Non aviation content. Play nice – No religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
User avatar
By Rob P
#1741127
Bill Haddow wrote:
Might be interesting to know more about her husband's DNA


:sleeping:
User avatar
By eltonioni
#1741140
nallen wrote:@eltonioni How about reference to "her rich and exotic DNA" (Rachel Johnson, Daily Mail)? Or that she is "(almost) straight outta Compton" (Daily Mail again) (because black people from LA must come from the gang part of town, right?)

Maybe that's not overt enough for you …

Cheers @nallen it's good of you to take the trouble. In return I took the trouble to look at the source articles and from what I quickly read they aren't racist. Have a look yourself - Rachael Johnson is positively gushing about MM in the context of the article but not so much the knobs and gingers like me. Maybe I should be offended too. :)
Genetically, she is blessed. If there is issue from her alleged union with Prince Harry, the Windsors will thicken their watery, thin blue blood and Spencer pale skin and ginger hair with some rich and exotic DNA.

If that's race criticism then I'm a Dutchman, which to be fair would make my DNA much more rich and exotic. If we tried really really hard some offence might be found between the lines that she'd be a decent brood mare for the Windsors (hello Fergie) but that's the polar opposite of race baiting.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... -Test.html

The Compton reference is because the DM went knocking on doors where her mother and aunt live, and the area has a gang issue with a link to Compton (almost) of some unknown proportion. It's of prurient, one might even say exotic interest to readers because we don't have much of that in the UK. I dare say it's not your nor my newspaper of note but they haven't just appeared out of nowhere to take racist potshots.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... rkles.html

The DM has always been in the titillation business of alternately swooning and digging dirt. Not sure why anyone would expect different, but there's no actual racism in those articles unless we're in one of those weird discussions where if somebody says "rich and exotic DNA" (like Mrs E, who has and is quite tickled by it) it is somehow racist, unlike "dull and boring DNA" (like me 76% English 23% Irish thanks for asking).

It's a shame we can't all just rub along as per MLK's dream: I have a dream that my little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character." but racism and identity politics makes money and careers so here we are arguing about this farcical couple who need to just slope off to live their best life wherever while cut off from the Exchequer.
Spooky, Chris Martyr liked this
By johnm
#1741153
I find it's quite interesting, I always know when I'm in a strong position because I get likes from @kanga :-)

The attacks on the Sussexes are quite subtle but nonetheless quite blatant and are included here it seems. There is nothing to justify such activity particularly when it is balanced by the sycophancy afforded to the Cambridges.
Flyin'Dutch', Rob P liked this
User avatar
By kanga
#1741212
johnm wrote:I find it's quite interesting, I always know when I'm in a strong position because I get likes from @kanga :-)

...


:oops:

Serendipitously, in the comments on an unsolicited item which turned up in my FB feed was this, comparing UK press headlines on the two Duchesses


https://www.boredpanda.com/uk-media-dou ... -middleton
User avatar
By kanga
#1741238
JoeC wrote:What sort of people read this stuff and keep on buying the paper?

How can these papers be defended in anyway at all ?

..


the answers are presumably connected: the editors/proprietors assume (instinctively and/or after diligent market research) that such lines are what will keep their readers' buying their papers .. :roll:
johnm, PaulB liked this
User avatar
By eltonioni
#1741320
kanga wrote:
JoeC wrote:What sort of people read this stuff and keep on buying the paper?

How can these papers be defended in anyway at all ?

..


the answers are presumably connected: the editors/proprietors assume (instinctively and/or after diligent market research) that such lines are what will keep their readers' buying their papers .. :roll:


Which is of course the point, not racism. If anyone cared to do an actual analysis instead of cherrypicking they would find plenty of both swooning and dirt digging on the any of the Royal Family depending on which tittle tattle is selling papers this week. KM has the benefit of having become either spectacularly boring of smart enough to stick to the job description for the gilded cage.
#1741327
johnm wrote:The attacks on the Sussexes are quite subtle but nonetheless quite blatant and are included here it seems. There is nothing to justify such activity particularly when it is balanced by the sycophancy afforded to the Cambridges.


'Twas always thus when it comes to the second in line. Going back one generation, look at the difference between the (early!) press coverage of Charles and Diana and that of Andy and Fergie. If you want to go back a generation again, look at the Queen and Prince Phillip vs Princess Margaret.

Disregarding the heir and spare thing for the moment and looking at royals marrying divorced Americans, well, I'll just say Wallis Simpson and leave it at that.

As far as I can see (and I don't really study these things!), the only time Meghan's "heritage" is mentioned is when someone wants to play the racism card. There may be a collection of American right wing nutters out in twitterland but as far as I can see, that is it.

Quick edit regarding eltonioni's comment about turning about face when it comes to selling papers, look how the press treated Diana when she turned out to not be whiter than white (not in a race context!).
Last edited by Paul_Sengupta on Fri Jan 17, 2020 9:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Spooky liked this
By johnm
#1741328
Neither KM nor MM seem to have been very active in being visible, but their treatment is very different as both Kanga and I have pointed out. Their cultural, social and ethnic backgrounds are the only major difference that I can discern.
By johnm
#1741757
eltonioni wrote:Radio this morning - estimated price for a 2 hour heart-to-heart with Oprah $25,000,000


There are a lot of insane people in the world who make that a reality. I have heard of Oprah Winfrey (?), though at first I thought she was something about the Grand ol' Opry I have no idea what she does.

The fact that MM doesn't get on with her father is no-one's business but theirs it's sad, but not exactly rare as we remarked earlier.

Rusbridger has an interesting take on the press issues this morning and how much the Mirror group and Murdoch are spending to keep their less savoury activities out of the courts.....
User avatar
By eltonioni
#1741762
johnm wrote:The fact that MM doesn't get on with her father is no-one's business but theirs it's sad, but not exactly rare as we remarked earlier.


When you take the Daily Mail to a public court over privacy and the DM rolls out your father as a witness for the defence it becomes everyone's business because you made it so. It's yet another variation of the Streisand Effect - they broke the long-standing duty covenant between the Royal Family and citizens to just turn up and shut up.
By johnm
#1741765
eltonioni wrote:
johnm wrote:The fact that MM doesn't get on with her father is no-one's business but theirs it's sad, but not exactly rare as we remarked earlier.


When you take the Daily Mail to a public court over privacy and the DM rolls out your father as a witness for the defence it becomes everyone's business because you made it so. It's yet another variation of the Streisand Effect - they broke the long-standing duty covenant between the Royal Family and citizens to just turn up and shut up.


As always you are almost right :D

The Daily Mail started it by pandering to prurient interest and is spending gazillions trying to stop such going to court as are the others I mentioned. They have chosen to fight this one because they have been successful at divide and rule.....
  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10