The whole ‘sourcing’ issue is a mess. Magazines have these weird anonymous sources that feed stories about celebrities/royals etc. Nothing is evidenced, there is just a ‘line’ given. This is then interpreted and padded out with background, previous ‘sourced’ stories and any on the record quotes that are relevant to create the story, plus loads of imagined feelings etc.
There are instances when the line given couldn’t be further from the truth - as an example, I believe the week Jen Aniston had her at-home wedding/blessing to Justin Theroux, some of the mags were running a ‘Heartbroken Jen’ story saying they had split up.
As the RF are known for rarely intervening, it’s easy for ‘sources’ to make this stuff up. Then it just gets repeated everywhere.
Basically it’s just a load of bollocks and not worth investing any energy in. I would love it if the RF refuted more stories, especially all the trash leaked by Smegs, but they would literally have no time to do anything else!
I agree the sourcing issue is a mess.
But to be fair there is a difference between proper sourced stories, usually the grown up news stories, and the more gossipy tabloid stories about 'celebrities'.
I think a lot of the confusion, in the 'celebrity' arena comes from the PR sources, who are trying to sell stories for their clients and /or divert attention away from a story they would rather not see published.
Harry may have suffered from this, if you think of the RF, publicists, they would be likely to divert attention away from a negative story about Charles or William by offering up a story about Harold. Although to be fair, most of these stories are of the inconsequential, what he ate for breakfast variety, whose party he got drunk at, rather than anything of any real substance or importance.
And this kind of story wasnt made up by the press or media, it was offered by the Royal Family PR team. So maybe Harolds main grievance shouild be with his family itself, rather than with the press?
A good way to try and get some inkling of the truth is to see behind the vague headlines, that often have no factual evidence behind them.
Im not sure there is ever much point in trying to refute a story though, you need to change the narrative by presenting a contradictory or different story to tell, or by ignoring it until it disappears into history and everyone forgets it.
Which is why its a bit sad that all these allegations against the media are being raised again, its muck raking of trashy stories all over again. I have no recollection at all of what grievance Paul Whitehouse's ex wife has against the media, but, it looks like I will be finding out any day soon! Stories I didnt care about in the first place are going to be unearthed! Diana is going to be in so much trouble, and her memories are at risk of being tarnished by her younger son.