Black people I know don't believe her, I wonder where that leaves them with the woke gang.
Keeping up with the Markles
- Thread starter antijoke
- Start date
Black people I know don't believe her, I wonder where that leaves them with the woke gang.
We'll see how their future goes.
I believe their only saleable asset is the royal connection and if they're out to live the lifestyle they're accustomed to they'll need to milk the nipples off that which will be incredibly cringeworthy. They've signed deals to provide infotainment content with netflix and spotify with not a lot of proven talent so that's something to dread for sure.
I believe their only saleable asset is the royal connection and if they're out to live the lifestyle they're accustomed to they'll need to milk the nipples off that which will be incredibly cringeworthy. They've signed deals to provide infotainment content with netflix and spotify with not a lot of proven talent so that's something to dread for sure.
Did you actually read that load of absolute nonsense?
As do I, it's mainly the media and those in the public spotlight frightened to death of stepping out of line and having their careers finished
Its all based on guess work and speculation for the most part. "surely xyz cant have happened because abc happened".
An absolute load of daily mail garbage.
So none of it has any merit whatsoever?
As they say, if xyz happened then how could abc have happened, why was no questions put to them regarding any of this or anything in an interview or should there be another interview that you know, asks questions as they state.
Or is it all clear cut?
I'm not a fan of the daily fail but you have to question people, or is the party line to be followed no matter what.
Yes. Every single word. I think it’s probably the best analysis of the interview that I’ve seen anywhere.
So basically, she told a shed load of lies. What a ****ing surprise. Actually quite a decent article for the DM.
Now we just have to wait for the sympathisers to come out. So here, take your pick:
How do you guesswork or speculate events into existence.
What they're referencing isn't something they can pretend happened.
The crying thing is inconclusive but they present sources which do not agree with what meghan said
The wedding thing is simple marriage law vs what was said
Her half-sister is the source that disputes them not seeing each other for at least 18 years
Damned if I know if the palace challenged the media twice on her behalf but that should be checkable
Royal protocol about princing and titles (archie could have been an earl or a lord but that was rejected by harry and meghan), again checkable
Basic maths between claims of not leaving the house vs times actually leaving the house
There's lots of stuff. Basically it's a fact checking article.
What they're referencing isn't something they can pretend happened.
The crying thing is inconclusive but they present sources which do not agree with what meghan said
The wedding thing is simple marriage law vs what was said
Her half-sister is the source that disputes them not seeing each other for at least 18 years
Damned if I know if the palace challenged the media twice on her behalf but that should be checkable
Royal protocol about princing and titles (archie could have been an earl or a lord but that was rejected by harry and meghan), again checkable
Basic maths between claims of not leaving the house vs times actually leaving the house
There's lots of stuff. Basically it's a fact checking article.
Tbf the DM does post a lot of absolute nonsense but in this case, I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt.
I mean who is to say that both Meghan and Harry spouted a lot of absolute nonsense in their “scripted” interview?? If the DM article is anything to go by, then it does certainly seem that the pair of them spouted some silly nonsense.
Yep, that's my view as well. There is no doubt Oprah's lack of questioning both Meghan and Harry's answers gave them both a free ride. As has already been said, Paxman would never have let them get away with it because he would have done his his research before asking the questions.
All the Daily Mail has done is laid out the answers to the research that Oprah should have done before starting the interview.
Does Oprah do “interviews” or does she do promotional pieces that are heavily scripted. I think we know the answer to that.
You have to ask why they did the “interview” with her in the first place. It was unnecessary and entirely self serving and they picked someone who would let them say whatever they wanted without cross examination.
You have to ask why they did the “interview” with her in the first place. It was unnecessary and entirely self serving and they picked someone who would let them say whatever they wanted without cross examination.
Is she bothered, persuing Piers to an ofcom complaint; well, her membership to the Forbes rich/influential/victims(/fashion?) list is at risk.
wonder what Piers might command on a USA chat-show; an Oprah follow-up, for him to present the UK publics truth.
wonder what Piers might command on a USA chat-show; an Oprah follow-up, for him to present the UK publics truth.
They had him. Then after running a show into the ground they sent him back: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piers_Morgan_Live
I admit, I haven't watched the interview but is it safe to say they were purposely vague about the whole skin colour topic? If the below quote from Meghan isn't taken out of context, it seems she isn't too sure if what was said was racist?
Think about that phrasing, it's very clever. She's actually putting the onus on Oprah with the whole 'if that's the assumption you're making". Plus, I think that feels? Why not just say "the conversation around Archie's skin colour was x'.
Think about that phrasing, it's very clever. She's actually putting the onus on Oprah with the whole 'if that's the assumption you're making". Plus, I think that feels? Why not just say "the conversation around Archie's skin colour was x'.
Agree it is very insidious - the supposed slow/friendly reveal of facts from Oprahs' questioning -("You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment")
[fascinating programme yesterday about one of the (e:usa) retired top Iraq Army 'inteviewers', who subsequently became a white expert on password hacking systems]
Oprah's the best the USA has though - no Paxman , even Kouennsberg(wonder if her 'interview'/take-down was seen/understood there)
[fascinating programme yesterday about one of the (e:usa) retired top Iraq Army 'inteviewers', who subsequently became a white expert on password hacking systems]
Oprah's the best the USA has though - no Paxman , even Kouennsberg(wonder if her 'interview'/take-down was seen/understood there)
So what do people think will be the response from the Royal Family?
I'd imagine the current silence is deafening for those hyped up in the USA.
I think some fact checks on what actually happens due to protocol in some circumstances will show a fair part of what was said up, but this can't be left to linger too long surely?
I saw William had passed a small comment which was jumped on.
I'd imagine the current silence is deafening for those hyped up in the USA.
I think some fact checks on what actually happens due to protocol in some circumstances will show a fair part of what was said up, but this can't be left to linger too long surely?
I saw William had passed a small comment which was jumped on.