d=1614259063

..that’s when we had her on TiBB Open the Box and she was the first $250,000 winner...amazing...:lovedup:...

[jet]

Good for the BBC....supporting The Monarchy instead of 2 people who just want to trash it.

Yes, good on them!
"The source said: "We're not going to pull out the chequebook for that."

Oops. :laugh:

[UserSince2005]

https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=5139&stc=1&d=1614259063

Trash and always will be.

[arista]

"International rights involved Sky and ITV."


Thats Fine
they can share it.

[Niamh.]

..that’s when we had her on TiBB Open the Box and she was the first $250,000 winner...amazing...:lovedup:...

:laugh:

[Jordan.]

Her hater critics will pretend to rejoice despite the fact they want to watch it.

[jet]

https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=5139&stc=1&d=1614259063

Has she never heard the saying "Cleavage OR legs, never both at once!" :hehe:

[Tom4784]

So she 'desperately' wanted the interview to be aired over here but there's nothing backing that up? Just another hit piece article aimed at the gullible people that hate her and lack the critical thinking skills to see the issues with the story.

[Cherie]

I will watch it of course, (if I can), wouldn't listen to any pod casts though, that is a step too far :hee:

[Tom4784]

Has she never heard the saying "Cleavage OR legs, never both at once!" :hehe:

Judging a woman for showing off a bit of leg and a small bit of cleavage? Tell me, when did you time travel from the 50's?

[jet]

Judging a woman for showing off a bit of leg and a small bit of cleavage? Tell me, when did you time travel from the 50's?

Thank goodness I have a sense of humour and don't take the slightest thing as deadly serious and an insult.

[Crimson Dynamo]

So she 'desperately' wanted the interview to be aired over here but there's nothing backing that up? Just another hit piece article aimed at the gullible people that hate her and lack the critical thinking skills to see the issues with the story.

I think I will probably side with the Daily Telegraph and their info on this as they are professional journalists ..

-----------------------------------

The BBC will not be “pulling out its cheque book” for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey, the Telegraph can reveal.

The Duchess, 39, is understood to have wanted the highly anticipated tete-a-tete to be broadcast on the most prestigious British channel.



https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/02/24/bbc-rules-running-uk-rights-harry-meghans-oprah-interview/

[Tom4784]

Thank goodness I have a sense of humour and don't take the slightest thing as deadly serious and an insult.

I have a great sense of humour, I just don't find slutshaming someone for wearing a pretty basic and unrevealing dress and then retroactively passing it off as a joke funny.

[Cherie]

I think I will probably side with the Daily Telegraph and their info on this as they are professional journalists ..

-----------------------------------

The BBC will not be “pulling out its cheque book” for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey, the Telegraph can reveal.

The Duchess, 39, is understood to have wanted the highly anticipated tete-a-tete to be broadcast on the most prestigious British channel.



https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/02/24/bbc-rules-running-uk-rights-harry-meghans-oprah-interview/

Just like Diana got prime time?

On November 20, 1995, the BBC managed to pull off a royal coup when veteran Panorama journalist Martin Bashir spoke to Princess Diana in her first solo interview since her marriage to Prince...

She should have tried to hook up with Bashir lol

[Ammi]

Has she never heard the saying "Cleavage OR legs, never both at once!" :hehe:

...I’m sorry but that really is quite sexist...

[Marsh.]

"Desperate" for it to be shown on the BBC?

Aye, sure she is. :joker:

[Jordan.]

I have a great sense of humour, I just don't find slutshaming someone for wearing a pretty basic and unrevealing dress and then retroactively passing it off as a joke funny.

...I’m sorry but that really is quite sexist...

:clap1:

[bots]

i'm confused, is this interview not on netflix? If it is then they will be the ones that pocket any earnings from international TV rights

[AnnieK]

i'm confused, is this interview not on netflix? If it is then they will be the ones that pocket any earnings from international TV rights

No, its not. They wanted it on non subscription channels so it ruled out Netflix and Amazon Prime apparently

[Niamh.]

i'm confused, is this interview not on netflix? If it is then they will be the ones that pocket any earnings from international TV rights

No it isn't, it will be on ITV according to an article I just posted on it

[jet]

...I’m sorry but that really is quite sexist...

It was a light -hearted remark, this emote should have helped -:hehe: - but don't miss the opportunity to throw an 'ist' at me.
BTW, it heard it from the wife who read it out to our daughter from one of her 'Cosmopolitan' mags. I suppose the wife and Cosmo are sexist too.

[Niamh.]

It was a light -hearted remark, this emote should have helped -:hehe: - but don't miss the opportunity to throw an 'ist' at me.
BTW, it heard it from the wife who read it out to our daughter from one of her 'Cosmopolitan' mags. I suppose the wife and Cosmo are sexist too.

I would say Cosmopolitan magazine is pretty sexist tbf

[jet]

I have a great sense of humour, I just don't find slutshaming someone for wearing a pretty basic and unrevealing dress and then retroactively passing it off as a joke funny.

Slutshaming. Get a grip. :laugh:

[Ammi]

...as Niamh said, Cosmopolitan can be sexist in vibe as well and I didn’t take an opportunity, I saw a sexist remark and commented that it was one, is all...

[Tom4784]

Slutshaming. Get a grip. :laugh:

I call it how it is.

[Niamh.]

...as Niamh said, Cosmopolitan can be sexist in vibe as well and I didn’t take an opportunity, I saw a sexist remark and commented that it was one, is all...

“That’s over 5,000 stores where families and individuals will no longer be automatically exposed to Cosmo’s hypersexualised and degrading article titles that regularly promote pornography, sexting, BDSM, group sex, anal sex, and more, all while marketing toward young teens with Disney star cover models"

.........but also don't show legs and cleavage at the same time girls!!

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/fashion/walmart-cosmopolitan-magazine-checkout-aisles-women-hypersexualised-degrading-female-sexuality-a8278201.html

[Ammi]

...and sexism and sexist remarks do grow as well so a sexist joke is also still sexist...I said in this thread or another one, I can’t recall...about a comment I’d read under a newspaper article/..in the comment section...why didn’t Harry just rent Meghan by the hour, why did he marry her ...these type of things can just grow and grow...anyways, that all because I’m not taking ‘any opportunity’...I’m just explaining why I would always make comment on words such as those...

[Ammi]

“That’s over 5,000 stores where families and individuals will no longer be automatically exposed to Cosmo’s hypersexualised and degrading article titles that regularly promote pornography, sexting, BDSM, group sex, anal sex, and more, all while marketing toward young teens with Disney star cover models"

.........but also don't show legs and cleavage at the same time girls!!

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/fashion/walmart-cosmopolitan-magazine-checkout-aisles-women-hypersexualised-degrading-female-sexuality-a8278201.html

...one of the things that I’ve found really infuriating which has been so noticeable in COVID times ...is an apparent
‘news’ article of a female celebrity....I think Michelle Pfeiffer was one of them but the articles are every day...and when you click to read...?..it’s just ...oh, showing off her shapely legs or wow, she looks great in a bikini etc...it’s all about the body in a way that I don’t ever see with males ...

[Niamh.]

...one of the things that I’ve found really infuriating which has been so noticeable in COVID times ...is an apparent
‘news’ article of a female celebrity....I think Michelle Pfeiffer was one of them but the articles are every day...and when you click to read...?..it’s just ...oh, showing off her shapely legs or wow, she looks great in a bikini etc...it’s all about the body in a way that I don’t ever see with males ...

Yeah, totally agree. I watched a video with Scarlett Johansson as well recently with all the sexist questions she gets asked during interviews promoting her films, she usually pulls them up on it as well which i love

[jet]

A sense of humour is still a wonderful thing, even when relating to all the 'ists'.
Some take things so seriously, life is too short to be on high alert all the time for those perceived 'ists'.

[Tom4784]

People who usually aren't one of the 'ists' can put their hands up and admit when they're wrong. They don't try to pass off slutshaming as a joke and then lash out at people for pointing it out.

[Niamh.]

A sense of humour is still a wonderful thing, even when relating to all the 'ists'.
Some take things so seriously, life is too short to be on high alert all the time for those perceived 'ists'.

Sure, it's usually men though who think sexist jokes are hilarious and people should lighten up

[jet]

People who usually aren't one of the 'ists' can put their hands up and admit when they're wrong. They don't try to pass off slutshaming as a joke and then lash out at people for pointing it out.

I would if I WAS wrong. It was a light hearted remark, no offense meant at all.
I'm not going to crumble because some people chose to make a big ole mountain out of it because its me. I'm not daft. :laugh:

[user104658]

I would if I WAS wrong. It was a light hearted remark, no offense meant at all.

I'm not going to crumble because some people chose to make a big ole mountain out of it because its me. I'm not daft. [emoji23]A tip jet; if your sexist jokes only have other men laughing and most women are saying it's sexist, then it's probably sensible to think "hmm was I maybe being a bit sexist?" and not "you meanies just don't understand my stellar sense of humour!"

[jet]

A tip jet; if your sexist jokes only have other men laughing and most women are saying it's sexist, then it's probably sensible to think "hmm was I maybe being a bit sexist?" and not "you meanies just don't understand my stellar sense of humour!"

I wasn't being sexist, as I know I'm not, it was a light hearted remark but I apologize for any offense taken.

There have been other posts today, calling Meghan TRASHY, isn't that sexist? but no - one batted an eyelid. Hmmm....

[jet]

THE BBC will not "pull out the chequebook" to obtain rights to the Meghan
Markle exclusive interview with Oprah Winfrey - despite the intentions of the
Duchess of Sussex.

https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/130/590x/secondary/Meghan-Markle-close-up-2351770.jpg?r=1583738013813

But according to the Telegraph, Meghan wanted the 90-minute special to be
broadcasted on the BBC.

However, a source claimed the corporation was not involved in the fierce bid
war for international rights.

The source said: "We're not going to pull out the chequebook for that."

Instead of airing the "tell-all" interview, the BBC will broadcast a
Commonwealth Day celebration.

This special will feature messages from the Queen as well as Prince Charles,
Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, and Prince William and Kate, the Duchess
of Cambridge.

It is believed negotiations for international rights involved Sky and ITV.

https://be35832fa5168a30acd6-5c7e0f2623ae37b4a933167fe83d71b5.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.c om/2512/william-and-kate-laughing__hero.jpg?1461929407

In the past, Princess Diana’s interview with BBC Panorama shook the world,
but she was said to later regret some of the things she said.

Now, the Daily Mirror royal editor Russell Myers said the Oprah interview is a
"disaster waiting to happen".

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1402436/meghan-markle-news-prince-harry-bbc-oprah-winfrey-interview-queen-elizabeth-ii-royal-famil

Gorgeous pic of our future King and Queen. They look so happy together. :love:

[Oliver_W]

I wasn't being sexist, as I know I'm not, it was a light hearted remark but I apologize for any offense taken.

There have been other posts today, calling Meghan TRASHY, isn't that sexist? but no - one batted an eyelid. Hmmm....

To be fair people of both genders can be trashy. Meghan's trashiness has nothing to do with her sex.

[jet]

To be fair people of both genders can be trashy. Meghan's trashiness has nothing to do with her sex.

Do posters agree with this?

[Niamh.]

Do posters agree with this?

I wouldn't have thought trashy was just reserved for women, I've heard TV shows called trashy and newspapers too. I would have thought it meant low quality, classless type thing?

[jet]

I wouldn't have thought trashy was just reserved for women, I've heard TV shows called trashy and newspapers too. I would have thought it meant low quality, classless type thing?

I've read (and heard) women say it's sexist because men don't get called trashy for how they may dress.

[Niamh.]

I've read (and heard) women say it's sexist because men don't get called trashy for how they may dress.

I didn't actually see the comment you're talking about, was it about that dress she was wearing, the one that you also commented on? In the context then yeah I'd say it's sexist

[Amy Jade]

People really are obsessed, good or bad.

I bet the interview will serve whoever screens it very well, people love talking about Meghan!

[Ammi]

...it would depend on the context and how it’s being used...to describe someone as ‘trash’ isn’t sexist, necessarily ...because males can be called trash as well...I’ve heard it many times in reference to something like Jerry Springer guests, for instance...whether male or female...but I’m pretty sure it’s an ‘ist’....showing prejudice...

[rusticgal]

Her hater critics will pretend to rejoice despite the fact they want to watch it.


It will be hard to critique them if we dont watch it...:laugh:

[rusticgal]

I suppose if its on ITV we have a bit of down time every 20mins...:laugh:

[jet]

I didn't actually see the comment you're talking about, was it about that dress she was wearing, the one that you also commented on? In the context then yeah I'd say it's sexist

I'll PM you, don't really want to carry on bringing another poster into it.

[jet]

I suppose if its on ITV we have a bit of down time every 20mins...:laugh:

I'll record and watch it later so I can pause at any time to have a retch in a sick bucket. :hehe:

[rusticgal]

I'll record and watch it later so I can pause at any time to have a retch in a sick bucket. :hehe:

Lol...I just put that on another thread :laugh: Great minds...:laugh:

[Elliot]

Icons

[Oliver_W]

I've read (and heard) women say it's sexist because men don't get called trashy for how they may dress.

What even would be trashy dress for a man? Having a bollock hanging out?

[Scarlett.]

I really really don't understand this weird obsession everyone has with Meghan

[Oliver_W]

I really really don't understand this weird obsession everyone has with Meghan

Same, and that goes for people on both sides of that particular fence.

Like, she's a bit ghastly, but not quite worthy of hatred. Nor is there anything much to love about her ... apart from "slay kween, she triggers the racists, we love to see it" or something :rolleyes:

[Beso]

Shes dull as dish water...and hes much the same.

Yet they demand to be celebs instead of royals..


I'd rather watch marco sabas 24/7.

[rusticgal]

I really really don't understand this weird obsession everyone has with Meghan



Well it’s Harry AND Meghan under discussion....and whilst they keep making headlines people will continue to discuss them...:shrug:

[user104658]

Same, and that goes for people on both sides of that particular fence.

Like, she's a bit ghastly, but not quite worthy of hatred. Nor is there anything much to love about her ... apart from "slay kween, she triggers the racists, we love to see it" or something :rolleyes:

I don't have any particular feelings about Harry and Meghan either way and if you absolutely had to push me, they're a little bit took "woke" for me to take entirely seriously but each to their own.

That's not going to stop me going in on the varying degrees of racism, classism and misogyny that oozes from those who will take any opportunity to attack Meghan... especially the ones who want to spin a "poor little Harry" narrative alongside.

[GoldHeart]

Oh because the BBC is such a good broadcasting company aren't they with their innocent moral high ground ?? :whistle::idc: .

[Cherie]

I don't have any particular feelings about Harry and Meghan either way and if you absolutely had to push me, they're a little bit took "woke" for me to take entirely seriously but each to their own.

That's not going to stop me going in on the varying degrees of racism, classism and misogyny that oozes from those who will take any opportunity to attack Meghan... especially the ones who want to spin a "poor little Harry" narrative alongside.

Yeah I don’t buy that at all, I think he is worse because he knew what Meghan was getting into but when ahead with a showy wedding etc anyway, should have set out his stall from the off, he is in his 30s not 17

[arista]

I really really don't understand this weird obsession everyone has with Meghan



Its Hatred
not obsession.



GMBHD itv
showed a new clip of James Corden
with the Prince Harry on a tour Bus
but then he goes on a mobile phone
and its Meghan

She calls the Prince "Haz"

[arista]

[Prince Harry has revealed he stepped back
from his royal duties because the British
press was "toxic" and was "destroying" his mental health.

The royal gave a candid interview to
British talk show
host James Corden's The Late Late Show - with the
pair touring Los Angeles on an open air bus
with afternoon tea.
Harry opened up about why he withdrew
from Royal duties, insisting "I did not walk away",
but had to leave due to the
British press affecting his mental health.

He said it was a "really difficult environment,
as I think a lot of people saw".
"We all know what the British press can be like.
And it was destroying my mental health. This is toxic."
He added: "So I did what any husband
and father would do - I need to get my family out of here.]


https://news.sky.com/story/prince-harry-reveals-he-stepped-down-because-british-press-was-destroying-his-mental-health-12229258

[arista]

Pathetic BBC1AM

Had a brief clip
but only on silly stuff. (about the baby)

And James Corden is on UK SkyComedyHD


So BBC1AM put CBS USA.

[user104658]

Harry: "My mental health was suffering because of the toxic British press."

The British press: "He is LYING and being CONTROLLED, his mental health was suffering because of his toxic wife!"

[Oliver_W]

Harry: "My mental health was suffering because of the toxic British press."

The British press: "He is LYING and being CONTROLLED, his mental health was suffering because of his toxic wife!"

:joker:

Exactly. Even if she is toxic and controlling, the rags don't exactly help.

[arista]

Arthur Edwards (Royal Photographer)
speaking on GMBHD itv
said Prince Harry he wondered what he has got in his head?

Arthur said it all changed after Meghan came along

[Livia]

Why do the Meghan Fan Club assume everyone who either doesn't like Meghan, or those who are indifferent towards her, are "haters". I don't spend any emotion on her. and really, I find the Meghan love a little creepy, seeing that no one knew her before she married Harry, except those who watched Suits. Hollywood Royalty she ain't.

[Livia]

I don't have any particular feelings about Harry and Meghan either way and if you absolutely had to push me, they're a little bit took "woke" for me to take entirely seriously but each to their own.

That's not going to stop me going in on the varying degrees of racism, classism and misogyny that oozes from those who will take any opportunity to attack Meghan... especially the ones who want to spin a "poor little Harry" narrative alongside.

I take it you're discussing people generally and not those on TiBB.

No one really knows. Not you, not me, not the haters, not the Fan Club... And the more speculation goes on the further from the truth everyone gets.

They want to be left alone. Let's help them with that.

[AnnieK]

Why do the Meghan Fan Club assume everyone who either doesn't like Meghan, or those who are indifferent towards her, are "haters". I don't spend any emotion on her. and really, I find the Meghan love a little creepy, seeing that no one knew her before she married Harry, except those who watched Suits. Hollywood Royalty she ain't.

I know what you are saying but people knew less about Kate Middleton before she and William got married and she was loved for the get go too. I don't think you have to have known them previously to admire them when they do get into the spotlight

[Livia]

I know what you are saying but people knew less about Kate Middleton before she and William got married and she was loved for the get go too. I don't think you have to have known them previously to admire them when they do get into the spotlight

William was with Kate for years, they were at Uni together. I remember all the headlines she got too. "Waity Katie", because the press thought it was time she was married. She was called a commoner and her family were ridiculed. She had ten years of it before they got married.

Meghan, however, was engaged, married, gave birth and left the country all within about 18 months.

Hey Annie x

[user104658]

I take it you're discussing people generally and not those on TiBB.



No one really knows. Not you, not me, not the haters, not the Fan Club... And the more speculation goes on the further from the truth everyone gets.



They want to be left alone. Let's help them with that.

:omgno: I would NEVER discuss other members or their various flavours of bigotry.

I can somewhat agree that they were a bit hard-line on the wanting to be left entirely alone if they still want to live a public life through their own work (and, it seems, they do) - choosing that as a career means accepting some degree of public comment.

That said, I don't think it should be a press free-for-all when it comes to celebrities and I don't think asking for the vitriolic press to lay off a bit is a huge ask. I would think it reasonable request from any high-profile individual. Public discourse is one thing but there should be tighter restrictions on the accuracy and tone of what's actually published, be that physical or digital.

[jet]

Nothing new there - the "I don't want people talking about our private life" Harry, formerly known as Prince, talking about their private life again. :sleep:

[Crimson Dynamo]

:omgno: I would NEVER discuss other members or their various flavours of bigotry.

I can somewhat agree that they were a bit hard-line on the wanting to be left entirely alone if they still want to live a public life through their own work (and, it seems, they do) - choosing that as a career means accepting some degree of public comment.

That said, I don't think it should be a press free-for-all when it comes to celebrities and I don't think asking for the vitriolic press to lay off a bit is a huge ask. I would think it reasonable request from any high-profile individual. Public discourse is one thing but there should be tighter restrictions on the accuracy and tone of what's actually published, be that physical or digital.

Unlike most Social media the press are governed by an independent body and can and regularly get into trouble fined and have to print retractions etc.

Pretending they are this wild pack of wolves is untrue.


"Following the Leveson Inquiry the Press Recognition Panel (PRP) was set up under the Royal Charter on self-regulation of the press to judge whether press regulators meet the criteria recommended by the Leveson Inquiry for recognition under the Charter. By 2016 the UK had two new press regulatory bodies, the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO), which regulates most national newspapers and many other media outlets, and IMPRESS, which regulates a much smaller number of outlets but is the only press regulator recognised by the PRP (since October 2016). Ofcom also oversees the use of social media and devices in the United Kingdom. BBC reports that Ofcom analyzes media use of the youth (ages 3 to 15 years old) to gather information of how the United Kingdom utilizes their media.

Broadcast media (TV, radio, video on demand), telecommunications, and postal services are regulated by Ofcom


wiki

[user104658]

Unlike most Social media the press are governed by an independent body and can and regularly get into trouble fined and have to print retractions etc.



Pretending they are this wild pack of wolves is untrue.





"Following the Leveson Inquiry the Press Recognition Panel (PRP) was set up under the Royal Charter on self-regulation of the press to judge whether press regulators meet the criteria recommended by the Leveson Inquiry for recognition under the Charter. By 2016 the UK had two new press regulatory bodies, the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO), which regulates most national newspapers and many other media outlets, and IMPRESS, which regulates a much smaller number of outlets but is the only press regulator recognised by the PRP (since October 2016). Ofcom also oversees the use of social media and devices in the United Kingdom. BBC reports that Ofcom analyzes media use of the youth (ages 3 to 15 years old) to gather information of how the United Kingdom utilizes their media.



Broadcast media (TV, radio, video on demand), telecommunications, and postal services are regulated by Ofcom





wiki

Pointing out that regulation exists says nothing at all about whether or not that regulation is effective... They get fined, they pay it (its built into their bottom line - they expect it)... They post a tiny one paragraph retraction that no one reads to a story that was a two-page spread and they move on. There are clear examples of it happening time and time again.

You're basically TELLING me that my opinion should be that the UK press is fine, because Wikipedia says so :think:. Thankfully I use my own brain to make decisions rather than wiki pages, so I'm comfortable maintaining my position that the UK press is a heaving pile of toxic trash, written by trash journalists and slobbered over by a trash readership. Might edit the wiki and stick that in there.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Pointing out that regulation exists says nothing at all about whether or not that regulation is effective... They get fined, they pay it (its built into their bottom line - they expect it)... They post a tiny one paragraph retraction that no one reads to a story that was a two-page spread and they move on. There are clear examples of it happening time and time again.

You're basically TELLING me that my opinion should be that the UK press is fine, because Wikipedia says so :think:. Thankfully I use my own brain to make decisions rather than wiki pages, so I'm comfortable maintaining my position that the UK press is a heaving pile of toxic trash, written by trash journalists and slobbered over by a trash readership. Might edit the wiki and stick that in there.

i am pointing out a fact that our press is regulated as is radio and tv and most of social media is not

our press have exposed many things over the years. no one forces anyone to buy a paper or look at the website.

[user104658]

i am pointing out a fact that our press is regulated as is radio and tv and most of social media is not



our press have exposed many things over the years. no one forces anyone to buy a paper or look at the website.

Social media is not the press, and while its a shambles for many of its own reasons, they're not the same reasons. People (the dumber ones) defer a certain amount of respect/trust to the press. They think, "what do you mean that's not true? It was in the paper..." whereas everyone is mostly aware that twitter opinions are opinions.

Pointing out that they've exposed things that needed exposing isn't really saying anything either - they can so that without the flipside (the tabloidy clickbait trash). I'm not saying "there should be NO PRESS!" I'm saying the press we have needs better regulation with meaningful consequences for harassment, misinformation and dodgy practices.

[jet]

Not really TS. That has been borne out over the years. Everyone thought what the press were reporting about Diana and Charles over the years was rubbish - many quite intimate details which people were saying "How would they know that!"

Then Diana's book was published, and she did the Bashir interview and Charles's bio was published and he did the Dimbleby interview and well....there it all was.....
Same with other Royals too over the years.

The press can't just make things up all over the show, they are accountable. They over - dramatize, sure, the front page headlines are often misleading, but there is more often than not truth in there....and the broadsheets usually carry exactly the same reports in a more, shall we say, dignified way....

[jet]

....and then there are the reliable and time - proven royal commentators and authors who are worth a listen on whatever the subject is in articles and good 'talking heads' docu's.
If things add up, well then, they can't just be discarded out of hand...