The Royal Family #31

[FenellaTheWitch]

It probably should be said (frequently) that the party the queen attended was days BEFORE the article was published.

I wonder if Clarkson had a lovely time at the party with Camilla, then went home, had a few more glasses of wine and went all out?
Just bizarre behaviour from Clarkson. I see one of his former editors suggested he was drunk or high when he wrote it. It still doesn't explain how it actually got into print.

 

[Jen667]

Even allowing for fact JC is a 'shock jock' type of character, that should never have been published. It doesn't get printed without editors and lawyers seeing it. Fact nobody said 'this isn't ok' is quite shocking.

 

[Popcorn&Peanuts]

About the Clarkson article? It's nothing to do with them and they'll do what they always do and ignore it. If H&M want to take it further that's up to them.

The editor of The Sun is female. It's all quite horrific.

As a part of the Firm, H&M are no longer working members but as (supposedly much-loved) members of the Family, it very much should have something to do with the BRF.

But I do agree with you that they'll do nothing, as per usual.

Unfortunately for them, this one has really caught the public's attention and no matter their culpability, the RF aren't coming out of this looking good. Their Twitter was flooded with negative comments when I checked earlier today.

 

[FenellaTheWitch]

As a part of the Firm, H&M are no longer working members but as (supposedly much-loved) members of the Family, it very much should have something to do with the BRF.

But I do agree with you that they'll do nothing, as per usual.

Unfortunately for them, this one has really caught the public's attention and no matter their culpability, the RF aren't coming out of this looking good. Their Twitter was flooded with negative comments when I checked earlier today.

No it's not. They cannot set a precedent for replying or commenting on opinion pieces written by individuals.

Again, Twitter is not the mouthpiece of the nation.

 

[Jen667]

No it's not. They cannot set a precedent for replying or commenting on opinion pieces written by individuals.

Again, Twitter is not the mouthpiece of the nation.

Yes, I agree. No way should they react or they'd be called upon to do it all the time.

 

[Popcorn&Peanuts]

No it's not. They cannot set a precedent for replying or commenting on opinion pieces written by individuals.

Again, Twitter is not the mouthpiece of the nation.

This is unprecedented and let's not pretend that the RF do not make their feelings known via their mouthpieces. This is beyond the BRF and their petty media games...it's verging on a hate article inciting violence. Even if not an official statement, a 'palace source' can denounce the comment. It feels like every week a palace source or 'friends of the family' has something to say to the national newspapers.

And I did not imply that Twitter was the mouthpiece of the nation...but it is certainly one barometer of public sentiment.

 

[LoopyLou47]

It probably should be said (frequently) that the party the queen attended was days BEFORE the article was published.

The Mail were the ones who used the lunch to prove a point, implying that Camilla would condone the article. Probably because they know a large proportion of their readership would not care about degrading and shaming a woman who does not conform.

No it's not. They cannot set a precedent for replying or commenting on opinion pieces written by individuals.

Again, Twitter is not the mouthpiece of the nation.

But they manage to do it when Tatler, in a puff piece about Kate implies thst she is annoyed about the amount of work she has to do, or that she has hair extensions? They are just proving Meghan and Harry's point. It was written by an individual but published by a National newspaper

 

[Jen667]

The Msil were the ones who used the lunch to prove a point, implying that Camilla would condone the article. Probably because they know a large proportion of their readership would not care about degrading and shaming a woman twho does not conform.

But they manage to do it when Tatler, in a puff piece about Kate implies thst she is annoyed about the amount of work she has to do, or that she has hair extensions? They are just proving Meghan and Harry's point.

But the Palace don't represent H&M any more. The Sussexes can respond if they want to, they've never been slow at that in the past

 

[Joannabloggs]

But the Palace don't represent H&M any more. The Sussexes can respond if they want to, they've never been slow at that in the past

Hussey no longer works for the RF but Buckingham Palace still facilitated a talk between her and ngozi, and also released a statement regarding the meeting.The inconsistency as to what and who Buckingham Palace will comment on is clear to see.

 

[Jen667]

Hussey no longer works for the RF but Buckingham Palace still facilitated a talk between her and ngozi, and also released a statement regarding the meeting.The inconsistency as to what and who Buckingham Palace will comment on is clear to see.

She was working for them at the time of the incident though and the incident occurred in their 'house'. It's different. The Palace have never employed Clarkson

 

[dizmal]

Hussey no longer works for the RF but Buckingham Palace still facilitated a talk between her and ngozi, and also released a statement regarding the meeting.The inconsistency as to what and who Buckingham Palace will comment on is clear to see.

The initial incident took place at an event hosted by the Queen Consort, so it makes the Palace would be involved in its resolution. It's silly to conflate this with a column.

 

[Joannabloggs]

She was working for them at the time of the incident though and the incident occurred in their 'house'. It's different. The Palace have never employed Clarkson

They may not have employed Clarkson but was he not invited to a lunch hosted by the Queen. If it was Dan Wootton, Sarah Vine making this commented I'd still find them disgusting but he has not been embraced in royal circles in public.

By continuing this never complain or explain policy, it allows the press to see how far they can push it, and essentially if anyone decides they no longer want to be part of the working RF, it's a free for all for you to be harassed by the media.

 

[Jen667]

They may not have employed Clarkson but was he not invited to a lunch hosted by the Queen. If it was Dan Wootton, Sarah Vine making this commented I'd still find them disgusting but he has not been embraced in royal circles in public.

By continuing this never complain or explain policy, it allows the press to see how far they can push it, and essentially if anyone decides they no longer want to be part of the working RF, it's a free for all for you to be harassed by the media.

She didn't host it. She was a guest along with many others. The RF aren't going to change. If they didn't respond to H&M themselves then they're not going to respond to third parties.

 

[50sGirl]

For those who still haven’t realised… Camilla did NOT host the lunch. She was just a guest, as was Jeremy Clarkson.
Extremely bad timing but it has NOTHING to do with Camilla!

 

[FenellaTheWitch]

Hussey no longer works for the RF but Buckingham Palace still facilitated a talk between her and ngozi, and also released a statement regarding the meeting.The inconsistency as to what and who Buckingham Palace will comment on is clear to see.

Because Hussey was working for the Palace when it happened.

H&M don't want to be part of the firm. They've complained about the way the Palace dealt with everything so they can get on with it. They can fight their own battles as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Em_gardener]

On the one hand I can see why people want the RF to make a stand against this type of hate filled article. On the other hand it would kind of give Jeremy Clarkson more importance then he should get - most people are going to read that article and think Jeremy is being his usual twattish self and forget about it. If the RF respond it will spawn hundreds more articles analysing their response. Then Meghan will probably respond to their response and to the article and there will be hundreds more articles about that. I don't think the sticker should ever have made it into print but I can see why the RF won't get involved.

 

[Reraciara]

For those who still haven’t realised… Camilla did NOT host the lunch. She was just a guest, as was Jeremy Clarkson.
Extremely bad timing but it has NOTHING to do with Camilla!

But she is friends with him - That's wildly reported.

Piers Morgan AND the editor of the Daily Fail were at this party too and as Queen Consort I'm sure she had the guestlist in advance to see who was going. The optics for this are so bad on her part.

Also, Harry and Meghan are FAMILY to these people - I'd like to think they'd have their back on some level with a public comment

 

[Jen667]

But she is friends with him - That's wildly reported.

Piers Morgan AND the editor of the Daily Fail were at this party too and as Queen Consort I'm sure she had the guestlist in advance to see who was going. The optics for this are so bad on her part.

Also, Harry and Meghan are FAMILY to these people - I'd like to think they'd have their back on some level with a public comment

I don't think the DM editor was there. I just can't see the problems with her attending a Christmas party with Clarkson, Morgan and a LOT of other people. H&M have made it very clear they have not time for the royal family and think they're liars and racists and that they are not represented by them.

JC has apologised now. I imagine there was a gun to his head as it is not something he'd have done willingly

 

[Andouilette]

But she is friends with him - That's wildly reported.

Piers Morgan AND the editor of the Daily Fail were at this party too and as Queen Consort I'm sure she had the guestlist in advance to see who was going. The optics for this are so bad on her part.

Also, Harry and Meghan are FAMILY to these people - I'd like to think they'd have their back on some level with a public comment

The optics are only bad if you ignore the fact that the party was a few days BEFORE the article.

 

[Onetwofour]

Just to make the timeline clear:

- Camilla was seen at a lunch on Wednesday (14th December) hosted by Evans Venters, the former head of Fornum&Mason that was also attended by Jeremy Clarkson and Piers Morgan.

- The last three episodes of Meghan and Harry documentary were released on Thursday (15th December).

- The Sun published Clarkson's vile column on Friday (16th December) at 9:38PM.

- On the same evening, the DM published an article about Camilla attending this lunch at 10:22 PM.