US network CBS today accused the British press of ‘blatantly racist’ coverage of Meghan Markle, using a column by Boris Johnson’s sister out of context as part of its claim the Duchess had been ‘vilified’ by UK tabloids.
The column by Rachel Johnson from 2016 had been used by Oprah Winfrey during the bombshell interview with Harry and Meghan as part of supposed negative coverage of the Duchess of Sussex.
It included a MailOnline logo with the words: ‘rich and exotic DNA. Miss Markle’s mother is a dreadlocked African-American lady from the wrong side of the tracks’.
That was again displayed on screen today during a report on CBS This Morning, with reporter Holly Williams saying: ‘There’s no doubt that Meghan has been vilified by Britain’s tabloid papers, their coverage sometimes blatantly racist.’
However, the line was never a headline, but rather a sentence penned by Ms Johnson about Harry’s then-girlfriend.
The sentence immediately followed her words, ‘Genetically, she is blessed. If there is issue from her alleged union with Prince Harry, the Windsors will thicken their watery, thin blue blood and Spencer pale skin and ginger hair.’
Later in the copy Ms Johnson went so far as to say, ‘Nobody cares that Miss Markle is mixed race’.
WHAT THEY SHOWED: Producers of the CBS Harry and Meghan special created what appeared to be a grab from this website with a line about ‘rich and exotic DNA’ written in a large typeface where the headline would normally be
The same quote, resembling a headline, was displayed on a CBS This Morning segment on Thursday which alleged blatant racism in coverage of the Duchess of Sussex
IN REAL LIFE: The text the show featured appeared in a column by the Prime Minister’s sister Rachel Johnson. This is how it actually appeared online. The line of text that the show made appear to be the headline was in fact taken from the middle of paragraph three of the 11-paragraph piece
The Mail On Sunday column – which was also published on MailOnline – appeared on screen during the CBS broadcast while a commentator discussed ‘undeniable racist overtones’ in media coverage.
In the separate segment today, Williams also highlighted complaints by MPs about coverage of Meghan and the row over the Society of Editors’ response.
The report was introduced by Oprah’s friend Gayle King, who said: ‘All you need to do is look at the headlines, we’ve been looking at them all year.
‘There’s definitely a difference in the coverage, so at least you need to acknowledge that… now what I like is that there is a microscope on it’.
Her fellow CBS This Morning presenter Anthony Mason claimed that Meghan had ‘endured some really vicious attacks’.
Following criticism of the column at the time, Ms Johnson explained that the article ‘celebrated the fact that she was mixed race’, although she admitted she regretted the phrasing.
She told the Express: ‘I meant that in marvellous contrast to the gingery white blood of his own blood family on his maternal side. But it didn’t go down well and I hereby apologise Harry.’
Ms Johnson also wrote in the column that Diana, Princess of Wales would have been ‘delighted’ by Meghan’s humanitarian work.
‘Miss Markle has an active social conscience, and anti-landmine campaigner Princess Diana would be delighted that she is the Ambassador for World Vision and has toured Afghanistan and Rwanda as part of her humanitarian effort,’ she wrote.
‘Like Princess Diana, she wears her heart on her sleeve, and is emotionally open.’
Ms Johnson’s brother, the prime minister, would not be drawn on the royal interview on Monday after Harry and Meghan alleged racist attitudes behind palace doors.
The PM said he had ‘always had the highest admiration for the Queen and the unifying role that she plays in our country and across the Commonwealth’.
But he said that on ‘other matters to do with the royal family, I have spent a long time now not commenting on royal family matters and I don’t intend to depart from that’.
Asked about the allegation that a royal family member had asked about the skin colour of Meghan’s child, the PM’s spokesman said Mr Johnson believed there was ‘no place in society’ for racism.
The Mail on Sunday column published in November 2016 was written by Rachel Johnson, left, who is the sister of UK prime minister Boris Johnson, right
Harry and Meghan’s interview with Oprah Winfrey, pictured, has plunged the royal family into one of its worst crises since the death of Diana, Princess of Wales in 1997
Buckingham Palace later put out a careful statement saying that the allegations were ‘concerning’ but that ‘recollections may vary’ about what happened.
Meghan told Oprah that the stresses of royal life had led her to contemplate suicide, saying the palace had failed to protect her from critical media coverage.
Producers of the two-hour CBS special displayed numerous examples of what purported to be newspaper headlines savaging Meghan and Harry.
But many of these headlines were taken out of context while more than a third of them came from American or Australian publications, not the British press.
One segment showed a headline about how ‘Meghan’s seed will taint our Royal Family’, as if implying that this was the view of the newspaper.
In fact, this was a story about racist comments made by a model who was the girlfriend of then-UKIP leader Henry Bolton.
The mocked-up version, which used a similar page design, included the quote but cut the remaining headline away.
The Queen, pictured, said she was ‘saddened’ to learn of Harry and Meghan’s struggles in a short statement released by Buckingham Palace on Tuesday
Two of the 49million people to have seen the Harry and Meghan interview so far watch the Duchess of Sussex on their TV screen in Liverpool on Monday
Meanwhile the fallout from the interview continued today as Prince William insisted that the royals are ‘very much not a racist family’.
William made the comment during his first public appearance since the family was thrown into one of its worst crises since Diana’s death in 1997.
He and the Duchess of Cambridge toured School21 in Stratford, East London, to mark the return of children to classes this week and the rollout to secondary schools of a mental health project Kate launched in primary schools in 2018.
As William left, a reporter asked him: ‘Is the royal family a racist family, sir?’. The Duke, with the Duchess by his side, replied: ‘We’re very much not a racist family.’
Asked whether he had spoken to Harry since the interview aired, William replied: ‘No, I haven’t spoken to him yet, but I will do.’
It came two days after Morgan departed from Good Morning Britain following 41,000 complaints to Ofcom about his attitude to Meghan’s interview.
Yesterday it emerged that Meghan herself was one of those who made a formal complaint to ITV bosses about Morgan’s behaviour.
Morgan stood by his comments on Wednesday, saying: ‘If I have to fall on my sword for expressing an honestly-held opinion about Meghan Markle and that diatribe of bilge that she came out with in that interview, so be it.’
The presenter had previously said that ‘I don’t believe a word she says’ and that ‘I wouldn’t believe her if she read me a weather report’.
Morgan walked off the set on Tuesday after an on-air clash with his colleague, Alex Beresford.
How Oprah used doctored and out-of-context headlines to smear the British press (while a third were from FOREIGN gossip mags)
By Rory Tingle for MailOnline
Headlines shown on screen during the Oprah interview to paint British media coverage as hostile and ‘racist’ were mocked up by the production company, often edited to remove context – and a third of them came from foreign media, new analysis has revealed today.
The two-hour programme, which aired on CBS This Morning, included cuttings of stories intended to confirm the Sussexes’ claim that UK newspapers were guilty of peddling racist abuse against Meghan.
One segment showed a headline about how ‘Meghan’s seed will taint our Royal Family’ – without noting that the story was actually exposing racist comments made by a model.
The mocked-up version, which used a similar page design, included the quote but cut the remaining headline away.
Another story that appeared during the tell-all interview referred to a BBC programme that had portrayed Meghan as a ‘trailer trash American’.
The actual article included an interview with actress Gbemisola Ikunelo, who created the character, explaining she invented it to find ‘humour in the ridiculous’ because it is ‘the opposite of how the Duchess really behaves’.
And another appeared to use a quote from the story as if it were a headline – without showing the context behind it.
Meanwhile, 11 of more than 30 headlines shown during the interview were from American and Australian publications, according research by the Telegraph. MailOnline has contacted Oprah Winfrey’s network for comment.
The research comes as Society of Editors chief Ian Murray tonight resigned as executive director after the body came under fire for defending the UK press against accusations of racism.
WHAT THEY SHOWED: The headline read ‘BBC comedy portrays Meghan Markle as ”trailer trash” American who threatens to knife Kate Middleton’. But the character was actually meant to be the opposite of what Meghan was really like
IN REAL LIFE: The article as it appeared on the Telegraph’s website – with Defence spelled the English way, not how the Americans mocked it up – makes it clear that the comedienne portraying Meghan as ‘trailer trash’ was doing so as it was ‘finging humour’ in a ‘ridiculous’ idea
How it appeared: A Telegraph article appeared in the same segment about hostile newspaper coverage, shortly after the commentator described the reporting as ‘standing apart from what we’ve seen for any other royal’.
The reality: The headline read ‘BBC comedy portrays Meghan Markle as ”trailer trash” American who threatens to knife Kate Middleton’.
But the story, from June 2019, included quotes from comedian Gbemisola Ikunelo, who voiced the character and said she conceived it as the opposite of Meghan to ‘find humour in the ridiculous’.
‘Anybody who has seen anything of Meghan Markle in public will know that she seems incredibly agreeable and friendly, always smiling,’ she said.
WHAT THEY SHOWED: The mocked-up headline purported to be from this website is reduced to a single quote and appeared as a commentator discussed ‘undeniable racist overtones’ in media coverage
IN REAL LIFE: The story – which was on the front of that day’s Mail On Sunday – was a story exposing the suspension of the girlfriend of the UKIP leader for using the racist phrase that appeared in the headline. Producers removed all that context
How it appeared: A Mail On Sunday article – which was also posted onto MailOnline – appeared as a commentator discussed ‘undeniable racist overtones’ in media coverage.
The reality: It was actually a piece exposing racist remarks about the Duchess by Jo Marney, the then girlfriend of former Ukip leader Henry Bolton.
The full online headline said Marney had been suspended from the party over the comments.
The front page headline in print for the same story, from January 2018 – ‘Vile Racist Attack on Meghan by Mistress of Ukip Chief’ – was not shown in the programme.
WHAT THEY SHOWED: Oprah’s team reduced this Telegraph article to a headline suggesting the Duchess ‘doesn’t speak our language’. As they mocked up the Telegraph’s website, they spelled
IN REAL LIFE: The piece – an opinion column – has the subdeck that explains it is critiquing the Duchess’s ‘earnest gushing’ which the writer finds to be ‘like nails down a blackboard’
How it appeared: Another Telegraph story flashed up as Oprah suggested Meghan had been the victim of media attacks soon after joining the Royal Family, and shortly after a commentator described the ‘racial overtones’ of media coverage.
The reality: The article, by the sketch writer Michael Deacon, appeared two months ago – after the couple had left the UK.
It claimed Meghan ‘speaks Californian … a hippie version of corporate management-speak’, before listing a series of gushing ‘Woke’ phrases.
The story was sub-headed: ‘No doubt the Duchess means well. But to jaded British ears, her earnest gushing is like nails down a blackboard.’
WHAT THEY SHOWED: The interview flashed up a Guardian headline apparently referring neutrally to Danny Baker talking about comparing Archie to ‘a chimp’
IN REAL LIFE? No such headline is immediately available on the Guardian’s website. This, from the aftermath of Baker’s sacking, is their story about him talking about his Tweet and apologising for it
The BBC Radio 5 Live host sparked outrage after he uploaded this image of a couple clinging on to a monkey wearing a suit with the caption: ‘Royal baby leaves hospital’
How it appeared: Following comments about ‘racist abuse’ Meghan allegedly suffered from the press was a headline in the Guardian referring to a notorious tweet by BBC radio presenter Danny Baker.
The reality: Baker’s 2019 tweet showing a couple with a monkey tagged ‘Royal baby leaves hospital’ prompted an outcry and led to him being sacked by the BBC.
Many viewed the tweet as racist. However, after the story was initially published, the 61-year-old broadcaster denied this and called it a ‘stupid unthinking gag’ about class.
Baker said that he was unaware of who the mother of the baby even was: ‘I didn’t know which of our royal princesses had given birth.
‘My go-to photo when any posh people have a baby is this absurd chimpanzee in a top hat leaving the hospital. Had it not been Meghan – perfectly good joke. I was trying to make a point about class and it’s just preposterous.’
Baker’s response to the allegation of racism was not mentioned in the Oprah broadcast.
WHAT THEY SHOWED: The producers created what appeared to be a grab from this website with a line about ‘rich and exotic DNA’ written in a large typeface where the headline would normally be
IN REAL LIFE: The text the show featured appeared in a column by the Prime Minister’s sister Rachel Johnson. This is how it actually appeared online. The line of text that the show made appear to be the headline was in fact taken from the middle of paragraph three of the 11-paragraph piece
How it appeared: A 2016 column by Boris Johnson’s sister, Rachel was shown as a single sentence, ‘Rich and exotic DNA, Miss Markle’s mother is a dread-locked African-American lady from the wrong side of the tracks…’ It came in a segment describing the ‘racist abuse’ Meghan allegedly received.
The reality: The actual comment piece, which appeared in the Mail On Sunday and was also posted on MailOnline, described Meghan as genetically ‘blessed’.
It said she would help the Windsors ‘thicken their watery, thin blue blood and Spencer pale skin and ginger hair with some rich and exotic DNA’, before lauding the duchess for her acting success and social conscience.
Following criticism at the time, Rachel Johnson explained that the article ‘celebrated the fact that she was mixed race’ – although she admitted she regretted the phrasing.
She told the Express: ‘I meant that in marvellous contrast to the gingery white blood of his own blood family on his maternal side. But it didn’t go down well and I hereby apologise Harry.’
The mocked up version of The Sun’s ‘Meghan made Kate cry’ headline which appeared during the Oprah Winfrey interview
The real version of the Sun’s headline. Both are almost the same, with pictures, and other text taken out
How it appeared: ‘Meg Made Kate Cry’ on top of a header for The Sun newspaper.
The reality: This was the same, albeit a mocked up version with the rest of the stories and furniture removed – most likely for legal purposes. The main story text and sub-headline have also been removed.
The sub-head sheds more context on the alleged incident, adding that the row was due to the ‘bride’s strict demands’ over Princess Charlotte’s dress for her wedding.
The Duchess of Sussex addressed the story – which was widely reported in February 2019 – during her interview with Oprah. The story claimed that in the lead-up to the wedding, Meghan had made Kate Middleton cry during a row over a dress for Princess Charlotte. In her Oprah interview, Meghan accepted there had been a row, but said Kate was the one to make her cry, and insisted the Duchess of Cambridge had apologised to her after.
A version of the Express’ story about Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle’s rift which appeared during the Oprah interview
The real version that was posted on the Express’ website – with the sub head underneath
How it appeared: Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle rift: Why did Kate cry during Royal Wedding rehearsal?
The reality: The Oprah interview version does appear identical to the real version. However, it does crop above the sub-head, which gives more context over the row in 2018.
The subhead mentions the reported ‘row’ between the pair – which Meghan confirmed had happened. However she claimed Kate had made her cry, and apologised for it, in her interview with Oprah.
The mocked up version of Star magazine’s ‘Meghan is ruining my life’ headline which appeared during the Oprah Winfrey interview
The real version of the ‘Meghan is ruining my life’ published in Star magazine – an American publication
How it appeared: Meghan is ruining my life!
The reality: Again, the headline is exactly the same, but is clearly a composed image, rather than the real version, which appeared in Star magazine on February 11, 2019.
The article, which featured a picture of the Duchess of Cambridge rubbing her eye claimed it had the ‘inside’ into the ‘nastiest fight after Harry’s wife makes her daughter Charlotte cry’.
On top of this, Star Magazine is actually an American publication – and this magazine was published in the US and not in the UK.
The interview showed a series of other cuttings from newspaper and magazine stories as the commentator described ‘a daily onslaught of vitriol and condemnation from the UK press
However, a third of the headlines shown were also taken from foreign media, according to the Telegraph’s analysis
How it appeared: The interview showed a series of other cuttings from newspaper and magazine stories as the commentator described ‘a daily onslaught of vitriol and condemnation from the UK press.’
The reality: A third of the headlines shown were also taken from foreign media, according to the Telegraph’s analysis.
One said ‘Harry trapped in marriage from hell!’ – but that was taken from the American tabloid the National Enquirer.
Another National Enquirer headline was also used which said ‘Monster Meghan exposed!’
In total 11 of more than 30 headlines shown during the interview were from American and Australian tabloids, according to the Daily Telegraph.
Of the 23 headlines from British news outlets which featured, around 14 were not published in print and only appeared online.
Other foreign publications used included Us Weekly, a celebrity magazine based in New York, and the Australia-based New Idea magazine.
Society of Editors chief resigns after backlash over comments defending UK press from accusations of racism
The Society of Editors chief has tonight resigned after coming under fire for defending the UK press from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s racism claims.
Ian Murray, the industry body’s executive director, faced a backlash from sections of the media after releasing a statement saying the couple’s accusations, made in their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, were ‘not acceptable’.
His statement also said the couple’s claims were made without ‘supporting evidence’ and that the UK media ‘has a proud record of calling out racism’.
But the remarks drew criticism from some within the industry, including editors of publications such as the HuffPost and the Guardian, who both said the statement did not reflect their opinion.
ITV’s news anchor Charlene White today pulled out of presenting the industry body’s annual awards.
And a number of journalists and newspapers had also announced they would reject their nominations for the prestigious honours.
In a statement, released this evening, he said: ‘Since the statement was issued the SoE has been heavily criticised.
Ian Murray, the industry body’s executive director, faced a backlash from sections of the media after releasing a statement saying the couple’s accusations, made in a bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, were ‘not acceptable’
But the remarks about Harry and Meghan’s (pictured) claims drew criticism from some within the industry, including editors of publications such as the Huffington Post and the Guardian, who both said the statement did not reflect their opinion
‘While I do not agree that the Society’s statement was in any way intended to defend racism, I accept it could have been much clearer in its condemnation of bigotry and has clearly caused upset.
‘As executive director I lead the Society and as such must take the blame and so I have decided it is best for the board and membership that I step aside so that the organisation can start to rebuild its reputation.’
It comes as yesterday a letter was signed by 167 journalists of colour, who said the response SoE’s response was ‘laughable’.
The SoE, which has members from nearly 400 national and regional outlets, today appeared to pull back from the earlier comments, amid claims of a split in the executive board.
The new statement ‘said the previous comments ‘did not reflect what we all know: that there is a lot of work to be done in the media to improve diversity and inclusion’.
The latest comment was made by the SoE board, rather than Mr Murray – as the previous comment had been.
Meanwhile, a number of publications and journalists have today decided to pull their nominations from the upcoming National Press Awards.
These include the Bureau of Investigative Journalism and the Yorkshire Post.
Earlier, the award’s host Ms White had pulled out, citing the comments by Mr Murray.
She said: ‘Perhaps it’s best for you to look elsewhere for a host for your awards this year.
‘Perhaps someone whose views align with yours: that the UK press is the one institution in the entire country who has a perfect record on race.’
It comes after the Duchess of Sussex accused the press of ‘attacking and inciting so much racism’ in its coverage of her during her explosive CBS interview with Oprah Winfrey.
She said: ‘It changed our risk level, because it went… it wasn’t just catty gossip. It was bringing out a part of people that was racist in how it was charged.
‘And that changed the threat. That changed the level of death threats. That changed everything.’