In recent hours, the British press has been under the Internet's spotlight for its relentless critiques and, at times, blatant attacks against individuals voicing their support for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry. Most recently, attacks have been made against tech CEO Christopher Bouzy and UCLA's Race and Equity Director Johnathan Perkins. This behaviour raises serious concerns about press ethics and freedom of expression within the UK and has far-reaching implications that could backfire significantly on the global stage. Especially considering the watchful eyes of internet users who kept receipt of the unchecked hate against a woman of colour, Meghan Markle. Of course, the international and independent press is not beholding to the Royal Institution and the British Press; they will see this smear campaign against Bouzy and Perkins for what it is - fear by the British Press that the palace's lies about Kate Middleton are not holding up within the public sphere.
The millions of Duke and Duchess of Sussexes' global supporters, the squads, and international news agencies alike would argue that the pattern of these attacks suggests a coordinated effort to suppress or discredit any support for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. The British press is seen as a gatekeeper rather than a facilitator of open discourse, targeting those who dare to question the palace or highlight potential misinformation and lies published by them to the public.
With the spread of information via social media and a diverse range of media outlets, including CBS, Rueters, AP press, and others, the global community is closely observing these personal attacks on members of the public who support Meghan and questioned the Palace's misinformation. These smear campaigns are how the papers have the power to change a person's life in an instant—driving innocent people to suicide and inciting hate against a section of the public. Different from the local British press, the international media landscape and social media users who support the Duke and Duchess of Sussexes are vast and varied, reducing the impact of any single narrative or agenda. This international oversight will expose the efforts to silence Meghan and Harry's supporters, undermining the credibility of the British press's campaign.
As social media and international press continue to monitor and report on Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's charitable work fairly, the British press will be under increased scrutiny for their constant attack on Meghan and now the Duke and Duchess's supporters, and even people who call out the inconsistency in the Palaces' PR relating to Kate Middleton recent photo debacle. The negative attention to the Sussexes' supporters may lead to a critical assessment of press practices in the UK, sparking debates on ethics, freedom of speech, and the press's role in society. These attacks on regular people could result in a Leveson enquiry 2.0, highlighting the need for more ethical journalism. People should not be fearful of the British Press potentially ruining their lives for speaking up against public institutions or supporting Meghan Markle against coordinated hateful campaigns.
The visibility of these attacks on a global scale can foster a sense of solidarity among Meghan and Harry supporters and advocates for free speech and fairness in media reporting. This international and social media backing not only counters the isolation of supporters within the UK but also amplifies their voices beyond the reach of the British press.
As the campaign against people who speak up against the Palace's PR misinformation or those who support Meghan becomes more apparent to a broader audience, the potential for reputational damage to the publications involved in targeting Bouzy and Perkins will grow. Readers both within and outside the UK may question the credibility and motives of outlets, like the Daily Mail, aka, 'Daily Fail', leading to a decline in trust and, potentially, readership.
The international spotlight can also highlight misinformation and bias in reporting Meghan and Harry, leading to a hopeful public demand for more balanced and factual coverage. This pressure can prompt a reevaluation of journalistic standards and practices among British media outlets, potentially leading to positive change.
In an increasingly interconnected world, the British press's attacks on supporters of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry not only challenge principles of fairness and freedom of speech but also risk significant backlash. With the international media and social media users serving as a counterbalance, these efforts to silence dissenting voices may ultimately lead to greater scrutiny, solidarity among critics, reputational damage to publications, and calls for more ethical journalism. In this context, the attack strategy seems counterproductive and a misstep that could provoke a broader discussion about British media accountability and ethics, potentially leading to a decline in readership and online engagements for the Daily Fail.
The British Press's Attacks on Meghan Markle Supporters Will Backfire; if these attacks continue, it's only a matter of time before the Squad raises enough money for a group litigation.
For more content like this, please donate what you can to help us grow. At the end of every fiscal year, 10% of your donation will be used to help change the lives of single mothers in the community.
L J Louis is an aspiring international trade lawyer, writer, foodie, and women's advocate with a double major in psychology and criminology, a Bachelor of Law(Hons LLB) degree, and an advanced diploma in fitness and health promotion. She writes and create content about human sexuality, psychology, and Meghan Markle.