Connect with us

Media

Harry and Meghan: What's the media's 'invisible contract' with British royalty? – BBC News

Published

 on


Princess Diana, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle

Getty Images

For decades, the motto “never complain, never explain” underpinned British royal life – including its dealings with the press.

But the revelations from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s interview with Oprah Winfrey have called into question the state of the British monarchy’s relationship with the media.

Prince Harry spoke of an “invisible contract” between the Royal Family and reporters – a world in which orchestrated public exposure is offered, and a level of scrutiny traditionally accepted, in return for privacy behind palace gates.

Meghan explained: “There’s a reason that these tabloids have holiday parties at the Palace. They’re hosted by the Palace, the tabloids are. You know, there is a construct that’s at play there.”

But that so-called contract could not prevent what Meghan described as a “media frenzy”, which has had a huge impact on the couple’s mental health and played a large role in their decision to step back from royal life last year.

The Duchess of Sussex

PA Media

The prince, meanwhile, revealed he “feared history repeating itself” – a reference to his mother Diana, Princess of Wales, who died in a Paris car crash while being hounded by the press.

So, how did this contract originally work – and is it now broken?

Jewel in the crown

The relationship between the monarchy and the media has historically been mutually beneficial, says Dr Laura Clancy, lecturer in media at Lancaster University and author of the forthcoming book Running the Family Firm: How the Monarchy Manages Its Image and Our Money.

For Buckingham Palace, the press has been a tool to communicate with its subjects, while the media has long used monarchy to attract readers and viewers.

In recent decades, royals have had to operate within “the tabloid age and era of royal gossip”, with Meghan the latest to taste life under the media microscope, Dr Clancy says.

“The construction of the royal family, as individual royals with individual stories, means that the monarchy can be consumed by audiences in the age of interest in the lives of public figures,” she explains.

Figures from search engine researchers Rise at Seven showed that 74,000 articles had been published about Meghan worldwide since the duke and duchess confirmed plans to distance themselves from the palace.

On top of this, searches for the duchess jumped 600% after the Oprah interview was announced.

And yet, despite this interest, the British public in general “know little about the inner-workings” between the monarchy and the media, such as the royal rota system which gives “some journalists more intimate access to royal events”, argues Dr Clancy.

The Duke of Cambridge with his children Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis

Kensington Palace

And then there are informal arrangements, such as the so-called “pressure cooker agreement”, where the paparazzi would leave Prince William and Harry alone during their education, “in return for intermittent occasions when they would be invited to staged photograph opportunities” – such as Prince William’s 18th birthday at Eton College.

This continues online in a new form with the prince’s family posts on Instagram, which “appear to give audiences intimate access to royals, but feel carefully staged”, adds Dr Clancy.

Race for clicks

However, the ever-growing dominance of digital news has altered this relationship, as the press scrambles for profitability in a fast-changing media landscape.

“Newspapers are still in the business of selling an audience to advertisers, a readership and page views,” says digital advertising expert Rob Weatherhead. “This hasn’t fundamentally changed with the move to digital publishing, but the metrics and numbers involved have.”

A printing press and a couple using tablet devices at the kitchen table

Getty Images

Publishers now “prioritise quantity, often over quality”, he says. And whereas it once used to be a fight for pride of place on the news stand, today publishers compete globally for primacy on search engines.

In the “race to be first” and reach audiences online and through social media, says Weatherhead, index prioritisation and search trends are king (or queen).

This means that enduring public interest in the monarchy make the royals “topics of high interest for publications, regardless of individual views”.

The volume of coverage surrounding Meghan and the Oprah interview has made this especially clear.

During February, when the interview and Meghan’s pregnancy were first announced, there were 6,080 articles written. Since then, interest has skyrocketed.

In the first week of March alone, 25,894 pieces on the duchess went live – an increase of more than 600%. And on Monday evening, as the world reacted to the US broadcast and the airing of the interview in the UK, this jumped to 448 articles in 24 hours, a daily rise of 348%.

Says Weatherhead: “Royalists will want to read about it, anti-royals will want to vent about it, and people in the middle probably have a passing interest just to keep up with the news.

“It has a pretty global appeal. And with that comes high page views and more advertising revenue,” he says.

‘Ruptured balance?’

The destabilisation has directly influenced British royalty’s relationship with the press. No longer is either side able to easily control the narrative and define the relationship.

Prince Harry told Winfrey the UK tabloid media is “bigoted” and creates a “toxic environment” of “control and fear”. But he added: “I’m acutely aware of where my family stand and how acutely scared they are of the tabloids turning on them.”

Meghan added that social media had made the relationship with the press like “the wild, wild West”, and said the royal family’s press operation failed to defend her and her husband from untrue stories.

Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, being interviewed by Oprah Winfrey

Joe Pugliese / Harpo Productions / CBS

In response, The Society of Editors said the media was not bigoted, and was holding the “rich and powerful to account”. After criticism, however, it issued a further statement on Wednesday to say its initial 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 duke and duchess’s latest statements add to a growing list of public grievances against certain elements of the press – all of which operate outside the palace’s traditional working relationship with the British media.

Earlier this month, Meghan successfully took the Mail on Sunday newspaper to court over the publication of private letters to her father, and asked for an “account of profits” in respect of her claim for infringement of copyright, which the judge agreed to.

This means that, unlike traditional damages, the paper will have to pay damages based on the revenue they made by publishing the letters – a direct recognition of, and challenge to, the royal family’s worth and relationship to the press.

The couple take part in their first joint engagement with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge at a Royal Foundation forum. Meghan shows her support for the £MeToo and Time's Up Campaigns during an on-stage Q&A.

Getty Images

“The monarchy relies on a careful balance of visibility and invisibility to maintain its power, so the inner-workings of monarchy must be kept invisible to protect the institution from scrutiny,” says Dr Clancy.

“Harry and Meghan’s ‘confessional’ interview threatens to rupture this balance.”

Opinion for hire

The royal commentators who offer their opinions for payment are also part of the royal news machine.

Their role was highlighted when YouTube hoaxers Josh Pieters and Archie Manners fooled a number of commentators into giving their views on the Oprah interview two days before it was broadcast.

“News media need sources and columnists to provide coverage,” says Rasmus Kleis, director at the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.

“When no-one – or only very few people actively seeking to control the narrative – has real insight into an issue or topic, there will always be a risk that some publications will settle for anonymous self-interested sources and whoever is willing to provide their insight, or at least express an opinion, as long as it makes for copy.”

2px presentational grey line

Follow us on Facebook, or on Twitter @BBCNewsEnts. If you have a story suggestion email entertainment.news@bbc.co.uk.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Media

GLAAD Media Awards presenters support transgender athletes

Published

 on

LOS ANGELES — “Schitt’s Creek” and “The Boys in the Band” were winners at the GLAAD Media Awards, which included soccer’s Ashlyn Harris and Ali Krieger calling for transgender students to be accepted as “part of the team” in sports.

Harris and Krieger, spouses who play for the Orlando Pride and were on the 2019 World Cup-winning U.S. women’s national team, presented an award in Thursday’s virtual ceremony to the film “Happiest Season,” about a lesbian romance.

The couple drew attention to transgender athletes amid widespread efforts to restrict their participation, including a recently signed Mississippi bill that bans them from competing on girls or women’s sports teams. It becomes law July 1.

“Trans students want the opportunity to play sports for the same reason other kids do: to be a part of a team where they feel like they belong,” Krieger said.

Added Harris: “We shouldn’t discriminate against kids and ban them from playing because they’re transgender.”

“Star Trek: Discovery,” “I May Destroy You” and “A Little Late with Lilly Singh” were among the other projects honoured in the pre-taped ceremony hosted by Niecy Nash. It’s available on Hulu through June.

The GLAAD awards, in their 32nd year, recognize what the media advocacy organization calls “fair, accurate, and inclusive” depictions of LGBTQ people and issues. Presenters and winners in this year’s event highlighted priorities including the importance of solidarity and self-respect.

“Friends, I’m so proud to stand with the LGBTQ community tonight, just as the LGBTQ community stands with Black and diverse communities,” said Sterling K. Brown, who presented the outstanding documentary award to “Disclosure.”

The “This Is Us” star, citing the Black Lives Matter and Black Trans Lives Matter movements, said that “we’re going to keep spreading that message of unity and justice until every one of us is safe to live the lives we love.”

JoJo Siwa, the teenage YouTube personality and performer, presented the award for outstanding children’s programming to “The Not-Too-Late Show with Elmo.” She said in January that she’s part of the LGBTQ community.

“I have the best, most amazing, wonderful girlfriend in the entire world who makes me so, so, so happy and that’s all that matters,” Siwa said. ”It’s really cool that kids all around the world who look up to me can now see that loving who you want to love is totally awesome” and should be celebrated.

Other awards went to Sam Smith, who was honoured as outstanding music artist for the album “Love Goes”; Chika, named breakthrough music artist for “Industry Games,” and “We’re Here” won outstanding reality program.

Cast members from “Glee,” including Chris Colfer, Amber Riley and Jane Lynch, paid tribute to Naya Rivera and her character in the series, gay cheerleader Santana Lopez. Rivera, 33, died in an accidental drowning in July 2020.

___

Online:

https://www.glaad.org/

Lynn Elber, The Associated Press







Source:- Coast Reporter

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Social Media Etiquette Review

Published

 on

Despite your best efforts, you may cause someone pain with that Tweet or Facebook post. Here’s a refresher on social media best practices, along with advice for some pandemic-only dilemmas.

In an ideal world, your followers would think every photo, video or thought you post on social media is like a little gift to them. In reality, it’s hard to predict how posts on Instagram, Facebook and other social media will land, especially during the pandemic. After so much loss and isolation over the past year, people are on edge. That vaccine selfie may feel joyous and hopeful to you, but it could be a digital slap in the face to someone who hasn’t received a vaccine shot or who has suffered a grave loss.

“Someone could be experiencing loss in such a way that there’s no way someone else won’t post something that compounds their grief,” said Catherine Newman, who has written the Modern Manners etiquette column for Real Simple magazine for 10 years. “That’s how grief is.”

Still, it’s hard not to overthink things — and to worry that despite your best efforts, you may cause someone pain. Some social media experts say you should review your sharing practices periodically, so here’s a refresher on social media etiquette, along with advice for some pandemic-only situations.

First, identify your motivations. Are you sharing that picture of the exquisite cake you baked because you want praise, or do you want people to feel bad that what they made themselves wasn’t as good? If it is to receive affirmation, that’s OK. But if you find yourself trying to get all your needs met by social media likes, it might be time to think about what else is missing in your life.

Second, focus on your friends. If you tried to consider every possible person who might be hurt by a post — your seemingly unobjectionable photo of tulips could very well remind a follower of someone they have lost — you might never post anything on social media. But absolutely think about your inner circle carefully.

Ms. Newman, for one, hasn’t posted about her own post-vaccination visits with family because so many in her immediate friend group have lost a parent in the past year. If you’re in a similar situation and you still want to post your vaccine selfie or the first time you’ve hugged your father in a year, consider acknowledging your own good fortune.

“I still appreciate it when people say, ‘We’re so lucky and there’s been so much loss and I’m sorry if you’re experiencing loss,’” said Ms. Newman, whose best friend died of cancer five years ago.

Before you hit “share,” read your words in multiple tones of voice, as different people can interpret the text differently, suggested Diane Gottsman, an etiquette expert and the founder of the Protocol School of Texas, a San Antonio company specializing in corporate etiquette training. If there’s any doubt, add a cue, such as an emoticon, about your tone.

If you want to post something negative, keep in mind that what you say or share often says more about you. Disagree (respectfully), but avoid sweeping generalizations about entire groups of people — or about one business based on your interaction with a single employee.

Additionally, remember that any message you share, even with close family members, will be amplified to your entire online community. (The tension may also be amplified around vaccines, health measures and the stress of a not-normal year.) If you are replying to your sister online about something, that doesn’t mean you can speak to her as harshly as you might privately. Ms. Gottsman advises taking a heated family debate offline.

“Don’t start a family feud on social media,” Ms. Gottsman said. “It can affect the next family holiday.”

If you are soliciting donations for a particular cause or charity, or asking for money to pay someone’s rent or medical bills with a GoFundMe campaign, recognize that the financial situations of many people have changed this past year and there may be many other appeals compared to times past. Skip shaming phrases, like “How can you not help this person?” Instead, Ms. Gottsman said, use ones like “If your heart moves you, I’m sharing this.”

Think less vigilance is needed, because your text group is small or your settings have been changed to private? Think again. When Heidi Cruz, the wife of Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, shared her family’s plans to flee a devastating winter storm in Texas for a vacation in Mexico, she texted only a small group of neighbors and friends. Screenshots of the messages ended up with journalists. Elaine Swann, an etiquette expert and founder of the School of Protocol in Carlsbad, Calif., points out that it wasn’t just one person who shared the chat with The New York Times; there were others who confirmed it.

“Even if you think it’s just your inner circle, there’s always somebody there who isn’t 100 percent on your team,” she said. “That’s the person who takes the screenshot before you delete whatever it is.”

Posting about food and fitness may be even more tempting than usual, given that a lot of people have changed what they eat and how much they exercise during the pandemic. But confine your commentary to how these lifestyle changes make you feel, not how they make you look. Among other things, not all people have had the luxury of more time to exercise during the pandemic — or if they did, they might not have had the energy to do so.

Dr. Lindsay Kite is a founder of Beauty Redefined, a nonprofit that promotes body image resilience, and an author of “More Than a Body.” She noted that your “before” photo — talking about how fat you look — may be someone else’s “after.”

If you really want affirmation and accountability for your fitness goals, avoid the sports-bra selfie and posts about body measurements. Instead, Dr. Kite suggested posting a picture of yourself in a blood pressure cuff, or a less body-focused snapshot of you jogging to your favorite coffee shop.

“Loving your body and improving your health doesn’t always lead to a more ideal-looking body,” she said.

There may be situations in which a post doesn’t land as you had intended. Maybe you shared a photo of a masked-up pandemic wedding, but followers pointed out that attending still involved travel. Or you posted a video of your family’s Easter egg hunt, because all the adults participating had been lucky enough to be vaccinated.

Ask yourself how many people reacted negatively. If only one follower is unhappy, it may just be that one person is raw.

“We have a genre in my family we call ‘hurting your own feelings,’” Ms. Newman said. “Where you’re looking for something to hang some pain on and you find it.”

You don’t have to own the person’s grief, but you do have to take responsibility for yourself and apologize. You can keep it simple, Ms. Newman said: I see your pain. I’m so sorry.

If you post something that is hurtful to a wider audience — you inadvertently said something offensive or you didn’t consider all the issues — it should absolutely be deleted if it’s causing people pain.

If it’s not, consider keeping the post up, Ms. Newman said, because deleting it erases the post from public view but does not address the hurt it caused. On Facebook, she suggested an “edited to add” with your heartfelt apology. This should not include the words “but” or “if,” as in, “I apologize if you were offended.” These words don’t acknowledge the hurt person’s truth and their situation, or your role in hurting them.

“If you accidentally step on someone’s foot, you don’t say, ‘I’m sorry if I stepped on your foot,’” Ms. Swann said. “You did it. It’s not a question.”

Your apology should also include a thoughtful plan about how you’ll do things differently in the future, which can be calibrated based on how grievous the offense. For lesser instances, Ms. Gottsman said, a sentence like “I’ll think twice before I post,” may be enough.

These are words all of us could live by.

Source:- The New York Times

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Media Advisory: Virtual Infrastructure Announcement in Brampton – Yahoo Canada Finance

Published

 on


GlobeNewswire

Reneo Pharmaceuticals Announces Pricing of Initial Public Offering

SAN DIEGO, April 08, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Reneo Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a clinical stage pharmaceutical company focused on the development and commercialization of therapies for patients with rare, genetic, mitochondrial diseases, today announced the pricing of its initial public offering of 6,250,000 shares of its common stock at a public offering price of $15.00 per share, for total gross proceeds of approximately $93.8 million, before deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses. All of the shares are being offered by Reneo. The shares are expected to begin trading on the Nasdaq Global Market on April 9, 2021 under the symbol “RPHM.” In addition, Reneo has granted the underwriters a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional 937,500 shares of common stock at the public offering price less underwriting discounts and commissions. The offering is expected to close on April 13, 2021, subject to satisfaction of customary closing conditions. Jefferies, SVB Leerink and Piper Sandler are acting as joint book-running managers for the offering. A registration statement relating to these securities has been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and became effective on April 8, 2021. The offering is being made only by means of a prospectus. Copies of the final prospectus relating to the offering may be obtained, when available, from: Jefferies LLC, Attention: Equity Syndicate Prospectus Department, 520 Madison Avenue, 2nd Floor, New York, NY 10022, by telephone at (877) 821-7388 or by e-mail at prospectus_department@jefferies.com; SVB Leerink LLC, Attention: Syndicate Department, One Federal Street, 37th Floor, Boston, MA, 02110, by telephone at (800) 808-7525, ext. 6105 or by e-mail at syndicate@svbleerink.com; or Piper Sandler & Co., Attention: Prospectus Department, 800 Nicollet Mall, J12S03, Minneapolis, MN 55402, by telephone at (800) 747-3924 or by e-mail at prospectus@psc.com. This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of, these securities in any state or jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state or jurisdiction. About Reneo PharmaceuticalsReneo is a clinical stage pharmaceutical company focused on the development and commercialization of therapies for patients with rare genetic mitochondrial diseases, which are often associated with the inability of mitochondria to produce adenosine triphosphate (ATP). Reneo is developing REN001 to modulate genes critical to metabolism and generation of ATP, which is the primary source of energy for cellular processes. REN001 has been shown to increase transcription of genes involved in mitochondrial function and increase fatty acid oxidation, and may increase production of new mitochondria. Contacts: Joyce AllaireManaging DirectorLifeSci Advisors, LLCjallaire@lifesciadvisors.com Vinny JindalChief Financial OfficerReneo Pharmaceuticals, Inc.investors@reneopharma.com

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending