[user104658]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Pretty much, and the public are just as much to blame, since the media wouldn't focus on things that don't get clicks. Both the media and the public find Meghan more offensive than a peadophile who has escaped any kind of justice. I honestly despise the people of this country at times. We are a nation of weak willed bootlickers, all too happy to lap up the **** that gets given to us with nary a complaint while we're told to hate a woman for existing and to ignore the predator in our midst.

Much as I'm skeptical of the GBP on a wide range of topics, and I don't think this is entirely wrong, I would say in this case it's one playing into the other - the public aren't disinterested in stories about Andrew, they would lap up those front pages, but the media NOTICEABLE shy away from it. It's "there" because they couldn't get away with not reporting on it at all, but there is a clear effort on their part to keep the reporting on him to a minimum. Someone has their grubby fingers all over it (and not just Andrew). Whereas Meghan is clearly considered "press fair game". Partly because she's female, I'm sure, but in this case I think the clear major difference is that she's "not actually Royal Blood". Same two reasons she has to soak up most criticism of Harry, as well as her own.