[ad_1]
LONDON (AP) – The British royal family is being mistreated by its portrayal in the explosive TV interview of Meghan and Harry as distant, indifferent and tinged with racism. But the couple identified an even bigger villain: the British media, whom they accused of racist bullying and personal attacks.
Many in the media say it is unfair. They claim that while some tabloids sometimes go too far, journalists play a vital role in holding the taxpayer-funded British royal family to account.
But some British journalists, especially those from minority backgrounds, hope the interview will trigger a long overdue awareness of inappropriate media behavior and lack of diversity.
Marcus Ryder, professor of media diversity at Birmingham City University, said he was too casual to talk about “defining moments”.
“But I would say it’s a moment that will help shape the industry,” he said.
In the couple’s interview with Oprah Winfrey, Meghan accused British tabloids of “attacking and inciting so much racism” against her. Harry described a toxic relationship between the monarchy and the media, saying the royals were “afraid” of the tabloid press.
The allegations sparked a heated reaction that toppled two British media figures.
Talk show host Piers Morgan, a familiar face on television from both sides of the Atlantic, left ‘Good Morning Britain’ amid an outcry over his comments about Meghan, particularly his description of mental health issues and suicidal thoughts.
Morgan told viewers Monday that “I don’t believe a word of what she’s saying.” His comments drew more than 41,000 complaints to the UK media regulator. Morgan left the set of “Good Morning Britain” on Tuesday when another presenter challenged him, and left the show later the same day.
Fury has also claimed the post of Ian Murray, executive director of the Society of Editors. The umbrella group for new media issued a strongly worded defense of the press after the interview with Harry and Meghan, saying that ‘the British media are not sectarian and will not be influenced by their vital role of empowering the rich and powerful . ”
This caused a backlash. The main editors of The Guardian, Financial Times and HuffPost UK disputed the statement, while 160 journalists and editors signed a letter saying the Society of Editors was “in denial” of racism.
ITV News presenter Charlene White, the first black woman to host the network’s main evening news program, has stepped down from hosting the company’s annual press awards, saying the organization asked her to get involved to improve her diversity, but she had not lived up to his words.
“Since the Black Lives Matter movement really took root in the UK last year, every institution in this country has had to finally address its shortcomings and position in terms of dealing with ethnic minorities inside and out. outside its walls ”. White told the company in a statement. “But for some reason you get the impression that the British press is exempt from this discussion.”
Murray resigned on Wednesday, acknowledging that his statement “could have been much clearer in his condemnation of bigotry and clearly caused upheaval.”
British media, while diverse in their political and social views, are not representative of the population in terms of race, gender or class. Britons and non-white women are under-represented, while private school graduates hold a disproportionate share of jobs.
Journalists working to change the situation say it is not easy.
Marverine Duffy, a former news anchor who heads the journalism program at Birmingham City University, said that “improving the number of trained, ethnically and socially diverse journalists in newsrooms is paramount”, but this no is not enough.
“Systems must be put in place to challenge group thinking, the fight against darkness and the reluctance to see racism and xenophobia for what they really are, instead of turning a blind eye,” he said. she declared.
In addition to stimulating a debate on diversity, Meghan and Harry’s interview highlighted the media’s complex and difficult relationship with the monarchy.
For decades, British royal dramas took place largely in private, as a respectful media guarded the secrets of the monarchy. In the 1930s, the romance between King Edward VIII and divorced American Wallis Simpson made headlines in the United States, but barely mentioned in Britain until the king abdicated to marry the woman. that he loved.
That deference evaporated when Prince Charles married Lady Diana Spencer, 20, in 1981. British media tracked every twist in their increasingly unhappy marriage. Glamor Diana became the most famous woman in the world, followed by paparazzi until the moment of her death in a car crash in Paris in 1997 while being chased by photographers.
Diana’s death prompted a search for the palace and the press. But that didn’t cure their troubled relationship.
Harry spoke of his fear of history repeating itself and his wife suffering the same fate as his mother. When he and Meghan left royal duties last year and moved to North America, they cited what they said were the unbearable intrusions and racist attitudes of the British media. The couple are suing several British newspapers for invasion of privacy.
Ryder said the challenge for the media was to differentiate legitimate stories about royalty that are in the public interest from intrusive gossip.
“It’s a subjective call, and this subjective call is why we need our gatekeepers, the people who make that call – the people who run the papers, the people who run the newsletters. information – to have real diversity. ,” he said.
“Because if the only people making this call are white people from a certain background and are mostly men, they will make different subjective calls than if we have more diversity.”
Others point out that despite their hostility to the British press, Harry and Meghan are themselves skillful media manipulators.
Ed Owens, a historian who has studied the relationship between media and royalty, said the couple “are using new media channels – things like social media, the Oprah interview – to try to reach and to connect with new audiences. “
“It’s not new,” he said. “Members of the Royal Family have always sought new forms of media in order to connect with the public. Another thing that is not new is how they have used, if you will, language of suffering and hardship in order to elicit an emotional response from media around the world.
“And I think to a large extent they have succeeded,” he said.
___
AP writer Danica Kirka contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
Source link