A Lie Is a Lie; However, It’s Couched.
September 19, 2020
The news media, in all its forms, is supposed to inform, educate, and entertain its readership and audience with unvarnished truths. However, when lies are the hallmark of editorials, whether in newspapers, television, and radio, then a great disservice is being dished out daily to gullible citizens, who place so much trust in the news media.
Unfortunately, a sexy epithet has been coined – conspiracy theory or alternative facts – instead of calling a lie a lie. Gullible citizens don’t know much better and will always swallow such lies without question. Though, it is a tad strange when U.S. Television News Executives, who should know the difference between the truth and being economic with the truth, continue to rely on so-called ‘royal experts’ in the United Kingdom to comment on royals, who no longer live in the country. Are these Executives getting it right? I think not.
These Television News Networks are still employing Katie Nichols, a known telephone hacker who lives in England and hasn’t any links to the Sussexes in any shape or form, to comment on their life in California. Katie has written a book about the Duke and rushed a follow-up book about the two of them immediately after the big Royal Wedding.
Just last week, this woman told a load of codswallop to an American cable news programme about how the Queen loves zooming with Master Archie, the son of the Sussexes, who she claimed has streaking red hair (ginger hair). Now zooming, if not with a few other people, is between two people and never a televised event. If the Queen really did zoom, it would be a quiet family affair, not meant to be heard by an American entertainment channel. She did not even mention Master Archie’s parents taking part in the zooming, so it was just between great-grandson and the Monarch? So how did she know what happened? What an unlikely baloney. But then, that is how Ms. Nichol operates; she writes loads of crap for Vanity Fair and because most people do not read between the lines to know the truth, she gets away with plain murder. Unfortunately, she has been labelled as a ‘royal expert’ even in the United Kingdom by the tabloids.
Katie’s experience has been working on the royal beat for one or two tabloids for some years and graduating to hawk herself as a Royal expert to earn megabucks from US News Networks and magazines. However, is there such a thing as ‘royal expert’? Of course, one does not need a higher education to be one. One can study about the history of royalty at the university, but that is different from the current goings-on in the Royal family.
In sixty to a hundred years’ time and royal historians then want to delve into what is happening now, they could be called experts. If a journalist on a newspaper, television news, and magazine is newly detailed by their editor to report on the royal family, they follow them around the UK and the world, when they go on royal tours. During such events, all they do is shout silly questions at them from afar as the TV cameramen and press photographers do their work as expected.
After travelling together and being around these people for a while, these journalists tend to befriend some of the courtiers or handlers. Some, such as Camilla ‘Hound Dog Face’ Tominey, that crazy little deluded Nikka Roya, Rebecca English, and Emily Andrews go beyond the decent ethics of journalism to connive with these courtiers to peddle lies. When it suits certain sections of the news media, these people are referred to as royal experts, just because they hang around the royal family. I would call them the lying scavengers, not experts.
The arrival of Ms. Meghan Markle gave these people, including their royal contacts an incentive to gear up their art of fabrications. They had already formed some sort of ‘bond’ with the young royals, including the not so young Andrew, by excluding Prince Harry. Prince Harry has always had a healthy disdain for the tabloids and television journalists, so it is not surprising that after marriage and withdrawal from Senior Working Royal roles, he quickly cut off the Royal Rota and declared four annoying tabloids ‘persona non grata’.
The Sussexes are making excellent progress in the United States, which has surprised their distractors among the news media in the United Kingdom and gleefully for me, the Royal family. All their shenanigans to place obstacles in their way had failed miserably. From writing about their failure to land anything of note, being rejected everywhere, and facing hardships in the US only in July, and lying about how the Duke is faring in his new LA surroundings, they are now lying about their signed contract with Netflix. Somehow, they have been given a copy of the contract and seen what the Sussexes would produce in terms of ‘contents’ (a great lie, which we all ought to know). They have seen a documentary is being planned about Diana, Princess of Wales, which William is not happy about and would disapprove or would put a kibosh on it.
If the documentary claim was true, what earthly right has William got, to put a stop to it? It is not like he has ever done anything about the myriad programmes and stories about Diana, Princess of Wales, but can only now comment or do something about his brother doing a documentary on their mother. William has no exclusive right to their mother, and we all know that. There is nothing he can do about the Duke of Sussex doing anything about their mother. If the Duke has plans at all, it would be in a good and welcoming taste and the truth. If anything, he is the one carrying on where the mother left off, not William the traitor.
These so-called journalists did not even know the Sussexes had bought their own place for almost a month and a half, nor knew about the Netflix negotiations and contract signing, yet are now claiming to know the contents. They now know how much they would be paid for a speaking engagement – an expert in the United States said so. Speculations and lies paraded to be truth are the specialty of most of the newspapers and magazines in the United Kingdom.
What I cannot understand is why US news programmes have not cottoned on to the lies and continue to employ these liars, especially in the case of the Sussexes. When the Netflix contract was announced, ABC called their UK correspondent to ask questions about the contract, the Sussexes, and what the Royal family thinks about it. He was on holiday when he was called to comment. With all due respect to that gentleman, what did he know, absolutely zilch, even if he was not on holiday? Is that lazy journalism or what is it? Why could they not look for the spokesperson of the couple in the US to talk to?
Why does a TV company use Victoria Arbiter to comment on the couple, when she obviously has never had any contact with them? Everything she has ever said is based on assumptions and lies. The American news media have a lot to do to retrieve themselves from the concocted lies that emanate from their royal stringers in the United Kingdom because it is not looking good. They have to do better.