I never really understand the royal reporters’ reliance on daily YouGov polls. It’s quite common to see many royal reporters citing those numbers to somehow justify their reporting, or claim that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s “popularity” is suffering in the UK. The polling methodology usually seems suspect, and I get the feeling that many of the numbers being thrown around are coming from push polls with small samples. But even then, it’s curious to see members of the Windsor clan treated like politicians in a heated campaign trail. There’s no “voting someone out” or “losing an election.” In the case of Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan, they’re literally in another country, living their lives away from the barrage of hatefulness. They’re not living on the British taxpayer’s dime whatsoever. So why the continuous polling? Newsweek has some data and some analysis. It’s very curious.
The astonishing two-hour prime time interview has caused Meghan and Harry’s approval ratings to plunge, not rise. YouGov data suggests Prince Harry’s net approval fell 15 points to -3 from March 2 to March 12, with 45 percent of Brits feeling positively about him and 48 percent feeling negative. The same research suggests Meghan’s net approval fell 14 points to -27, with 31 percent feeling positive about her and 58 percent feeling negative.
Newsweek’s own exclusive polling points to some possible explanations, identifying that just 21 percent of Brits believe all the couple’s claims. A full 26 percent said they believed nothing the duke and duchess said while 45 percent believed everything. As if that was not bad enough, 48 percent believed Meghan and Harry were motivated by self-promotion with only 36 percent thinking they did the interview to defend themselves. And 64 percent felt cutting Prince Harry off financially was the right thing to do once he had stepped back from royal duties, compared to 36 percent who did not.
Royal biographer Penny Junor told Newsweek: “In terms of whether it’s been successful for Harry and Meghan, I don’t think we know what it was meant to achieve. I’m absolutely mystified about why they did it. Unless it was purely self-promotion. By the sounds of things in America there is much greater approval of them. I still think this is quite worrying for the Monarchy. The queen is head of the commonwealth and Prince Charles is lined up to be head of the Commonwealth after her. All of that is worrying.”
There was, however, some good news for campaign group Republic who seek to abolish the monarchy. They have been buoyed by Survation data that suggests 34 percent of people would like an end to the monarchy while 66 percent want to see it continue. While the findings do not suggest Queen Elizabeth II is going anywhere anytime soon, it is a better than usual response for the group. The campaign Tweeted: “34% is a significant jump in support for a republic.”
There are potential implications further afield than the U.K. among the 15 other countries around the world who have the queen as head of state. Barbados has already committed to becoming a republic and there has been a similar debate in Jamaica as well.
Historian Robert Lacey, author of Battle of Brothers, told Newsweek: “If there is a threat to the monarchy it is obviously to the Commonwealth monarchies. Barbados has already signed off. I think there will be a problem in the future with Australia, New Zealand, certainly in the Caribbean countries. You’ve seen it in recent reports, Caribbean newspapers saying why should we have a white head of state anymore. They will stay in the Commonwealth but I think this could be the end of the strange anomaly of the Commonwealth monarchies where these countries choose to have the British head of state as their head of state. I think that survives as long as the queen is alive but after that people might feel differently about King Charles III and Queen Camilla.”
Imagine spending the money to do a push poll about the motivations for two people publicly detailing their ordeals with a toxic British media and toxic royal family. It’s not shocking to me whatsoever that 48% of the people polled on Salty White Folk Isle believe that Meghan and Harry are doing this all for “self-promotion.” This is something I keep coming back to: the nasty, negative, toxic, racist, misogynistic press around the Sussexes happens because some British people want it and are willing to put up with it. If there was an outcry from the public, the British media would change. There is such a significant bloc of the British public who WANT to hate Meghan and Harry, who WANT to read every disparaging, nonsensical, nasty story about them. It’s the same thing with Piers Morgan – he was allowed to publicly abuse Meghan for YEARS due to a lack of accountability.
As for what Lacey and Junor say about the Commonwealth… yeah. A lot of things will be very different when the Queen dies. And the Republic’s numbers on younger people’s feelings regarding the monarchy should scare the sh-t out of the Windsors.
34% is a significant jump in support for a republic. https://t.co/TkAsDwAjBf
— Republic (@RepublicStaff) March 14, 2021
Photos courtesy of WENN.
I know it would be a complicated, difficult, and challenging process but I cannot wait for the day Canada becomes a republic and gets rid of these leeches.
SAME. I honestly have incredibly low hopes for it, bc the process of removing the monarchy would involve the government having to sit down with and treat our First Nations population as equals, and we are just not there yet at all. The sheer cavalier-ness with which people speak about removing the monarchy in Canada, without actually talking about what it would entail, speaks to just how overlooked First Nations people are, and always have been, by not only the Canadian govt, but by us, the citizens, as well.
This is a huge reason why Trudeau is not eager to open this particular can of worms. It would mean having to start asking some incredibly necessary and difficult questions about how the Canadian govt (not the Crown) has treated First Nations people throughout history. From the First Nations people I know and have spoken to about this, their stance on the issue is clear too–they do not trust the Canadian govt to negotiate in good faith, and the treaties they signed with the British crown (NOT the Canadian govt–an important distinction here) have come in handy more than once in helping them to defend their land and treaty rights against settler encroachment.
The most recent issue in Nova Scotia, in 2020, about the M’ikmaq people and their lobster fishing rights is a prescient example of one of those treaties in action. The Canadian supreme court ruling that it still holds is what enabled them to defend their rights to their land, even today. That treaty was one signed with the Crown–not the Canadian govt, and not the govt of Nova Scotia either.
That being said, the monarchy absolutely needs to be abolished. I just think that if people want that to happen, things need to change in Canada in a big way before it can be accomplished. I think people sometimes have it backward, in that they think abolishing the monarchy will create a more just and equitable society. But I think, as far as Canada goes, it has to be the other way around. We have to create a more just and equitable society, where First Nations people feel like equal partners, before we can even think about abolishing the monarchy. Until that happens, as distasteful and ridiculous as the whole bunch of them are, their continued existence, and the existence of a legal, constitutional entity known as “the Crown”, is an unfortunate necessity. It’s weird and backwards, but there you have it.
For those who are curious, and want to look up some of the legal aspects of this stuff, you should look into things like the Halifax Treaties, and rulings like R v Marshall, and more generally, the relationship that First Nations, Inuit and Metis people of Canada have with the Crown (aka the ruling sovereign of Britain). This process could take decades and it entails a lot of work. I do want the monarchy abolished, but I don’t want people taking this stuff lightly, because the First Nations in this country have been screwed over for long enough now. The process has to include them, or it won’t work.
@A this is a beautiful response and clearly outlines how complex the issues are in Canada because of the countries convoluted legal structures and the history of many of the negotiations that formed this country. A few months ago I was explaining to a French friend of mine about the Meech Lake accord, and my god her face when I explained it and its fallout.
I think the majority of Canadians have very little understanding of many of the issues you highlighted her and the example of the M’ikmaq is a good one. I think it a long road that needs to be travelled before the monarchy can be abolished because it involves so many other pieces of work. Not sure if you know about this very cool pilot in Ontario right now…
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/indigenous-education-kit-1.5787761
@A you have put this so well and explained it beautifully
@sunny, it is absolutely a long road. One of the bright spots in all of this is, a lot of the people who are committed to abolishing the monarchy in Canada are also the same people who are deeply concerned with issues of First Nations sovereignty in Canada as well. There has been much more of an overlap between the two, especially in recent decades, as awareness continues to grow on these issues. That pilot program looks amazing, and it’s much needed, and hopefully it gets rolled out on a much larger scale as time goes on.
I do think that, being a fairly young person, I’ll see the monarchy abolished in Canada at some point in my life. But it won’t happen overnight (no matter what any New York Times article that lacks sufficient knowledge on the subject might want to say, LOL). And somewhat unrelated, but Canadian constitutional history is both fascinating and a nightmare at the same time. The Meech Lake stuff is a good example of that.
Thank you, A
An excellent, clear synopsis.
My privilege blinded me to some of the nuances you make so clear.
Instead of advocating for the monarchy to be abolished in Canada, from hereon in I commit to more fully, more publicly and more intelligently fighting for a more just and equitable society in Canada. Once more closely achieved (and as you say, it could take decades, but instead of supporting indigenous culture and persons privately, I need to make my stand more vocal and public) we can re-visit the fight to abolish the monarchy in Canada.
Thank you for your light shone on this Canadian aspect to the Crown.
I think you could transfer the responsibilities outlined by the Royal proclamation toward indigenous peoples to whatever new entity that would be conceptually created. It doesn’t need to be the crown because already the entity that made the declaration in the 1700s is not the same. The Canadian crown is not the same as the British crown, which was the original entity that made the declaration and upon which the Supreme Court of Canada determined there were obligations with respect to the treaties and the unceded land. So already a transfer of responsibilities were made. And it could be done again. The current Queen is recognized as the Queen of Canada and with repatriation it has been separated entirely from the UK. This is why Canada has to approve of any new monarch since it is not an automatic acceptance.
@Nic919, it could be done again, no one is saying it can’t. My point is that, regardless of what needs to be done, it can’t be done without huge changes in societal perceptions and understandings of First Nations people, their treaty rights, what the Crown actually does, and the level of consultation that this process needs to have with First Nations people to get off the ground at all.
So yes, those responsibilities could be theoretically transferred–but whatever entity those responsibilities are transferred TO needs to be one that the First Nations people are WILLING to make an agreement with. The questions remain, as to what sort of entities these would BE, in reality. What would they look like? And more importantly–who comes up with this entity? Who gets to decide on what it is? Is it the Canadian govt? As I already said, the history of relations between the Canadian govt and the First Nations people is not a good one, and it never has been. Is it the Canadian people?
And while I haven’t looked into it too closely, how much consultation was there in 1982, with the First Nations people, when the Canadian constitution was patriated? What did they feel at the time this happened, when the responsibilities were transferred from the British crown to the Canadian crown? What do they feel about that today? The fact that these are questions that were a) never asked in all of my time at school, and b) don’t have an easily accessible answer (although I have a good guess as to what those answers might be), speaks to the sort of cavalier-ness that I was stating in my comment. This stuff gets glossed over, and it shouldn’t. Canadians hear more about Quebec and their issues with the Canadian constitution than they hear about what the First Nations people thought of it, and that’s precisely the problem.
The issues here are not about whether the process *can* be done. It can be done, it’s been done once before, as you outlined. The issues here are, what would that even look like, and most importantly, will First Nations people get the sort of say they NEED to have in this process at all? Like I said, they’ve been screwed over far too many times in history. We can’t say we’re abolishing the monarchy to create a more equal society when we’re repeating this same process, yet again.
Thank you A for this succinct explanation.
As a Maritimer living in London, we sadly have a long road ahead of us. I have family who are commercial fishermen and whilst they were not involved in the horrible hate crimes against Mi’kmaw people they didn’t denounce them either. I blocked a lot of family members on social media in 2020 because I just could not deal with it.
Sadly I think Canada will be the last nation to get rid of the monarchy only because of the legal difficulties when we should be leading the charge.
The majority in Europe sees this as a class conflict fought on both sides in a snug-luxurious ambience.
It’s the leeches/his familiy Harry is living of. And Meghan didn’t google Harry?! That’s the subject of memes here over the pond! I even google me future boss, not to mention my boyfriend, back when we dated. Come on, who would not?! (Except Meghan, of course! *eyeroll*) .
Google doesn’t tell you how racist and xenophobic the UK has become in the last 10 years, quite the opposite in fact as any voice speaking on the topic is routinely silenced.
Brits don’t want to know they have issues with race and they take delight in mentioning polls saying they are the most tolerant. Like.. Pfft!
I would not….mostly because it wouldn’t occur to me, but even if it did, I would prefer to make my own assessment.
Ahh? Europe is very big, maybe you mean the racist side of the UK. Where I live not only don’t we care enough to side eye Meghan, and are careful to downplay instances of racism, but we are also way more concerned about the third freaking wave of covid-19. So please learn geography
And what would google have told her about Harry that could have warned her about the insidious ways the family operate with the media? Some people are just now learning how the BRF have an invisible contract with the media and what they do to get positive coverage. A quick google of Harry would have shown her all this? I’ve never googled my bosses (only the organisation so that I can ace the interview). Definitely never googled a prospective partner.
Yes as much as I like Meghan, I did an eyeroll at that one as well. She is a smart lady and she would have been well prepared when she went to that first date. People know how savvy she is and you can’t have it both ways I’m afraid. There is more gray in this whole situation than black and white. I see contradictions on both sides . I see how both “sides” use the media to their advantage.
@Powermoonchrystal: was has geography-knowledge (or lack of such? I don’t know how you read this into my post anyway?) to do with racism in the UK? And who are you talking of as “we”? Europe, EU or the UK? 😉 Be more precise, geographychrystal!
@Alpine witch: you have a point there: Google couldn’t prepair Meghan on how racist “the family” was, but she said she didn’t google Harry, which is weird when you can get the basics on Wiki. Meghan said Harry did open up to her and she didn’t “have to google”, but he should have told her about his conservative family. Their stance probably didn’t come to him a surprise!
I just call out naiveté on H.&M.
@Gail: You would go in an interview unprepared? Or not google someone you met you are intersted in? But you make your assessment on celebrities like here on CB? 😉
The internet doesn’t tell the full story. I’d think it’s a bit weird my date googled me before we even met, but hey more power to you.
Honestly, I believed her about the googling, because my guess is as a famous person herself (even if not as famous as Harry) she knows that a lot of what can be found online isnt necessarily true. And I mean okay she could have looked at Wikipedia – it would have told her his full name, place in succession, where he went to school, bare bones about his military service, his mother – all stuff she probably already knew, or at least had an idea about (like she might not have known he went to Eton but she probably knew he went to an upperclass private school – or what americans would call private.) I dont think that was the stuff she was interested in finding out.
I do not understand the constant harping on Meghan not Googling Harry before/while they dated. They were set up by a mutual friend. Are people this out of touch with how this works, or is the concept of a trusted friend circle a foreign concept? I haven’t dated any of my friend’s friends, but when we were introduced there was no pressing need for me to look them up because I assumed that the mutual friend aspect meant they were who they said they were. Also, what would Meghan be searching for online about Harry? He’s a public figure, so it’s not like he would have had a baby or a wife or a criminal record he was hiding. His wikipedia page would have been a one-stop shop.
All in all, constantly nitpicking at this is part of the belief pushed by haters that she is a manipulative liar.
Anna, agreed. I mentioned this here a few days ago – I’m from mainland Europe and the attitude towards H&M is surprisingly much more on the negative side.
The articles in our (mostly left wing) major newspapers were positive, but hardly any comments were. People’s attitude is somewhere between “who cares”, “rich privileged people fighting each other” and “Harry weak, Meghan bad”.
Although I’m willing to bet nobody has actually seen the interview itself. They just read the articles (possibly just the titles).
You google strangers to make sure you’re not meeting a criminal or a psycho. If a friend I trusted set me up on a date with Idris Elba or George Clooney, why would I google either man although I really don’t know much beyond the public persona. It is still quite an adventure getting to know someone in person.
Meghan is very much a romantic. I believe she would want to experience the discovery.
How come no one looks at it from the point of view that if she googled Harry and his family, then she’d have to tell him that she did. Assuming they have an honest open relationship. I personally would not google someone especially if I was into them and thought there might be potential.
I thought it was a blind date.
Also— glad to hear that there are even more people out there dismissive of systemic racism and mental health.
SAME. It’s long past time for us to have our own little party and chuck this lot and their tiaras into the St. Lawrence River.
I won’t live long enough to see that but I personally think it should be dissolved. Many smaller countries in the Caribbean have managed it.
Only 48%? I’m surprised it’s that low considering how the British media machine has been churning out misogynoir propaganda so years. That means a majority, if however, slim, have some sense.
That’s what I thought. For a bias and racist poll I thought it would be higher.
This is actually bad for the BRF and the other racists over on Shutter Island.
Agreed, this is bad news for the Royal family. This has become a dogwhistle issue where you know beforehand who’s going to think what, so this is a surprisingly low number considering the huge part of British society that supports the Tories.
It really depends on how the question is framed. I actually took this YouGov survey – my friends and I usually do them together while watching tv as we’re at uni and if you do x number, they send you a participation cheque (we are still a long way off!)
We’re all supporters of H&M, and answered favourably to the questions around their personal images etc. BUT for this particular question in the headlines, we also answered for “self-promotion” because that’s what we generally thought. Of course they are self-promoting. They have sponsorships, charities and other media projects being announced and coming up. They SHOULD be self-promoting. It’s not a bad thing!
Obviously, that question could 100% be read in a negative light, which i’m sure all these retired old racists are doing. But it was objective enough that supporters could answer it factually as well.
What is the general sample size of these polls? Wouldn’t all have to had watched the interview? Or was that not necessary to take the poll?
I mean… I guess I understand (sort of?) hate-watching but doesn’t it get tiring to be angry for 2 hours at something you’re voluntarily watching?
I guess the “bots” took the survey. They say the same things over and over and over again about Harry and Meghan.
Camilla’s nephew is one of the people behind YouGov.
There it is. There had to be a direct tie to the BRF somewhere.
Well, what do you expect? These are the same people who still think they are an empire and are in a strong position globally. *Shrug*
Obligatory, “you don’t need a fucking YouGov poll to know that Britain is a racist society that has yet to have it’s proper reckoning–just ask them to try and be honest about the crimes they committed around the world as a result of colonialism to see them froth at the mouth and lose their absolute shit in the process, LOL” comment here.
So, magats with a nicer accent?
lol yes exactly.
Obviously not all
But the ones that suck are magats with a better accent. In my experience anyway.
But I would say for the most part more casual racists. It’s more a general racism under the surface. It’s there and comes out but isn’t in your face all the time.
Which is why they probably don’t think they are racists. And they don’t realize how cringe a lot of their sayings are. Especially the older generation
Yes! It’s like a cult.
No, bc there is a crucial distinction here–MAGAts know full well that racism does exist. Their denial isn’t for anything except out of a desire to keep in place a system that prioritizes them and their white needs first and foremost. That’s what makes their opinion so insidious, and what allowed them to take their masks off, wholesale, during the 2016 election. They know they’re racist, they don’t care that they’re racist, because racism is good for them personally, so they are fully in favour of that shit.
British MAGAts (aka Boris Johnson Brexit supporters) flat out do not accept that they are racist, or that racism exists in the UK. Period. They think the only racism that still exists is in America. They do not under any circumstances accept that British society, or they themselves, are racist, because according to them, there is no racism in the UK, so there is no way they themselves can be racist.
Maybe it’s a small distinction, but it’s a crucial one.
in the Uk they are called gammons, not magats.
also just as not every single person in the USA is a magat, not everyone is a gammon either. although they tend to be very loud and opinionated.
@Vera, no one is saying every single person in Britain is a gammon. What people are saying is that the prevailing culture in the UK is one where racism is deeply embedded at all levels, the same way it is in the US. One doesn’t have to be a card-carrying gammon/MAGAt to belong to a culture where that’s the case. As far as British society is concerned, their understanding and approach to the racism in their society is incredibly flawed and needs a lot of work.
So please, don’t come in here with the whole #notallbritishpeople/#notallwhitebritishpeople line. Read the room and try to understand what people are saying, and stop letting your fragility/defensiveness get in the way of having a real conversation about what things are like in Britain for minorities. If you’re really not one of the bad ones, that shouldn’t be too hard.
Yes, the gammons. Everyone knows that not all Brits are racists. Unfortuantely, the loudest voices are always the negative ones. We also do rely on those not racist people to be actively anti-racist. People who stay quiet are also complicit in racism. The first time I experienced racism in my life as a WOC was in the UK.
@Myra
The first time I experienced xenophobia as a white woman was in the UK. I think it speaks volumes when hatred and intolerance against people of different races and nationalities is so widespread that impacts non-UK born white people. I think the worst kinds of Britons are those who stay silent and enable racism and xenophobia, even if not openly.
That’s true @AlpineWitch. I learned that Polish people received tons of abuse when I lived in the UK. It was definitely an eye-opening experience for me in terms of racism and xenophobia. We know that it’s not everyone, but it’s definitely a big enough problem that needs to be addressed.
I think these polls are done by making calls to landlines. Who has a landline and the time to chat in the middle of the working day? Boomer retirees, and they are much more likely to be pro-monarchy Tories, and racist, sexist, and misogynistic to boot. So I’m really not surprised at all by this.
As a Brit I am mortified by the British response to the Sussexes. I promise we’re not all like this!
I think this goes without saying. Some of the biggest defenders of Meghan are also Brits – Dr Shola, Professor Kate etc. It’s just that the negative voices are louder. I think we are also judging Brits based on the UK media’s behaviour. It’s up to Brits though to start cancelling these racist shows, papers, journalists etc. It’s appalling that the journalist who was incredibly racist to Ash Sarkar still has employment.
Exactly. I am not British (yet), but I live there and not everyone is a ‘magat with a nicer accent’.
I would like to know what % was the ‘I really do not care either way / have no opinion’
they only showed the % of those who do have an opinion and usually it those cases the negatives ones win.
I’ve done consultations myself and those who should loudest are not representative of the majority opinion.
“I am not British (yet)”
Even if you were it changes nothing. I have suffered xenophobia before and after being naturalised. For ‘gammons’, it’s where you are from that matters, your passport does not change much (I’ve been called a fake Brit and plastic Brit anyway after forking 1,500 pounds to get naturalised, it really doesn’t change anything).
@AlpineWitch
oh I know, I am only doing it because of Brexit. It cost me almost 3 grand so far and although I got the email saying my application was approved, I’ve been waiting over 2 months now for the official letter so I can book the ‘swearing in’ appointment. I am not looking forward to swearing an oath to the Queen.
I’ve been told enough time – ‘why dont you bugger off home’ if I dared to criticize anything
I agree we’re not all like this, but this website has decided we are. No one under the age of 50 does a yougov poll. In my whole life I have never heard of anyone ever doing a yougov poll. So the demographic they used is very narrow. But anyway, here we are, I’m sure I’ll get shouted at for being salty etc etc.
I agree. I didnt judge the whole of the USA because of Trump’s behaviour, so it would be nice to this courtesy to extended to the UK as well, without rude blanket name calling.
None of us here dispute that the UK is systematically racists, like all countries in Europe to varying degrees. I am aware that I have my white privilege, while in other areas I am disadvantaged.
The British media is toxic because it is owned by a handful of rich toxic a-holes pushing their agenda. the printed press circulation is actually dropping so it isnt just about what sells, but what their owners’ agenda is.
that Tucker whatshisname still has a job too, but I only blame the folk watching Fox for that, not the whole of the USA.
You are not being salty. Many of us on the website (especially me) just do not understand why Meghan is harassed by the British Media and Andrew is ignored as this would not happen. Andrew would not be ignored if he was a member of a high profile family in the USA.
We don’t think you all are, just like not all U.S. are trumpers. I’d guess it’s more like 40-50%
Which would be a big chunk of the boomers, the older gen x and a smaller percentage of the younger generations.
It’s just the racist media is so loud and amplifies the crappy people. On both sides of the pond.
LOL we dont think all the British are like this! But I do find it interesting how the press is over there, because the loudest press seems to be the most anti-Meghan, so it does give the impression that the country is anti-Meghan. Like @KKate said, the racist media just seems to amplify the crappy people over there.
We do have a problem with the media in this country too, but I think the tabloid culture is very different.
I think Andrew might well be ignored in the US sadly — after all we ignored Don the con’s close Epstein ties and rape and sexual harassment accusations after a brief kerfuffle in the media and nothing ever came of them — and that was our president!
A lot of people react to January 6 by saying that’s not who America is. Except it’s exactly who we are because it happened. Of course not all Brits are racists, but England is country where all of the societal institutions were built by white people for white people. The “not all [insert group of people]” is a dangerous form of denialism because it suggests the problem only exists at the individual level and ignores the systems of oppression that perpetuate it.
I see that and I can see it in my own family. My brother and sister-in-law are one of those anti BLM people who dont believe in systematic racism, making all those all lives matter posts and pro police ones.
I totally agree that there is systematic racism and casual microaggressions (race, misogyny, very strong transphobia etc)
I myself had the usual experience just today of having my comment ignored until a man repeated it and then got all the credit.
I think it’s just an increasing number of comments and the way words are phrased in this article seem to be angry with Brits or people living in the Uk on an individual level, making us individually responsible for what happened to Meghan and Harry.
I know Twitter and social media shouldn’t necessarily be taken as representative of what’s happening on the ground, but based on what I see it seems like Black Brits and many other Brits of color have been very supportive and are happy to see that British-style racism is being exposed on such a large stage. I know my family in London were. I also see quite a number of non-POC Brits chiming in too. I definitely don’t get the impression that Britain as a whole hates them.
I’m not surprised by this and I agree that their is a section of the British public who enjoy seeing Meghan and Harry get raked over the coals daily by the media . The Racism doesn’t bother some British people if it really bother British people they would have complained lot time ago they are comfortable with the racism throw at Meghan . I know some British people who are on this site swears up and down that no one over in the uk cares about the royals or cares what the new papers printed but obviously their are people who have the same ideology as the daily mail and those royal reporters because the newspaper are being read . There a reason their constantly turn out hate pieces about Meghan over in the U.K. because it sells and people aren’t not as outraged by the racism she endured in Britain .
Those polls are completely manipulated. I read somewhere that they invite participants to specific polls based on demographics and other accrued data, so they can pick and choose who they want to answer which poll and almost ensure a predictable response.
Even if these polls were 100% accurate, my takeaway would be that the UK media has succeeded in brainwashing the masses through their sycophantic pr-masquerading-as-journalism coverage of the royals, so even people who don’t read the daily fail or the other rags have most likely absorbed some of their coverage. You can only pass over so many headlines about how evil and awful and self-serving someone is before you internalize it at some level.
Agree it’s manipulated, but the poll showed a 50/50 divided population. The younger are pro republic and are with Meghan and Harry while the old white conservatives are brainwashed by media and buy into “fake news”. Not different from Trump situation in which his base was racist older people or hillbillies. Also I thought the results of Meghan haters would be higher considering it’s a racist, conservative poll.
First time commentator but long time reader. I find the UK response honestly amusing. There’s a reason this interview was done in the U.S. and conducted/edited/produced by a U.S. team showcasing (branding) their lives in the U.S. This was The Sussexes chance to set the narrative not through “sources” but directly from their mouths as to why they stepped back and what they hope to do next in the U.S. This interview was not for the UK (though despite heavily promoting they weren’t interested in it – certainly had a bidding war over broadcasting it and quite a number of people watched it). As long as the U.S. view them positively (and it looks like many Americans are sympathetic towards them – not all but a good chunk) that’s all that matters. The UK taxpayer does not pay for their security or lifestyle anymore for over a year. Brits love to point out that they should drop the titles – well they aren’t using the HRH but if you want them to drop the Sussexes title then the whole damn peerage system and House of Lords should be questioned as to why they all have theirs to this day and use it to make money/connections/gov’t policy but they’re not ready to have that convo yet.
JMoney, I agree that this was done for the US and globally. H&M are going to continue to back issues that are global issues. I’m cheering them on, because they’re going to do amazing things. As far as the titles go, I think they should ignore the calls for them to be stripped. Now, I’m not saying that I wouldn’t get a front row seat and munch on popcorn during those discussions in Parliament, because I would. I’ve read enough on this site to understand that the House of Lords wouldn’t even let it come up for discussion (there goes my fun) . I personally think they should use the last name of Sussex (and their children), and get on with their humanitarian driven life.
Not sure if it was here or on Twitter, but someone said those YouGov polls are by invitation only. So, it isn’t quite random. They are polling a limited subset of the population. Doesn’t really matter since this interview wasn’t for the British public. It was for a global audience. It reintroduced Harry & Meghan. Not as the DDOS, but this young married couple striking out on their own. Meghan needed to regain her voice & her reputation. The BM has turned her into a caricature. Before Harry, she was beloved. After Harry, people spout all kinds of nasty, harmful rhetoric against her. The real Meghan is only known to her family and friends. And Harry isn’t the stupid, lovesick fool, blindly following his wife and abandoning his beloved family. So, the Sussexes don’t really care if the Brits polled have a negative view of them. Nothing H&M said was going to change those people’s minds, but now everyone has heard them loud & clear.
I think we all know by now that these polls are conducted in very biased and skewed ways. They don’t reflect reality.
I totally see the numbers as follows:
1) There is a group of Brits who do not like Meghan because she is an American and/or Hollywood
2) There is a group of Brits who do not like Meghan because she is a biracial women of color
3) There is a group of Brits who do not like Meghan because she is an American and/or Hollywood, she is a biracial women of color and she rejected the UK.
Actually IMAO, I am surprised that within in the UK the negative polling numbers are not higher. However, with the Sussexes new life, it is the global numbers that are important.
BayTampaBay
It is sort of funny and silly these polls matter so little. The U.K. can have their royals. The world sees them.
It really is funny because the UK public have the Royals the British Media claim are prefect for the job: William, Kate, Edward & Sophie. However, The UK public does not seem very interested in William, Kate, Edward & Sophie.
There is also a small group who don’t like her because she married Prince Harry. Because he was totally going to marry them if he didn’t marry her!
HAHAHAHHHHAAHHHHHAA. That made my day.
These polls don’t matter and they don’t effect H&Ms bottom line. What the uk thinks of them is irrelevant at this point. They do not need them for success. The only market the Sussexes need is the American one and anybody else is a bonus. With Netflix and Spotify deals, I think Harry and Meghan will be fine. The only people who need be concerned about the British perception of them are the royals. The monarchy should be concerned that the future generation is supportive of a republic. The monarchy may not be abolished but it will look very different by the time William is on the throne.
However, half of those polled were fine with the interview, so I think H&M came out fine considering who is being polled.
I know the reasons behind this ‘poll’ are spiteful but, so what if they did?! Are they not entitled to promote themselves in anyway they see fit? There are bills to be paid and they’re surely free to lead their lives as they please.
Just means that 48% of the people polled have been so successfully radicalized by the far-right media that they get their opinions from deliberately provocative headlines and nothing else. Imagine being that hateful and yet so damn proud of the fact. Mind-blowing.
Right. 48% of the already skewed poll participants. These numbers mean nothing. Nothing. They are only indicative of a percentage of a carefully selected sector of the British population.
Whether the data is an accurate reflection of the wider population or not (doubtful), there is no question that big media pushes/smear campaigns do have an effect. I use my boyfriend as a bit of a mine canary as he’s not particularly interested in anything so just picks up views by osmosis. He had no idea Johnny Depp is such a scumbag (was more ‘I don’t trust her’ in a vague way) and he’s similar re. the royals, no idea how awful they are and why H&M left.
I talked to my friend from England over the weekend (yay zoom!). We just touched on it, but her reaction was an eyeroll and a “strange for people who want privacy” and Meghan is “all about self promotion”. I asked her if she had watched it, she laughed and said ‘no’. Curious about how many of the people who responded actually watched it…
When the media is driving in the same narrative people stop wanting to see the other side. They take it as gospel because all the news in their small world is reporting the same thing.
agree. I hear the same things from friends here (U.S.) who only go by tabloid-y stories.
48% disapproval is actually not that impressive considering how hard Meghan and Harry have been dragged in the headlines.
And, again, as many here have pointed out, they are *not* coming back, and their popularity (or lack of it) in a tiny former empire has no bearing on their success in the rest of the world.
I always question the accuracy of these polls since it’s such a narrow sample of people. I also think part of the backlash could be similar to some American pushback in the sense that “look here is billionaire Oprah interviewing two millionaires in a gorgeous perfect setting complaining about how oppressed they are while millions struggle with lack of healthcare, job loss and need to feed their families. Cry me a river.” I’ve seen that meme going around the US for weeks. I think both US and UK citizens are just over the coverage and want to see the spotlight be turned away from the royals and onto more pressing issues.
1. If Meg was just promoting herself, an interview discussing her pain would probably not have been first choice.
2. There’s nothing wrong if she was promoting herself, as everyone does that.
3. This poll is just indicative of the racist mentality that women of color don’t deserve to shine and must be kept from showing their full light… couched in a “that’s shameless promotion” respectability rule. Which of course does not apply to white women.
This is free promotion for Archewell foundation for that tiny island. The racist might blow up their blood level and die quickly, the one whose matters will continuing to support them.
They kept giving showing their wrinkly ass to the world by spending money to this stupid polls and i believe by using tax payer money.
*We’re the Salty White Isle*? Coming from a country that loved the politics and hatred of Trump so much that he very nearly had 8 years in office, that’s a bit rich.
Yes, the normal people in the u.s. are getting painted to the world as trump supporters and magat Q’s because our loud racist media amplifies that. It’s obviously not everyone or we wouldn’t have Biden as president and a blue senate and congress right now.
The racism in the US is horrifying and very out in the open right now because the orange turd made it ok.
But the racism was still there, just more hidden in polite society
It doesn’t matter that not all of us are, enough of us are.
The UK’s loud racist media is amplifying the blatant racism and also the UK’s systemic racism.
England is a racist island, it’s a country built on colonization and raping and pillaging and controlling other countries and people’s.
Predominantly people of color.
That’s how the world sees you.
Every country has a dark history and underbelly that the rest of the world knows them for. Those are just facts.
Obviously a chunk of the population of the US and the UK aren’t the blatant racists that our countries are being portrayed as.
But enough are.
And if you’re white in either the US or UK, I hate to tell you but you have white privilege and internal bias and are the product of systemic racism.
The difference between the good people and the crap are the good people realize this, look inside themselves and see this.
The good people do the work of understanding bias, micro and macro agressions and privilege and how we can use that privilege for good as an ally.
And to teach our children.
Well the US is not an island but maybe we are the Salty White Folks Continent. However Trump lost the popular vote by a wide margin so he does not and never did have majority support. The reason Biden won was because of the Herculean efforts of people like Stacey Abrams and many many others to turn out the vote in areas where voting is highly suppressed (obviously BIPOC majority areas as well as some others). The main reason Republicans win is because of gerrymandering and voter suppression (yes we have many racists and abhorrent bigots here for sure as well). Not saying the US is a shining light but we did NOT elect Trump with the popular vote, ever.
For me, the part of reason why the UK seems nebulously racist is that the UK is a small country, so it’s difficult to say the equivalent of “there’s a lot of Trump supporters in the Midwest,” or “Trump got the most votes from white males with no college degree.” There’s specific geographic and demographic information, and those who are on this site generally do not fit the bloc of Trump supporters.
Now, the same applies to the UK CBers who come to this site, but with respect to the greater population of the UK, I can’t differentiate who is racist or not based on demographics. It seems like there’s lots of examples of racism from people who went to university; there’s racism in the older generation; the rest is a mixed bag. Is a middle class university educated white male from Liverpool more likely to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal? Is a black female living in London more likely to have gone to university than a black female in Manchester?
And the UK press does make an impression if only because all outlets seem to act as if they are one voice. In the US, we have media that is divided along partisan lines— everyone knows Fox is despicable and that MSNBC is liberal, but in the UK there only seems to be a solid wall of conservative press blasting ugly headlines— not only at Meghan but also, more recently I believe, at Nicola Sturgeon. So it’s difficult for me to wrap my head around some of these cultural differences. I know consciously that not everyone in the UK is racist and hates Meghan, but I don’t have a solid grasp on the demographics so I end up getting an incorrect impression of an unknown sea of individuals who are apathetic to or unaware of racism, individuals who are definitely racist, and … CB readers.
I don’t know if anyone else feels this way, but in the US we are basically trained to think liberal and conservative as correlating to key demographic markers and I don’t know what those demographic markers are in the UK. Tell me where you live, your religion, ethnicity, and income level and I will probably be able to tell which party you will likely vote for. Is it the same in the UK?
The good thing about leaving the UK, is that Meghan and Harry don’t have to pay attention to these UK polls anymore.
Xenophobia abounds on here. Plus it deflects from the Trumpism in the US. Blame those salty, queue loving colonial Brits.
Yes I’m British, yes I know the press, Royal fam and every other intutution in the UK is systemically racist. I also fully support Megan.
Thing is I can make that point without being xenophobic! Wish commenters on here could do the same.
Saying it’s a good thing that they’re not in the UK anymore is xenophobic? This is news to me. After all they’ve been through, really?
While the Commonwealth may fall apart after QEII dies, I think the monarchy will persist in GB. I think a lot of Brits need it as a constant reminder/reassurance of their former greatness and glory.
This is what I’ve noticed, although my circle is admittedly and sadly limited to a bunch of posh people in London due to my friends’ unfortunate marriages. They all love to make fun of Americans and talk trash the US, but every single one of them fantasize about moving to the States. I think Harry and Meghan are living that dream, and I think a lot of people are just kind of jealous. I think these Royal Reporters would love a shot at working with Oprah or being on American television. Even Pippa Middleton gave it a shot lol
All these people who think that cutting off Prince Harry financially was the right thing to do because he walked away from royal duties … I wonder if the same amount of people believe financially cutting off Price Andrew and Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie would also be the right thing to do since they have no royal duties.
Just kidding. I know they only care about the black woman getting white people money.
I think it is possible to believe that Andrew shouldn’t be receiving a single penny (and should go to jail) but also that Harry and Meghan if they are not working royals shouldn’t receive money.
It is also possible to believe that H&M should not receive public money (if not working royals) AND to believe that their treatment by the family and the press was completely awful AND that they had every right to leave
The question was private money from Charles though, they had already renounced the public money. And it was clearly short term, the Sussexes said in their manifesto they wanted to be financially independent. Plus Oprah was the one who brought up Tyler Perry and his help, Harry just explained why they needed his assistance. I think its sad that a relative stranger feels you are more worthy of help than your family but so be it. The queen thinks Andrew deserves to have his security covered for I guess riding horses and going to church with her in lieu of being a “working royal”. Charles just wanted to punish Harry.
what ticks me off about those praising cutting Harry off is that they are also pissed off that he & his wife have found a way to support themselves financially. Even if she had gone back to acting to support herself, those same people would be angry at her taking advantage of the royal association even though she was a working actress when they started dating (same people probably wouldn’t think to criticize Cressida Bonas as having her prior association help get her foot in the door when she’s cast)
Aren’t all public statements and interviews for self and/or entity promotion if we’re being honest? If the press across the pond is keen for more accuracy concerning their own industry, because let’s face it, anyone being interviewed is doing so for publication, the barometer stems from quality and quantity. H and M are extremely selective concerning how, why and when. The royal media, as evidenced daily, is not concerned with quality (odd) or quantity. So in essence, they’re behaving like the American fast food industry. They even keep old works under a sun lamp for quick retrieval.
They need to just say that black women in pain should shut up and take it. That’s the lesson I have been learning from 2008 onwards. Such a freaking mess.
A new poll came out today saying that over 50% percent of Canadians find that monarchy is obsolete and it went up after the interview aired. The poll was done by Léger which is a legitimate polling company in Canada used for elections, so if I was the Queen I would be concerned that a pretty white and traditionally supportive country like Canada wants to get rid of them. And the age breakdown shows a consistent majority.
Add to that another 15% who don’t know or have no opinion…. that’s movement in the direction for removal.
Does Canada and other commonwealth countries give money to the queen ?
We pay for them when they come to visit. If we do pay for them otherwise, it is not made public.
“Caribbean newspapers saying why should we have a white head of state anymore.”
GOOD QUESTION!
The problem with the poll cited by Republic is that it presents only 2 scenarios: monarch or president. With the horrible experience with the previous US president so fresh in everyone’s minds, it’s no wonder the president option was so low. The question should have been: Monarchy, yes or no?
I’m white british, and it’s really bad here the racism. People I love are really showing their racism with Meghan and Harry. It’s awful. Also remember we are brought up to look up to the royal fam, loads are breaking with this. I don’t really talk about the royal family to my kids as I don’t want them to think they are important. I have discussed the racism and why Prince Harry and Meghan left. The royals are going to go relatively soon though, no one I know cares at all about them in any real way any more. Also the U.K. media are vipers, any poll would have been designed to give the results they want.
I wish that Harry hadn’t brought up money. I know he was talking about it in the concept of security but saying he ‘only had what his mum left him’ came across really whiny when everyone knows that he’s talking about More than 15 million pounds.
I wish they had stuck to the central issues of racism and bullying and smears. That is really important and instead the haters are still talking about money and the neutrals who don’t want to pay for any of the BRF are pouncing on it too
I have registered for the YouGov app and I never take their daily polls because they are bollocks – clearly should have, in this case. As stated above, 48% is horrific but not surprising. There was some really, really, really grim responses to the interview on the family group chat involving my husband’s side of the family and I wasn’t quite sure what to do with it (any advice on how to deal with racist uncles but maintaining peace?? My husband asked me to just ignore it but that doesn’t quite sit right). I am talking memes of the queen and Daniel Craig as Bond, her asking him to go and kill Meghan, and the comment “where is Henry VIII when you need him?”. So yes, 48% = NOT surprising. Probably the same 48% Tory, farmer, idiot percent who voted for Brexit (that is, my husband’s extended family).
Oops sorry I realise that Brexit got the 52%, not 48%, majority – but that is still a pretty big circle on the Venn diagram.
It was self-promotion. They need to make money somehow because obvioulsy 15 million punds isn’t enough for them.
@Juju, why are you so bitter that Harry has 15 million in private wealth from his mother? That’s nothing compared to the wealth of the Royal family. The British people are paying for Royals who basically do nothing and are actively trying to hide their billions in private wealth. The queen was given hundreds of millions of pounds of tax payer funds to repair the various dilapidated palaces and it’s been re-routed to Andrew and various family members. So now she’s asking for even more funds to fix palaces that should have been fixed when the funds were initially released. Where is the outrage for that? The Sussexes are financially independent and it kills some people that they didn’t fail and are thriving. What high profile or corporate job doesn’t include promotion?
If Royalists want to continue to worship, bow, scrape to, and act as the subservient peasant/serf to the racist, inbred, grifting, welfare royals, go for it. Who cares if they do nothing but line their pockets with your hard-earned cash, right? Let’s beat up on Harry and Meghan instead for no longer being on the take. You guys do you, I guess. The rest of the world prefer living in the 21st century.
Personally I’d be quite happy to pay for none of them ever again. France manages quite well to have a roaring tourist trade in non covid times.
£15M isn’t going to last that long, given they have to pay for round the clock security for themselves and Meghan’s mother no doubt. They are facing continued threats. It sounds a lot, but in their world it unfortunately isn’t. And as Keri says, 15M is nothing compared to other members of the RF.
I definitely don’t know this for a fact but it wouldn’t surprise me if Biden has quietly taken over the cost of their security. I certainly hope so anyway.
.
But you are ok with the royals who self promote at the expense of taxpayers? That’s pretty dumb.
A real brand would be worried about the poll numbers. If a most likely biased poll could get 34% saying ditch the monarchy and most of the supporters of the monarchy are 65 plus, that doesn’t give good prospects for long-term survival of the monarchy. A real company would look at methods of change to survive long term.
Saying they did the interview for self-promotion might depend on your definition of self-promotion and not hinge on like or dislike so did that part of the poll accomplish anything? The majority of what celebs, including royalty do, is for self-promotion. I would like to see a poll asking the same people if they would do the same if there were thousands of inflammatory articles printed about them in the media.
King Charles and Queen Camilla ..ugh, I can’t.
I have to say i am EXTREMELY suspicious of all these YouGov polls that always SUPPOSEDLY manage to poll the WHOLE damn country in like a 2 hour period. I think the “results” are totally misleading and just another way for the press to abuse Harry & Meghan. Another thing people need to remember is that not everyone TAKES these polls. Furthermore, WHERE do these polls pop up on the internet, asking the user to take them? My impression is that it is usually in banner ads and that those banner ads are featured on sites like the DailyMail, the Sun, the Mirror, etc etc So really theyre only telling you what percentage of THEIR READERSHIP thinks about things. I do NOT think YouGov respresents the general UK population.
Woooow. The monarchy is going to be go-ne in a generation.
I’m indifferent as I’m not British.