LONDON (AP) – Britain’s royal family is hurt by his description in Meghan and Harry’s explosive TV interview as indifferent, indifferent and tinged with racism. But the couple identified an even bigger villain: the British media, which they accused of racist intimidation and personal attacks.
Many in the media say this is unfair. They argue that, although some tabloids occasionally go too far, journalists play a vital role in holding the British taxpayer-financed British royal family accountable.
But some British journalists, especially those from minority backgrounds, hope that the interview will trigger a long-awaited reckoning with poor media behavior and a lack of diversity.
Marcus Ryder, professor of media diversity at Birmingham City University, said it was too simplistic to speak of “turning points”.
“But I would suggest that this is a time that will help to shape the industry,” he said.
In the couple’s interview with Oprah Winfrey, Meghan accused the British tabloids of “attacking and inciting so much racism” against her. Harry described a toxic relationship between the monarchy and the media, saying that the royal family was “scared” of the tabloid press.
The allegations generated a passionate response that brought down two leading figures in the British media.
Piers Morgan, talk show host, a familiar face from TV on both sides of the Atlantic, left “Good Morning Britain” amid a clamor for his comments on Meghan, particularly his description of mental health problems and suicidal thoughts.
Morgan told viewers on Monday that “I don’t believe a word of what she says”. His comments drew more than 41,000 complaints to Britain’s media regulator. Morgan left the set of “Good Morning Britain” on Tuesday, when another host challenged him, and dropped out of the show the same day. ‘
The furor also cost the work of Ian Murray, executive director of the Society of Editors. The umbrella group of the new media launched a strongly formulated defense of the press after the Harry and Meghan interview, saying that “the UK media is not prejudiced and will not be influenced by its vital role in holding the rich and powerful to account.”
This provoked an adverse reaction. Leading editors at The Guardian, the Financial Times and HuffPost UK contested the statement, while 160 reporters and editors signed a letter saying the Society of Editors was “in denial” about racism.
ITV News anchor Charlene White, the first black woman to feature the network’s top nightly news, gave up hosting the society’s annual Press Awards, saying the organization asked her to get involved to improve its diversity, but failed to keep your words.
“Since the Black Lives Matter movement really consolidated in the UK last year, every institution in this country has finally had to look at its flaws and position in terms of how it treats ethnic minorities both inside and outside its walls,” White told society in a statement. “But, for some unknown reason, you feel that the UK press is exempt from this discussion.”
On Wednesday, Murray stepped down, acknowledging his statement “it could have been much clearer in its condemnation of prejudice and it clearly caused trouble.”
The British media, although diverse in their political and social views, are not representative of the population in terms of race, gender or class. Non-white Britons and women are underrepresented, while graduates from private schools hold a disproportionate share of jobs.
Journalists working to change the situation say it is not easy.
Marverine Duffy, a former news anchor who runs the journalism program at Birmingham City University, says that “improving the number of qualified, ethnically and socially diverse journalists in the newsroom is key,” but it is not enough.
“The systems need to be put in place to shake up group thinking, anti-blackness and the reluctance to see racism and xenophobia as they really are, instead of turning a blind eye,” she said.
In addition to generating a debate on diversity, Meghan and Harry’s interview highlighted the media’s complex and uncomfortable relationship with the monarchy.
For decades, Britain’s royal dramas unfolded largely in private, while respectful media protected 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 was barely mentioned in Britain until the king abdicated to marry the woman he loved.
This deference was evaporating by the time Prince Charles married 20-year-old Lady Diana Spencer in 1981. The British media recorded each turn of their marriage more and more unhappy. The glamorous Diana became the most famous woman in the world, followed by paparazzi until the moment of her death in a car accident in Paris in 1997, while being chased by photographers.
Diana’s death led to a profound search for both the palace and the press. But it did not heal their troubled relationship.
Harry talked about his fear that history will repeat itself and his wife will suffer the same fate as his mother. When he and Meghan left their royal obligations last year and moved to North America, they cited what they said were the British media’s unbearable intrusions and racist attitudes. The couple is suing several UK newspapers for breach of privacy.
Ryder said the challenge for the media is to differentiate legitimate stories about royalty that are in the public interest from intrusive gossip.
“It is a subjective call, and that subjective call is the reason why we need our gatekeepers, the people who are making this call – the people who are the heads of newspapers, the people who are the heads of newsletters – to have true diversity, “he said.
“Because if the only people who make that connection are white people of a certain origin and predominantly male, they will make different subjective connections than if we had more diversity.”
Others point out that, despite their hostility to the British press, Harry and Meghan are themselves skilled manipulators of the media.
Ed Owens, a historian who has studied the relationship between media and royalty, said the couple is “using new media channels – things like social media, the Oprah interview – to try to reach and connect with new audiences”.
“This is nothing new,” he said. “Royalty has always looked for new forms of media to connect with the public. Another thing that is not new is the way they used, if you prefer, a language of suffering and deprivation to evoke an emotional response from the media audience around the world. “
“And I think for the most part, they were successful,” he said.
___
AP writer Danica Kirka contributed to this report.