For days now, I’ve actively been ignoring this dumb commentary around one particular part of Prince Harry’s Armchair Expert interview. The British media was immediately focused on “how dare Harry speak about his dysfunctional family,” but the right-wing American media focused on something else entirely. That thing? Harry admitting that he doesn’t understand the First Amendment. The context for the particular conversation in the podcast was the swarm of paparazzi in LA, when Meghan and Harry were staying at Tyler Perry’s mansion last year.
A contingent of conservative-leaning politicians and talking heads are up in arms after Prince Harry offhandedly dubbed their beloved First Amendment “bonkers.” During his interview on Dax Shepard’s Armchair Expert podcast, the pair discussed the actor’s campaign to stop the paparazzi from photographing celebrities’ children and the media “feeding frenzy” surrounding Harry and his wife Meghan Markle’s arrival in Beverly Hills last year.
“I’ve got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it, but it is bonkers,” the former senior royal confessed. “I don’t want to start going down the First Amendment route because that’s a huge subject and one which I don’t understand because I’ve only been here a short time. But, you can find a loophole in anything. You can capitalize or exploit what’s not said rather than uphold what is said. I believe we live in an age now where you’ve got certain elements of the media redefining to us what privacy means. There’s a massive conflict of interest.”
While the royal’s comments seem benign enough given that he’s self-admittedly no expert on the subject, that didn’t abate the deluge of criticism he received for questioning America’s Bill of Rights. Brexit leader Nigel Farage tweeted, “For Prince Harry to condemn the USA’s First Amendment shows he has lost the plot. Soon he will not be wanted on either side of the pond.” Texas Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw wrote, “Well I just doubled the size of my Independence Day party.” Meghan McCain also gave her two cents, tweeting, “We fought a war in 1776 so we don’t have to care what you say or think. That being said, you have chosen to seek refuge from your homeland here and thrive because all of what our country has to offer and one of the biggest things is the 1st amendment—show some utter respect.”
Piers Morgan, Megyn Kelly, Sean Hannity and all of the other dumbf–ks chimed in, because of course they did. A good rule of thumb is that if you’ve pissed off Piers, Megyn Kelly, Meghan McCain, Nigel Farage and Hannity, you’re doing something right. Because those people suck and they’re wrong about everything.
Now, all that being said, for the particular context of this interview, what Harry and Dax were talking about isn’t even purely a First Amendment issue. When paparazzi were cutting into Tyler Perry’s fence and entering private property, that wasn’t a First Amendment issue. That’s a criminal issue of trespassing, breaking and entering and destruction of property. Plus, I think Harry was making a larger reference to the conversation about how just because something is not explicitly criminalized, doesn’t mean that it’s a good idea. It’s also part of the larger conversation about misinformation and purposeful disinformation online, which are part of the right-wing fascist propaganda campaigns which hide behind the First Amendment.
Here’s the clip.
Hello! Here’s what Prince Harry actually said about the first amendment He didn’t even discuss it!
Listen 👇🏾pic.twitter.com/ysAjJ0Uchz— Franz 👀💯‼️ (@FranzPrusse) May 17, 2021
Photos courtesy of Armchair Expert IG, AppleTV screencaps.
Not surprising these people took it out of context. Everything is literal with them. Black and white. Unable to take a step back and consider things conceptually or from another viewpoint.
“Fake news” and twisting facts is going to be our downfall.
Most people don’t realize that the Murdochs own both FOX News and the Daily Mail. This attack on Harry shouldn’t be a surprise. The other concern for the Royal Family maybe what their future brand looks like the US. If MAGA media starts defending them and adapts them as their own the Royal Family brand in the USA will be associated with White Supremacy, KKK and all of the trash that goes with that. At this point there are a least 2 Harry/Meghan articles on FOX News online daily. The RF may not realize that they are being forced to choose the worst that America has to offer as it’s biggest supporters. Meanwhile Harry/Meghan are making the right connections with the right people in the US.
The Royal Family is already associated with White Supremacy. I mean, Brit colonialization of non-European lands was the literal realization of white (European at that time) supremacy. I know this is not all what you are saying, but it would highlight the truth about the BRF just more and more.
Murdoch doesn’t own the Daily Mail. Viscount Rothermere does
Sofia: you are correct. Its the Times that he owns. My point is that Murdoch’s have a US connection to the British Media. What most Brits may not understand is that the FOX News (if you can call it news) isn’t an organization known for truth and facts. So when the British media is quoting Tucker Carlson (who FOX stated in court was NOT a creditable person, (yes they said that)), Sean Hannity and Laura Ingram they are quoting the worst worst of the worst at FOX. It’s a relationship that the RF doesn’t want to develop in America unless they don’t mind the association which would speak volumes.
Piers Morgan replacement On Good Morning Britain is journalist Ben Shephard. I have no idea who Ben Shepard is or what type of journalist is but I do know that he is 1000 times better looking than Piss Morgan?
Have any CB Brits heard of Ben Shephard? He looks like a sports journalist to me.
I doubt there are many Brits who haven’t heard of him. He’s been on TV for years but I wouldn’t have called him a journalist. He’s just a TV presenter and mostly seemed like more of a stand in when the main presenters were away. I remember him being on the Xtra Factor and GMTV.
He seems like a nice but boring guy and I can’t imagine him even having an opinion on Harry & Meghan so I doubt there will be much drama there.
Practically anyone would be 1000 times better than Morgan. He is extremely unpopular with the vast majority of the UK population
JodieP, true, but the Daily Mail keeps trying to pretend he’s huge and valid. He’s hugely useless; see his latest “commentary,” where he just calls Harry a long list of names? Entitled twerp, spoiled brat, on and on…free speech my arse. It’s open season to abuse and insult and bully whoever he wants. He’s the biggest piece of sh!t to ever hit the public forum. The epitome of white trash.
Agree, BASI. I like what he said, “ But, you can find a loophole in anything. You can capitalize or exploit what’s not said rather than uphold what is said. I believe we live in an age now where you’ve got certain elements of the media redefining to us what privacy means. There’s a massive conflict of interest.”
I saw a quote a few days ago and it sums up this story well: Thinking is difficult, that’s why most people judge by C. Jung. Not sure if he said it but it is so true. Instead of these ignoramouses trying to understand Harry and his interpretation of the world (because he has a very different lens) they judge him and criticize him. I agree, if he is pissing off that list of individuals, he is doing something right.
He’s doing everything right. The Brits can moan and bitch all they like on DM comment boxes, and fool themselves that they’re the majority and that H&M are “hated,” but the truth is, while UK is demanding their exclusion and stripping of titles, they’ve already wound up every single connection they’ve ever had to the UK…there is NOTHING they’re involved in except for Invictus Games, and that’s Harry’s own doing. They’ve shut down all connections with trusts and charities, and are focusing solely on the US. The Brits scream like baying wolves for “titles to be stripped!”, but seriously WHO CARES about “Duke & Duchess.” I wrote on one DM comment section that titles are meangingless, there is one title they have that no one can remove, and that is “Harry & Meghan,” and that title is GOLD. Needless to say, it was the most hated comment lol
And they can’t remove “Prince” from Harry: it’s his birthright. No way is the Queen, Charles, nor Willy-Won’tee strip him of that…waaaaay too controversial. And as his wife (not born to an heir of the throne), Meghan also has the right to “Princess,” but only as “Princess Henry,” Harry’s formal birthname. Diana was the same: she wasn’t born to an heir to the throne, and technically was never “Princess Diana.” Her, Meghan, and Keen are all Princess Charles, Princess Henry, and Princess William. Diana was given the special privilege of being formally and forever known as “Diana, Princess of Wales” after her divorce, but that was due to her overwhelming popularity as “the peoples’ princess.” They called her Princess Diana, so the Queen let them, and even formalised it. She, too, had to surrender her “Her Royal Highness” title, so that’s no biggie…she also had “Duchess of Cornwall,” which Camilla is now. People make such a big deal of H&M losing that title, but it’s the norm, and they hardly care. So is the Duke/Duchess thing: it’s something the Queen awards them as a gift on marriage…she did the same to Charles and William.
“ It’s also part of the larger conversation about misinformation and purposeful disinformation online, which are part of the right-wing fascist propaganda campaigns which hide behind the First Amendment.”
Bingo!! That’s the crux of what Harry is talking about. Right wingers think they should be free to say anything, true or false, misleading, abusive, etc. and have ZERO consequences. And that ALL platforms should allow them to do so completely unfettered. And they shouldn’t be fired or lose opportunities because of it. And their justification is their interpretation of the first amendment.
I’m an American and I also find that mindset BONKERS.
Of course Harry is interested in this topic because combating online misinformation is one of his core issues.
Agreed, again–you’re batting 1000 today.
Thanks 😊
Also since these people hold the first amendment in such high regards, isn’t it within harry’s first amendment rights to say that he doesn’t fully understand it and that in certain situations its bonkers?
That’s the irony of all these statements. The mindset is that you have the right to speak as long as it’s to agree with my view.
Why? Has somebody censored you?
These same people criticizing him are the same that don’t believe an insurrection occurred on January 6th. I am glad he pissed them off. Good for Harry.
I particularly enjoyed Donald Trump Jr’s attempt:
“I can think of at least 1776 reasons why he’s wrong but at least he has to freedom here to make stupid takes.”
Junior clearly never took a history, government, civics, or language class while at UPenn. Their admissions office must deny him as an alum.
…I realize I’m not saying anything new or insightful, but Jesus, what an absolute f–king dickhead. And you know damn well he can’t think of 1776 reasons. Well, he probably can, but none of them will make sense because, you know, the coke.
UPenn is pretty well known for horrific hazing, pornography, bribery, misogyny, and more. I’m sure Junior fit right in.
The far-right whole existence is based on the first amendment. A host of a talk show was speaking about this point with CT and he said: “Harry said that he didn’t understand the first amendment very well so he wouldn’t talk about it” but the British press went on to write that he was attacking the first amendment and how was that fair. Camilla answered something along the lines that if he didn’t understand it he shouldn’t be speaking about it. Like yeah, that’s the whole point Harry made. These people are insane and completely and purposely misquoting and misrepresenting Harry’s words.
The far-right’s existence is based on completely misrepresenting or misunderstanding the First Amendment, you mean.
Miranda, that’s what I find so ironic about this “outrage”. The far right wing (MAGAs) including sitting Republicans, don’t understand the 1st Amendment. At least, they are very verbal about having their 1st Amendment rights suppressed while shouting it loud and clear. No wonder so many people get confused about what it represents. That’s simply a political strategy–and the MAGAs believe it and amplify it.
I’ve said on here before and I’ll say it again, let them spend their time on Faux News, One America, NewsMax, etc., that’s where white supremacy rules. They can have themselves a party. The up side to this is that people who know exactly what Faux News is will not be giving any weight to the idiots who are shouting this crap. It’s no surprise that the BM and brf by association is spewing their narrative here. Credible media in this Country are well aware of the disinformation coming from Faux, etc. They are also aware that the Times was sued by H and won. I’m starting to wonder if Rupert Murdoch is trying to do in the monarchy.
Harry’s mistake was to call it “bonkers”. Americans are rightfully sensitive to a member of the monarchy we fought against saying our First Amendment is “bonkers”.
Yeah but it is to the rest of the world. Seriously. Most of the planet rolls its eyes when Americans talk about free speech and the 1st Amendment. No offense, but really…it’s become so twisted in meaning that it’s a chore to hear about…”bonkers” is a very British term; at home he likely would have said “that’s f***ing bonkers”!!!
They’re not mad, they’re delighted about the clicks and ratings. They are feigning outrage
Only the dumbest of dumb are outraged by this, so Harry’s ok.
Why are these pussies so sensitive?
Bloody snowflakes 😉
I know right.lolol
This is typical of white conservatives in the country; take a portion of the whole and use this portion as a cudgel to beat someone with it. When Emily Blount said something about some Americans, these same conservatives went after her as well. They will also use this to discredit him and her regarding all the good things they are trying to do, which is why the American conservatives are joining with the Brexit gang and the British media to go after him even more.
Does not matter. The right-wing nuts are not the Sussex audience.
Harry even said something like “I don’t know much about it because I’m new here so I should shut up”. So then what’s the issue? How many of these American right wingers speak about Brexit and the monarchy despite them not having a monarchy or going through Brexit?
RIGHT??? I hate the idea that someone who is not American can’t comment on something happening in America, or that I (as an american) cant comment on something happening in another country. Of course you take into account nuance and cultural differences and different histories and all that – or at least you should – but we all have a vested interest in what happens in other countries.
I agree. As a Brit, I was interested in the US election because whoever is elected definitely has effects effects across the globe. Same applies to major events going on (there were George Floyd protests happening all over the world despite him dying in America). I also wanted to see Trump go.
When the President of the United States is nicknamed (or wants to be nicknamed) “The leader of the free world”, I think people across the world should be aware of what’s happening in his/her country and what they’re doing.
I agree with everything you are saying but I have one caveat, as a person that grew up in latin america… Americans sharing their opinion on our countries internal politics is… problematic just based on relatively fresh history.
@nana that’s a good point, its why I said there should be some nuance and taking into account history etc. There are some things that I just don’t really comment on because I know there is way more history there than I know and I can’t comment just based on a headline.
I’m getting a kick out of imagining Harry having a spirited debate with his American wife and friends about it. I’d love to be a fly on the wall of that conversation.
@Sofia With all the agreements Trump wanted to withdraw the US from, I’m sure many around the world were watching the US election.
And they regularly misquote the U.S. Constitution even though they did attend American schools.
I would argue that most Americans dont understand the 1st Amendment that well, at least Harry admitted it.
Agreed. I don’t really understand it as well. My husband said Harry was dissing America. I asked him if he heard the podcast and he said no. I told him to shut up then. People need to think for themselves and not listen to tabloids. I explained what he said and he now understands.
That was my first thought!! We have a great number of idiots in this country that couldn’t tell you that there is a Constitution and Bill of Rights, for that matter. Or the importance of the 13th right amended with the Constitution state or its purpose.
Haha was coming here to say the same thing. A lot of people don’t understand the first amendment especially with respect to social media platforms, which I think is really what Harry has been trying to delve into. I personally think the loophole he was obliquely referring to was Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which states:
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.
ie FB, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, etc are not responsible for anything published on their social media platforms and cannot be held liable for anything published by users. There is now a very large body of US case law which upholds social media’s liabilty shield. Ever since the platforms have taken steps to add warnings, fact check articles, and remove content that encourages violence, etc, there’s been a deluge of lawsuits against the companies by all kinds of people for VIOLATING MA FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS!
Any initiatives these platforms take to restrict hate speech and prevent the spread of misinformation are thusfar on a voluntary basis only, which makes it difficult to achieve what Harry is ultimately working towards— an kinder and fact based social media culture. And there are a lot of thorny complications to any attempts the government might make to regulate speech on these platforms. It’s why Harry focuses so much on supply and demand and encourages people not to share/click on malicious, false content. If hate speech and misinformation are no longer profitable, it disincentives the platforms to continue to promote those materials by means of their algorithms.
I there have been seven bills introduced so far this year about this. Both Democrats and Republicans want changes made to the liability shield – the question is how many.
The specific discussion, as I remember, was about paparazzi taking pictures of kids, but I think you’re right that Harry is probably learning about 1A in the specific context of social media, and of course that does tie back into pictures of the kids – so pictures of Archie are all over social media and there’s nothing Harry can really do about that.
I bet he sees the social media frenzy for pictures of celeb kids and thinks how much worse his life would have been with iphones and social media when he was a kid.
And I think he has a bigger issue with the Freedom of the PRESS than he does Freedom of SPEECH. Freedom of the press (and various loopholes) allows for the cut fences, backyard drones, and bush stalkers. All because he’s a public person outside his house. Random people not going to jail for what they say hasn’t ever really been his issue.
Excellent point!
I know right? “It’s my first amendment right to spew this hate speech!” Yes, yes it is. And per the first amendment, we won’t lobby congress to limit your right. Human Resources is not congress, though, and you have violated company policy.
You can fully tell that none of these people actually listened to the podcast.
I’m sick of people misusing the First Amendment as an excuse to be an asshole, then freaking out when other people use the First Amendment as an excuse to call them on their assholery.
this is too stupid a “controversy”. Only right wing fascists hold the constitution as some inviolable sacrosanct thing and how dare anyone engage in an honestly interesting debate about the amendments and their practical effect on society. But that’s what comes from being raised in a religious fundamentalist environment.
But the constitution is not so black and white and easily interpretable; that’s why we have a Supreme Court- to figure out if and how our laws conform to its standards or don’t, and define what those standards actually are. At least in theory.
It’s also why we have occupations like constitutional lawyer.
Agree with everything said above. Just wanted to point out that in the screenshot/freeze-frame of Meghan and Harry, Harry looks SO MUCH like Charles. Probably the most like Charles that I’ve ever seen. (Not a bad thing necessarily, but I’ve never really seen his father’s looks in him).
Harry really does look more like Charles than TOB does. During Philips last illness and funeral, I actually noticed that Charles looks a good bit like him (Philip). I hadn’t noticed before. It’s like Charles got the worst phyiscal traits of his parents and his face never really worked out one way or the other. Harry has just enough Spencer in him to even things out.
None of the people frothing at the mouth have actually listened to what H had to say about the first amendment. The right wing in this county is sooooo tiresome. They get an awful lot of mileage out of being outraged about things that haven’t actually happened. I am one exhausted American – the constant barrage of misinformation and whining is disheartening. Murdoch is really trying to destroy their credibility here too.
Apropos of nothing: I found out yesterday that my youngest son was at the infamous Las Vegas pool party with Harry!! He wasn’t at the strip snooker game, but he was with his group at the pool. How did he not tell me this until yesterday! When I asked for details I got only this: “he seemed nice.”
I love this. My grown son would have forgotten to tell me that until years later too, and then have nothing much to say about it.
I got a huge kick out of Harry’s response when that controversy blew up. IIRC, he said something like, “I guess I was too much army and not enough prince.”
I guess what he should have said was “I don’t want to start going down the 1st Amendment route because that’s a huge subject to tackle right now.” That way he would have not been ambushed.
I actually think it doesn’t matter what Harry says or how he says it- they’re just looking for something to attack and if they have to completely misrepresent what he said, as they did in this case, they will find something to scream about.
William and the British media are hating on the Sussexes because they humiliated them in court before the whole world. They lost one of the biggest court battles in UK history. Their big lie was exposed and is now the laughing stock of the world. Now they’re out to take their revenge on the Sussexes. But they are confused why, no matter how much they destroy the Sussexes, they cannot conquer and subjugate them to submit to their will. What’s consuming them more is that the Sussexes are gaining strength and popularity and seem to be invincible at this time. Eat your heart out. Harry and Meghan are living the dream.
Biggest court battle in legal history ? You are joking
Meghan has already been awarded millions in costs alone and that doesn’t include damages. And since they are looking to get the profits made from the papers that printed the letter, they are looking at millions in judgement, which if awarded will be one of the highest UK awards for that area of law.
This blasting of Harry about the First Amendment comment is a nice try but will never take off here. The FOX faux outrage business is so busy nowadays that a flimsy faux outrage attack such as this one will have no legs compared to covid and Biden outrage. There is always something more outrage-inducing coming down the pike. The outragers who go to the audiotape to find the offending clip to pass it on are probably so disappointed when they actually listen to it.
If Piers Morgan can coherently explain the First Amendment to me I’ll give him one hundred dollars.
Piers Morgan’s replacement On Good Morning Britain is a very good looking Journalist Ben Shephard. Have you heard of him?
@Jo73c-That’s really funny. I’d pay(maybe) to hear him explain it coherently too though his voice would make my ears bleed.
I see a co-ordinated attempt in the UK and US by the rightwing establishment (of white supremists) in the media (Murdoch etc) to block the Sussexes’ progressive efforts for a kinder, more compassionate world.
As Harry’s leadership gains popularity globally for his humanitarian agenda he faces more pushback and misinformation in the rightwing UK and US (social)media. I’ve listened to his great podcast which was absolutely respectful and entertaining. So this news is totally fake.
In my opinion this noise is part of the broader struggle currently in the Western world for a democratic society-model versus an authoritarian (fascist, populist) society-model. We see that the extremists in the Republican party are regaining political power within their party and mobilizing their fascist fanbase by feeding them with misinformation. In Britain Boris Johnson continues to dismantle civil rights and turn Britain into an authoritarian police state.
Although I think we are moving towards the democratic model with the Biden/Harris administration post-pandemic, the roots of white supremacy are still active and dangerous.
It requires the vigilance and sustained efforts of all people of good will of all races to fight for a just democratic society.
The struggle goes on!✊
With all due respect, calling a news item “totally fake” based on your subjective experience of a podcast contributes to the problem of misinformation. And I’m not sure what you’re referring to when you say the election of Biden is contributing to the democratic model. Do you mean the social democratic model, as in Nordic-style social democracy?
Well Cookie, I don’t confuse editorial fiction with “news”. It’s fake news when facts are manipulated to serve as malicious clickbait! Let’s agree to disagree on that.
I don’t think America as a capitalist nation is ready for social democracy. It will remain a liberal democracy. But it’s good to see that Biden/Harris boldly defend its principles and values, backed by a people-friendly policy.
As a wise man said: all governments are bad, but democracy is still the best. I agree!
@ 2cents J think it was Churchill and he said “least worst” – subtle difference!
Jodiep, my quote is from the German writer Erhard Blanck. It’s not the Winston Churchill quote.
Maybe I’m missing some key context, but I don’t get what he’s actually trying to say. If he doesn’t understand the First Amendment, which he clearly doesn’t (and that’s ok, he’s an Englishman who hasn’t specialized in American political theory) then why would he refer to it as bonkers? And if he’s trying to say something else about the paparazzi trespassing, then why even refer to the First Amendment at all?
So the overall context here was about a few issues – paparazzi (specifically pap shots of the children) and then the lies the press can print, and it was all kind of tied into misinformation in general. So Dax was trying, IMO, to make the point that just because something was legal, didnt mean it was right (he kept using the analogy of going to the bathroom on the dining room table which was….not pleasant, ha.) And that’s when Harry said the bit about the first amendment, I don’t think he meant the 1A was bonkers, just that all the jurisprudence etc is. the actual language of 1A is pretty straightforward, but we have 200 years of case law interpreting what it actually means and in what context etc, so its kind of a bonkers thing to come in and try to wrap your head around. and it tied back into the point about something being legal but not ethical – just because you can get a picture of Harry’s child on his first day of school, doesn’t mean you need to publish it.
He knows the paparazzi are there because there is a market for the pictures – both on social media and the tabloids etc – so that was how it tied into the first amendment.
Thanks a lot for the great explanation! That makes a lot more sense. And anyway, Brits use terms differently than Americans. By your explanation, it seems like he was using bonkers more to explain the level of complexity rather than calling it ridiculous or crazy or whatever meaning the right-wing media is trying to ascribe to his statement. But yeah, Dax’s analogy clearly needed some finessing, bleh. I appreciate the reply!
The evil and ridiculous Angela Levin is all over Twitter predicting the decline of Harry’s popularity because of him labeling the 1A bonkers. Well, sorry, but Harry is more popular than ever. More popular than the boring duo Will and Kate combined. Wait until his Apple TV docu with Oprah airs. This Levin and the rest of the Royal Rota and William will doubly go mad and ballistic as they witness Prince Harry’s global popularity skyrocket.