In throwing out major elements of her argument against Associated Newspapers yesterday, the Duchess of Sussex’s defeat marked not just a battle loss, but the start of a worse stage for her war
‘MeGain’ should quit whilst she’s (just about) still ahead. Whilst public support for her is still just about there in some quarters as, frankly, distaste for the Mail and its parent operation remains high, this ‘I don’t want to be a royal anymore but I want everything that went with being a royal’ looks increasingly isolated after having major part of her case against Associated Newspapers deservedly struck out yesterday.
In delivering his ruling on Friday, Mr Justice Warby pointedly remarked that parts of the duchess’s case were “irrelevant” and “inadequately detailed.” He went further and totally ignored her claim of “dishonest behaviour” and now, according to Mark Stephens, a libel and privacy expert at the law firm Howard Kennedy, will be forced to pay a bill of upto £250,000 in costs as a result of her totally “ill-informed” claim.
Worse still, the Duchess of Sussex now faces the prospect of her five friends – whom most curiously still remain unnamed at this stage (raising the question of: “Do they actually exist?”) – being dragged into the witness box. In addition, yet more embarrassment and costs will follow for the royal family she once so used to crave being part of and as a result we today join those telling this mendacious madam: “Enough is enough. Put a stop to your nonsense before it is too late.”
Irrational ‘Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells’ type correspondence is on the increase in national newspapers during the coronavirus lockdown; ‘Horrified of Haddenham’ cash-coronavirus conspiracist Garry May is a fine case in point
The coronavirus lockdown has no doubt resulted in a dramatic increase in the number of ‘Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells’ (and even paradoxically ‘Delighted of Tunbridge Wells’) types corresponding with both national and local newspapers. There are, after all, now many more people moping around at home with little else to do other than to ponder with a pen (or clatter on a keyboard).
Whilst in November 2019, The Telegraph stated that its letters editor received and read 600 missives per day from readers (and subsequently published 18 of them in their next edition) and in June that year, the Guardian referenced a by comparison meagre sum of 82 per day (citing 30,000 communications annually), one can only assume that both publications have seen huge spikes in their mailbags in the last few weeks – the content of which of course now mostly arrives by email rather than with the help of the Royal Mail.
Editors such as Christopher Howse – who has worked on The Telegraph’s letters pages for over twenty years – however, is plainly still favouring letters from his reliable riled-up regulars and yesterday was no exception. In publishing a totally irrational observation from one Garry May of Haddenham, Buckinghamshire linking cash to coronavirus (a totally nonsensical view very clearly empirically denied by the World Health Organisation in March), the paper fulfilled its ability to share views to spread yet more Eamonn Holmes-esque claptrap. This kind of 5G type twaddle will no doubt appeal to its stereotypical conspiracy theory believing old buffer audience, but it is without factual base.
SIR – I hope this pandemic cements the use of debit cards for all transactions, and thereby the end of cash.
Bank notes and coins spread diseases. Ruling out ready money could also put an end to most drug deals on our streets.
Garry May
Haddenham, Buckinghamshire
On a date exact unknown circa 2011, in a letter to The Telegraph, that was subsequently republished in the compilation book The Lunatics Have Taken Over The Asylum: Political Letters to The Daily Telegraph, Mr May previously shared his views on phone hacking. He presented yet another pastiche of days gone by and read:
SIR – The hacking scandal left my family debating who we can still rely on. Our shortlist of trustworthies came down to the Gurkhas, other ranks in our Armed Forces, postmen and Simon the pieman, who works in the butcher’s shop.
Garry May
Haddenham, Buckinghamshire
Mr May’s archaic idealism might resonate as charming and worthy, but what should be noted is that this prolific man of letters belonging in the 1950s lives in Haddenham, a quintessential English village that most definitely has Midsomer Murders-esque qualities (it was used as a location in eight episodes of the television drama even). One of only three ‘wychert’ settlements in the country and a place peppered with thatched cottages and a duck pond famed for breeding Aylesbury ducks, one can imagine the era of “old maids bicycling to holy communion through the morning mist” John Major-style still reigns in this parish.
Indeed, at this time, as countless rural residents turn to growing their own vegetables and even start going to their local ‘community shop’ in order to avoid queuing for hours whilst safe distancing at Tesco, many will join in eulogising a love of postmen and piemen and – quite rightly – a loathing for evil drug dealers also.
Sadly, however, getting rid of cash will not wipe out that particularly vile scourge on society and it will not stop the spread of coronavirus. Instead, maybe it’s time for ‘Horrified of Haddenham’ to find another topic to get het up about: Perhaps, indeed, Mr May could turn his pen to the squealing sickness of snitching ‘quarantine shaming’ or maybe he could just calm down and pour himself a large G&T.
An early example of ‘Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells’ correspondence:
SIR – Being present at the unveiling of the plaque on Thursday last week on the Pantiles, I was surprised when the National Anthem was played to see that in a place like Tunbridge Wells, which is noted for its loyalty and calls itself ‘Royal,’ there should be people who refused to remove their hats. Are such people Communists? If they are, Tunbridge Wells should be no place for such as they. We can do without them.
Letters to the Editor, ‘Tunbridge Wells Advertiser’ – 14th June 1929.
Pictured top: Haddenham, Buckinghamshire – a quintessentially quaint English village with a duck pond and thatched cottages from whence nosy parkers peer from behind net curtains.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, in stoking a new war with the press (but strangely not including ‘The Sunday Sport’) just prior to the commencement of their case against Associated Newspapers, have yet again proved themselves as nothing but ridiculous attention seekers suggests Matthew Steeples
In a way you can’t blame the “tone death wastrels” that are the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for their latest move. In announcing they’ll childishly be ignoring the likes of the Daily Mail and The Sun completely henceforth, one can fathom that they think that such a strategy will make their ‘problems’ go away. Frankly, these entitled brats will very deservedly find quite to the contrary.
In a statement that appears to have been written by someone with no grasp or command of common sense or correct use of grammar, sent at the height of a global pandemic killing thousands each day, attention seeker ‘MeGain’ has achieved exactly what she wants: A return to herself garnering acres of press attention each and every moment. This mendacious madam has utterly no shame – after all, for her, it’s always just been the “me, me and more about bloody me” show – and in calling her out Andrew Neil is quite right. In a tweet, the veteran broadcaster remarked: “Their solipsism is amazing. Can’t they just consign themselves to oblivion for a while? Or at least hire someone who can write a press release in clear, decent English” and now this wicked wench will find to her cost that the silent majority will agree. We have all heard enough and more and more sympathy is switching to poor old Thomas Markle – a father who has been treated utterly abysmally by a deviant who’d put herself in the White House if she thought it might get herself just a bit more fame.
On Friday, the first hearing relating to Associated Newspapers publishing ‘The Modern Day Mrs Simpson’s’ correspondence to her father is due. Plainly, thus, this badly advised move is related to stoking the media up as part of a strategy to fight that case. It won’t work as the public are not as stupid as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex think, but most amusingly as one Dr Midd pointed out on Twitter: “Notice that Meghan and Harry haven’t included the Sunday Sport in their blacklisting, a victory for quality journalism.”
The full statement from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex:
As the Duke and Duchess of Sussex now settle into the next chapter of their lives and no longer receive any publicly funded support, we are writing to set a new media relations policy, specifically as it pertains to your organisation.
Like you, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex believe that a free press is a cornerstone to any democracy – particularly in moments of crisis. At its best, this free press shines light on dark places, telling stories that would otherwise go untold, standing up for what’s right, challenging power, and holding those who abuse the system to account.
It has been said that journalism’s first obligation is to the truth. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex agree wholeheartedly.
It is gravely concerning that an influential slice of the media, over many years, has sought to insulate themselves from taking accountability for what they say or print – even when they know it to be distorted, false, or invasive beyond reason. When power is enjoyed without responsibility, the trust we all place in this much needed industry is degraded.
There is a real human cost to this way of doing business and it affects every corner of society.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have watched people they know – as well as complete strangers – have their lives completely pulled apart for no good reason, other than the fact that salacious gossip boosts advertising revenue.
With that said, please note that The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will not be engaging with your outlet. There will be no corroboration and zero engagement. This is also a policy being instated for their communications team, in order to protect that team from the side of the industry that readers never see.
This policy is not about avoiding criticism. It’s not about shutting down public conversation or censoring accurate reporting. Media have every right to report on The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, good or bad. But it can’t be based on a lie. They also want to be very clear: this is not in any way a blanket policy for all media.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are looking forward to working with journalists and media organisations all over the world, engaging with grassroots media, regional and local media, and young, and up-and-coming journalists, to spotlight issues and causes that so desperately need acknowledging. And they look forward to doing whatever they can to help further opportunities for more diverse and underrepresented voices, who are needed now more than ever.
What they won’t do is offer themselves up as currency for an economy of clickbait and distortion.
We are encouraged that this new approach will be heard and respected.
The publications that the couple will not engage with not engage with henceforth are:
Vast Knightsbridge penthouse for sale for 27% less than in 2012 but extraordinarily 6,900% more than in 1999
Constructed between 1961 and 1962 by builders Gilbert Ash, Collier House is not the most attractive structure in Knightsbridge externally. Whilst retailers Reiss and Nespresso – lucky residents get George Clooney’s ugly ‘mug’ stuck on the façade as a bonus (excuse the pun) – occupy the ground floor, the top floor ‘space’ was sold for the creation of a two-storey penthouse in 1999 for £230,000.
The exterior of the building in which the sixth and seventh floor penthouse is situated – Collier House, 163 – 169 Brompton Road, Knightsbridge, London, SW3 1PY.The ground floor of the building is occupied by Reiss and Nespresso. A large image of actor George Clooney dominates the frontage of the latter.
Developed to provide a 4,615 square foot duplex over two floors, the apartment is currently on the market for the considerably higher figure of £16 million through agents Merchants Row. It includes 2 reception rooms that are some 70-foot in length in total, a bar area, a media room, 5 bedrooms and 5 bathrooms and comes with wrap-around terraces with skyline views towards Harrods and the Brompton Oratory.
From October 2014 to July 2019, the penthouse was the registered office of Elaph Publishing Limited. Founded in 2001 by Othman Al Omeir – a man “considered close to King Salman of Saudi Arabia” – Elaph is described as “the first daily Arabic independent online newspaper.” It has at various times been banned in both Saudi Arabia and Yemen and its former managing director was the EMMY award winning producer Nicholas Claxton.
The long leasehold penthouse, which was offered for the even more outrageous sum of £22 million in November 2012, has direct lift access to the sixth floor and comes with secure underground parking. It is subject to a service charge of £10,800 per year, has been offered to rent for £10,000 per week previously and what the agents neglect to mention is that it is situated directly above one of London’s most polluted stretches of road.
The Numbers – Collier House, 163 – 169 Brompton Road, Knightsbridge, London, SW3 1PY, United Kingdom
April 2020 – For sale for £16 million ($20 million, €18.4 million or درهم73.4 million) through agents Merchants Row.
November 2012 – For sale for £22 million ($27.5 million, €25.3 million or درهم101 million) through agents Wilfords.
July 1999 – “As then was” space for penthouse sold for £230,000 ($287,000, €264,000 or درهم1.1 million) according to Land Registry records.
As #SaveTheSunNewspaper trends on Twitter, an analysis of the sorry state of the British press should act as a wake-up call to our nation suggests Matthew Steeples
Yesterday, ‘Save The Sun Newspaper’ was all over Twitter. Those clicking the hashtag were not taken to a page bemoaning the fact that the Rupert Murdoch owned paper has lost £68 million in the last year alone, but to a Go Fund Me campaign that has raised over £16,500 that will be donated to the Essex Coronavirus Action Urgent Food Bank Appeal.
Set up by an Essex based food bank campaigner named Simon Harris, #SaveTheSunNewspaper garnered support because of the intense dislike for a newspaper that some claim is “not fit to wipe their arse with” whilst others (especially the people of Liverpool, a city where it is mostly banned due to their crass reporting of the 1989 Hillsborough disaster) condemn it for its “lies” and “bigoted” reporting.
Whilst the ‘fake’ hashtag was about helping foodbanks, on Sunday night, the Guardian’s Roy Greenslade highlighted a genuine problem for the British press. In an article titled: “Why our newspapers might not survive the contagion of coronavirus,” the media commentator observed: “It is the bleakest of ironies: the biggest news story in a lifetime is killing off the very industry that exists to report it. Coronavirus is destroying newsprint newspapers across Britain, delivering the coup de grace to businesses that were already in the process of dying.”
Whilst it has been for long known that traditional media has struggled to cope and find a way to exist and maintain revenue streams in a period where online and social media have battered it, coronavirus, it appears, will be the death knell for many a print newspaper.
Just like, for example, the restaurant sector, which will likely see many establishments fail to reopen once this pandemic is over due to them not having the resources to get their staff back and pay their rent and suppliers, many print newspapers – most especially local titles – will not weather the storm. As Greenslade points out, “it seems inconceivable that publishers, already struggling to fund journalism, will return to the previous status quo.” Going further, he remarks: “That’s because the status quo was, itself, one of perpetual fragility in which publishers were engaged in the delicate task of managing newsprint decline while, in parallel, seeking to create a digital journalism business model.”
Here comes an epoch of change and with newsrooms across Britain currently completely empty, publishers will indeed start to rationalise when so-called “normality” returns (in whatever form that takes). Expensive city centre offices will be shut and like cancer, profitless titles will most likely be permanently closed down. This will not be a loss that should be glorified and it will not be something that should celebrated; without good journalism, we’ll all be the poorer. Those thinking we can rely on the Twitterati for news are in for an era of the emperor’s new clothes and they’re in for a future where fake news will quite wrongly reign.
The ‘Guardian’s’ Rebecca Nicholson’s fascinating interview with the actor Michael Sheen is exactly the kind of reading needed during coronavirus lockdown; he reveals previously unknown details about bizarre encounters with Tony Blair, Rupert Murdoch and Wendi Deng Murdoch
It’s hard to find stories to read right now in newspapers that don’t relate to coronavirus and it’s even harder to find compelling interviews that don’t feature bleeding hearts banging on about what good they’re doing (when they’re just actually craving a return to their glory days gaining acres of Alexa Chung-type press acreage).
Gone are the days of the great, the good and the not-so-good actually revealing something we didn’t already know and instead, it seems, COVID-19 has reduced The Telegraph, for example, to unimaginatively asking the chef Jason Atherton: “Powder or piste?” (His 50/50 chance answer: The latter – for those of you actually interested in this kind of inane drivel).
Today, however, the Guardian’s Rebecca Nicholson pulled a blinder with what one reader described as a “marvellous portrait” of the actor best known for repeatedly playing Tony Blair, Michael Sheen. Though ‘Two Tony’s’ – according to an individual who left a comment online afterwards – “sounds thoroughly uncomfortable,” Nicholson coaxed her subject into revealing amongst other things that Wendi Deng Murdoch once asked him to “dress like [Blair]” and “make [his] hair look like him” so she could “bring [him] out and surprise [Blair].” Please don’t throw up whilst considering that rather scary image. Thankfully there’s no mention as to whether Sheen enquired about the alleged extra-marital relations that went on between the ‘real’ Tony and the now ex-Mrs Murdoch, as there would be a detail that’d certainly be nearly as off-putting as what allegedly went on between the wife of one of the most loathed premier’s in history and Carole Caplin (what on earth became of her?) in a shower in Downing Street.
Sheen, a man “fascinated by Blair’s legacy,” but someone who didn’t meet the “wary of [him]” ex-PM until after he’d already played him twice, also shares snippets of an encounter with Rupert Murdoch. Of it, the ex of Kate Beckinsale recalls: “There was a very peculiar moment with Murdoch. I remember standing looking out at the view, and then I realised that Murdoch was standing next to me. It was quite a hot day. I just remember seeing a little bead of black dye, running down his face. I thought, oh, Ozymandias [two sonnets by Percy Shelley about the decline of rulers with their pretensions to greatness].”
Moving on to how he is “astonished” by our current Prime Minister, Sheen observes: “It’s very hard to trust someone who can go so easily in different ways.” Nicholson then concludes the interview with a suggestion: “Part of me hopes [Michael Sheen] might one day take the idea of Michael Sheen MP seriously, after all.” Superb.
Wiltshire manor house owner proves himself a fine example of an ‘angry person in a local newspaper’ in ranting about otters
Whilst most people are worrying about where they can buy bog roll during the coronavirus lockdown, 83-year-old John Aeberhard of Steeple Ashton has taken the time to contact the Wiltshire Times to “warn other fishpond owners to beware” about the threat of otters.
Manor house owner Mr Aeberhard, previously the protector of 30 goldfish, koi and other carp, told the paper’s reporter, one John Baker, of how 22 of them were “killed in raids on his pond.” He remarked: “I and my grandchildren are very upset, as the fish all had names.”
At first, Aeberhard blamed a heron – of which he’s previously shockingly admitted to catching two in “heron wires installed above and the perimeter of the pond” – but when his gardener suggested “it could have been otters,” the pensioner decided to install electric wires.
Describing these carnivorous mammals as “in reality vicious fish killers,” Mr Aeberhard plainly will be leading the way in calling to eliminate these beautiful creatures. Thankfully British law still protects these them and on the government’s guidance website for clarity, we point this ‘Angry Person In A Local Newspaper’ to the paragraph that reads: “You’re breaking the law if you capture, kill, disturb or injure otters.” He should also be made aware: “If you’re found guilty of an offence you could get an unlimited fine and up to 6 months in prison.”
Now, Mr Aeberhard, please be civil and leave the descendants of Henry Williamson’s ‘Tarka’ alone. And whilst you’re at it also, leave the herons be as well.
Angry caravan owner complains to local newspaper after he and his sardine tin are told to move on
Nobody sane would wish to spend their holidays in a glorified sardine tin, but now “upset” caravan owners at the Low Wood, Haverthwaite site are distraught at being evicted.
Moaning pensioner Lloyd Smith complained this week to The Westmorland Gazette about the matter. Pictured standing aside his scruffy looking metal box in his equally awful parka, the Queensbury resident bleated:
“It’s all very upsetting. It’s been a lifetime of enjoyment… I can’t understand this… I’ve been caravanning for more than 60 years. The essence is that caravanning has been a way of life. It’s terribly sad that it has come to an abrupt end in such a way for myself and friends.”
He retchingly continued:
“I have not heard of a caravan site closing. I very much doubt there will be alternatives for the caravans.”
As our regular comment maker Rod from Australia would say: “Yes there is. Send in the bloody wrecking ball.”
In the first edition of a header for an article about a star who’d taken to the dating app Bumble to “seek someone who isn’t uptight,” the paper falsely suggested that the somewhat drippy adventurer turned television presenter Ben Fogle was divorcing a woman (a singer and ‘Hottest Female 2009’ named Una Healey) who isn’t even his wife and having an affair with another (an until now unknown PR woman named Becky Milne) he’s unlikely never met also. Instead, they meant to reference a somewhat vain rugby player who likes to get his kit off for photoshoots called Ben Foden but somehow got the surnames mixed up.
Though errors happen at all levels, the Daily Mail – a paper that is part of a company with a revenue of nearly £2 billion annually and a vast staff of around 10,000 globally – could surely do better. This was not a story that was run on Page 54 in the graveyard section, but one that they have plastered as headline news and run as story number one online also.
We may well be living in the era of hashtags and fake news and are certainly currently in August’s ‘silly season’, but come on Lord Rothermere – employ yourself a bloody half-decent copy checker.
Pictured top: Rugby player Ben Foden (left) supposedly embarked on a relationship with PR woman Becky Milne (second left) whilst still married to ‘The Saturdays’ singer Una Healy (second from right); television presenter Ben Fogle was mistakenly brought into the mix by a rather ineffectual ‘Mail Online’ copy checker.
The Daily Mail’s first header to the story began “Ben Fogle” (left) whilst later they were forced to amend it to the correct name: “Ben Foden”; surprisingly this mistake was made in a story that they ran as their number one headline on the Mail Online.
The acclaimed 1956 film ‘The Man Who Never Was’ was based on the true story of a British attempt to trick the Germans into weakening Sicily’s defenses before their 1943 attack there, using a dead man with faked papers. The late Dame Paddy Ridsdale, at one time Ian Fleming’s secretary and the inspiration for the Bond character Miss Moneypenny, formed part of the plot and pretended to be having an affair with the aforementioned dead man in order to aid the deception.
Butler-turned-blabbermouth Paul Burrell sinks to a new low; he should retreat to Siberia and live out his days privately
Cat-like Paul Burrell again and again reinvents himself. Somehow, in spite of already having undeservedly exhausted more than nine lives, this ghastly individual is back in the press and this time he’s milking the story of his marriage to a corporate lawyer he met on a train.
“Diana’s rock”, as the traitorous butler-turned-blabbermouth likes to call himself, chose not to keep his wedding to Graham Cooper private but instead bared the story of his union with his “soulmate” to various media outlets.
Mr Burrell, in spite of being born in Derbyshire wore a kilt to the ceremony (in a bizarre pattern of tartan he’d, of course, commissioned himself in 2006) at the Linthwaite House Hotel in the Lake District and in comments to the Mail Online remarked:
“There’s no more hiding my unbridled happiness now. Life is about being true to who you are and, for the first time ever, I’m able to stand proudly beside my husband and say: ‘This is who I am’”.
Burrell also told the newspaper of how he walked into the ceremony to Barbara Streisand’s Some Enchanted Evening and “danced out of [it] to Kylie Minogue’s Better the Devil You Know” and disrespectfully remarked on references to his late employer, Diana, Princess of Wales, being made during the ceremony. He again showed himself to be a master of the kiss-and-tell and even, in case anyone cared, shared the menu for his “three course wedding dinner”. It consisted of: “A starter of ham hock terrine, egg and chipped potatoes followed by pot-roasted breast of Goosnargh chicken served with Pommes Anna and wild mushroom fricassee and finished with a dessert of apple Tarte Tatin with a Calvados caramel and vanilla ice cream”.
An anything but credible individual according to Lord Justice Scott Baker, Burrell – a man prone to crying on a whim – was severely criticised by Princes William and Harry in 2003. In a statement, at the time, they remarked:
“We cannot believe that Paul who was entrusted with so much could abuse his position in such a cold and overt betrayal”.
“It is not only deeply painful for the two of us but also for everyone else affected and it would mortify our mother if she were alive today and, if we might say so, we feel we are more able to speak for our mother than Paul”.
“We ask Paul please to bring these revelations to an end”.
Burrell plainly paid no attention to this request and now, fourteen years later, it is again time to urge this self-serving toad to do the decent thing: May Paul Burrell please stop peddling tat and may he please retreat to Siberia.
