Now that he’s no longer a working royal, Harry wants to “change” the press, in particular, the United Kingdom’s tabloid media, he told interviewer Tom Bradby in January. It’s been a recurring theme for Harry. A desire to correct press narratives, especially those birthed by the British tabloids, seems to motivate the couple’s public commentary — from their Oprah Winfrey interview in 2021, to their Netflix series last year, and Harry’s memoir “Spare,” published earlier this year.
But Harry’s vendetta against the media, even if understandable from an emotional perspective, may also be blinding his ability to understand the nuances and motivations of the industry. This in turn could be creating a vicious cycle.
In “Spare,” and the interviews he did to promote it, Harry slammed the royal family’s culture of “briefings and leakings and planting of stories,” as he called it in an interview with Anderson Cooper. Harry implied family members and aides had leaked stories about him and Meghan, sometimes unfavorable, to ensure positive coverage for themselves.
The couple’s Netflix series doubled down on these accusations, and pointed to examples of what they called private information, like plans to move to South Africa, appearing in the British press without their involvement. Some royal reporters, however, have denied that the palace would plant negative stories about a prominent member of the family. Meanwhile, the palace has remained silent.
The rest of the royal family’s relationship with the press is also complicated, but arguably more realistic. In the modern world, where millionaire kings and queens supposedly exist to serve their subjects, journalists can (and should) provide accountability. The royal family doesn’t have to answer to voters, but just like all rich and powerful individuals, it should have to answer to the press. I may sound American for saying it, but a powerful press is often synonymous with a strong democracy (or…
Read the full article here