[Cherry Christmas]

what is all this about, what press reports? .. all I have seen is that she felt unsupported during her pregnancy? how is that the press hounding them

[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by Cherie

what is all this about, what press reports? .. all I have seen is that she felt unsupported during her pregnancy? how is that the press hounding them

Lol...that’s just the point. She isn’t being hounded. Sadly negative reports here and there are being seen as being hounded.
Now Diana was hounded by the press because she was loved and everyone wanted to read about her...that’s the real tragedy.

[Good King Glennceslas]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

Lol...that’s just the point. She isn’t being hounded. Sadly negative reports here and there are being seen as being hounded.
Now Diana was hounded by the press because she was loved and everyone wanted to read about her...that’s the real tragedy.

The Daily Mail has hundreds of negative stories on Meghan. Let’s not pretend otherwise.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

The Daily Mail has hundreds of negative stories on Meghan. Let’s not pretend otherwise.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

The Daily Mail has hundreds of negative stories on Meghan. Let’s not pretend otherwise.

How do you know? You must be obsessed reading all those hundreds. I only ever seek out articles by Royal correspondents online. I used to read a variety of papers but not any more.

Links to some of these negative stories please? I might be able to refute or verify some of them by referring to the Royal correspondents usually knowledgeable assessments.
Thanks.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

I only ever seek out articles by Royal correspondents online..

The last article you brought into this thread proves this to be a lie.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

The last article you brought into this thread proves this to be a lie.

It was a factual piece with no criticism of Meghan and Harry...to point out newspapers don't always pick on the poor little victim even though they could have in that article.
Seeking out decent articles and coming across them occasionally online in links and either ignoring or considering them post worthy are 2 different things.
You don't want to reveal your age then? That's okay, I'll hazard a guess, 16,17?

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

It was a factual piece with no criticism of Meghan and Harry...to point out newspapers don't always pick on the poor little victim even though they could have in that article.
Seeking out decent articles and coming across them occasionally online in links and either ignoring or considering them post worthy are 2 different things.

Saying you "only seek out articles by Royal correspondents online" was a lie no matter how you're trying to rephrase it now.

Originally Posted by jet

You don't want to reveal your age then? That's okay, I'll hazard a guess, 16,17?

What's your age? I'd hazard a guess significantly older than Meghan Markle.

[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

The Daily Mail has hundreds of negative stories on Meghan. Let’s not pretend otherwise.

The definition of hounding someone is to chase someone or refuse to leave them alone especially because you want to get something from them. Diana was hounded for those very reasons. Meghan receives some bad press and negative stories this does not equate to hounding. They are not chasing her quite literally like they did Diana...they don’t want anything from her like they did Diana. She and Harry quit the Royal family for a quiet life...if you keep putting yourself out there for publicity then expect it..good or bad.
In response to the OP...they don’t compare in the terms of ‘hounding’.

[Good King Glennceslas]

Originally Posted by jet

How do you know? You must be obsessed reading all those hundreds. I only ever seek out articles by Royal correspondents online. I used to read a variety of papers but not any more.

Links to some of these negative stories please? I might be able to refute or verify some of them by referring to the Royal correspondents usually knowledgeable assessments.
Thanks.

There’s this thing called a search function. I typed in her name and 194 pages of articles were the result.

Originally Posted by rusticgal

The definition of hounding someone is to chase someone or refuse to leave them alone especially because you want to get something from them. Diana was hounded for those very reasons. Meghan receives some bad press and negative stories this does not equate to hounding. They are not chasing her quite literally like they did Diana...they don’t want anything from her like they did Diana. She and Harry quit the Royal family for a quiet life...if you keep putting yourself out there for publicity then expect it..good or bad.
In response to the OP...they don’t compare in the terms of ‘hounding’.

It’s not ‘some’ bad press though is it. It’s a LOT of tabloid crap that idiots lap up like thirsty dogs.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

There’s this thing called a search function. I typed in her name and 194 pages of articles were the result.

So how do you know hundreds of them were negative? You can't know that unless you read them all - my word.... -

[Good King Glennceslas]

Originally Posted by jet

So how do you know hundreds of them were negative? You can't know that unless you read them all - my word.... -

It’s the Daily Mail...


EDIT: page 1 of 194 features 14 sensationalised negative stories

[jet]

Originally Posted by Cherie

what is all this about, what press reports? .. all I have seen is that she felt unsupported during her pregnancy? how is that the press hounding them

Yes Cherie, she is hardly mentioned now but the coming court case about her fathers letter in which she complains about press coverage will be of interest to them for sure:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/p...ries-vr7ptvf7n

Palace press team ‘couldn’t defend Meghan against true stories’

The Duchess of Sussex felt that she was unprotected by the royal “institution” because she could not do anything about the stream of stories about her deteriorating relationship with her staff, The Times has learnt.
Meghan’s lawyers have said in legal papers filed at the High Court that her mental health was damaged by negative coverage while she was pregnant.

A source has confirmed that this refers to the palace machinery, rather than members of the family: above all, in other words, her former media team. “No one thinks this is going to end well,” a source said. “For anyone.”

Other passages in the documents — a response from her lawyers to questions raised by The Mail on Sunday, which Meghan is suing for breach of privacy — spell out her unhappiness with the Kensington Palace communications team and their policy of not commenting on press reports.

Her anger grew over two strands of stories dominating the news agenda about her: her relations with staff, especially the number who had quit, and the criticism of her by her family, especially Samantha Grant, her half-sister.

One story that made the duchess particularly dissatisfied was the resignation of her PA, Melissa Toubati, who quit six months after the royal wedding in 2018. There were reports that she had been reduced to tears by Meghan’s demands.

However, the communications team found it hard to deny the reports because they were largely true. “The stories were a drop in the ocean compared to what was going on,” another source said. Meghan, 38, also wanted something done about the sniping from Ms Grant, who among other things called her sister “a shallow social climber”. Kensington Palace was never going to get involved over one woman voicing her opinions from Florida......