Prince Charles’ op-ed about climate change was published exclusively by the Mail

Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall visit Devon

The Daily Mail is one of the most prolific gossip-aggregator outlets out there. Especially when it comes to royal gossip – they steal quotes and stories from other tabloids and only give credit when it suits them. They have several unhinged royal commentators on their payroll, but they are happy to quote the sleaziest commentators on other sites too. The Mail was obviously paying Thomas Markle for a wide variety of “interviews,” photos and stories, which is one of the reasons why the Duchess of Sussex sued them in 2019 and why she ultimately won her case. The Mail still hasn’t published their apology to her, and they have not paid their full damages to Meghan either.

Basically, the Mail exists to enforce the racist, neo-colonialist, sexist, white-royalist narrative 90% of the time, but they have a lot of power over the Windsors and the Mail is perfectly capable of yanking someone’s chain when they want to. Well, interesting story: the Prince of Wales wrote an op-ed about climate change and it was published exclusively in the Mail. You can read it here. I’m not going to excerpt any of it.

For what it’s worth, Charles has been an environmentalist for decades and he’s arguably the most “credible” environmentalist in the Windsor clan. Maybe he believes in meeting people where they are to change hearts and minds on the unfolding climate disaster. Or maybe the Mail yanked his chain and he ponied up an op-ed, and ended up giving the Mail legitimacy. All in all, it’s pretty bad form to go to this tabloid – the same one his daughter-in-law sued, the same one which was part of the racist smear campaign against the same DIL – just to publish an environmental op-ed which probably would have been more at home in the Guardian, the NY Times or Vanity Fair. Why didn’t he go to one of those outlets?

As for the climate hypocrisy – the organization Republic posted several stories about Charles taking private planes and riding in gas-guzzling cars, etc. I’m of the opinion that someone can be an environmentalist and sometimes do sh-tty hypocritical things. Just keep a consistent energy for all of the royals, you know? If you’re going to make a big deal about Harry being a hypocritical “woke” environmentalist, surely the same publication would have the same energy for Charles and his many hypocrisies? Oh, right.

Charles is currently in Scotland, on the extensive Balmoral estate, which was quietly exempted from Scottish green laws after secret lobbying from the Queen and her courtiers.

The Prince of Wales, Royal Founding Patron,  joined representatives of the British Asian Trust before they embarked on the charity’s ‘Palaces on Wheels’ cycling event. At the prince’s Highgrove, home , Tetbury, Gloucestershire,

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

66 Responses to “Prince Charles’ op-ed about climate change was published exclusively by the Mail”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Maria says:

    This was such a failure. Nobody who supports this rag believes in climate change anyway, so I have no idea why he did this. Everyone in the comments was trashing him.

    • ElleV says:

      i am not a purist when it comes to climate change – if conservative public figures wanna talk to their base about climate action, i’m here for it. our house is burning down and the more people picking up the hose the better, even if it’s part of some quid pro quo, even if i gotta hold my nose, even if his base doesn’t listen.

      • Becks1 says:

        I am not hating on Charles for this (although I can’t believe its the DM) because I agree, when the house is burning we need all the buckets we can get. I’m only mad it about compared to the criticism of Harry for flying on a private jet last week because that’s being hypocritical. But if Charles changes a few people’s minds, all the better.

      • Maria says:

        ElleV – see my comments below about Charles and his activism.

        And I don’t care if he makes a statement meant to galvanize people into working for climate reform, of course that’s good. But if it’s in the Daily Mail it’s not a good faith effort, it’s PR for him and for an initiative that ultimately will not help (in my opinion…free markets rectifying climate change is not an avenue that’s been helping us so far).

      • Robyn says:

        This is a fair point – thanks for raising it.

  2. VS says:

    He couldn’t find a credible newspaper in the entire uk to publish his op-ed? jeez…….

    • Maddy says:

      Guardian readers don’t need persuading. At least he tried!

      • Amy Bee says:

        That’s why he should have published it in the Times of London. But he had already leaked the Edward/DoE story to them so he had to give the Daily Mail something.

      • VS says:

        then he went to a trashy tabloid? wow

    • ElleV says:

      to be fair, how many of us consume more *serious* journalism than trash? maybe i’m a cretin but i only heard about this because i’m here on a gossip site that regularly rereports the fail’s trash so i can enjoy it with a side of intelligent commentary without giving Murdoch my clicks

      have i read the times this morning or any morning in recent memory? no, cause i read my own country’s credible news and only trash is global lol

      • VS says:

        I am very biased by US newspapers but had he published this in the NY Times or the Washington Post or the Boston Globe or CNN or even the WSJ (if he needed a conservative outlet; some of their columnists are wacko and yes I do know who owns the WSJ), etc… and for the UK, why not the FT or the Economist? a lot of people would have paid attention. I certainly would have and I am pretty certain I wouldn’t be the only one
        There is no way I will take seriously anything publish in a trashy tabloid!

      • Mac says:

        Serious newspapers aren’t interested in Charles promoting his own work. Had he co-written the piece with Jamie Dimon or David Solomon or their like it would have gotten traction.

    • nina says:

      His invisible contract is with them and he does not have any new content regarding Harry and Meghan. The beast has to be fed.

    • Nic919 says:

      Can you imagine if Al Gore published an article like this in the National Enquirer? Because that’s the level of tabloid we are talking about here

      • VS says:

        @Nic919 — thank you so much for the great analogy! exactly, can you imagine? we are being told he is the future king and a trashy tabloid is all he could get? WOW
        I wonder if we should laugh or pity how tabloids control them!

      • Robyn says:

        Yes! This is it, exactly.

  3. MsIam says:

    This smells quid pro quo all over it. I wonder who Charles is offering up in return for this?

  4. Harper says:

    Camilla invited the Fail to Highgrove in Oct 2020 to showcase her elephant statues initiative and Charles strolled out and joined the interview unexpectedly. Lots of photos and cordial chit-chat. They have nothing against the Fail, it’s very useful to them.

  5. LoonyTunes says:

    A dog whistle if there ever was one. Now we know how the Mail got so many “exclusives.” This is a huge eff you to the Suxxeses.

  6. Leanne says:

    He had his Bentley driven there too?!?! He couldn’t just use a car already in the place he was traveling? Am I understanding that right?!?!

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ Lenne, I know! It’s that disgusting that he had his car driven to his designation, all the while flying in a helicopter to get there!! Can he be an ever bigger hypocrite in regards to global warming?

  7. Miranda says:

    I think this, going to right-wing shit-stirrers like the Mail, will be the Windsor’s plan going forward. As more and more people see them for what they are, they will pander directly to those who refuse to see it (or, probably more accurately, those who see it very clearly and hardily agree with their racist, sexist, classist bullshit).

  8. Sofia says:

    Daily Mail readers aren’t exactly believers of climate change so this was a bad outlet to write it. Either Charles and his team didn’t know/care about that or the Mail said “Give us an op-Ed.” Should have gone to the Times or Telegraph at least.

  9. Amy Bee says:

    This is the same paper that Charles sued for publishing his private diary or memos. Not to mention that the Daily Mail is on record of denying that climate change is real, attacking Greta Thunberg for her activism and smearing the environmental movement. It’s clear that the Charles’ chained was yanked. He has nothing to leak about Harry and Meghan and he exhausted the Edward/DoE story so he gave them an essay on climate change and an endorsement as one of the trusted newspapers. If there’s any doubt that Charles was part of the smear campaign against Harry and Meghan, this proves that he was a willing participant.

  10. OriginalLala says:

    I’m sorry but no, just because Charles is into organic farming and regenerative agriculture doesn’t make him a credible environmentalist, because if he truly cared he wouldn’t be *only* traveling by private plan or gas-guzzling cars.

    He is a rich man who lives an absurdly wasteful lifestyle who also believes in organic and regenerative agriculture, that’s it, that’s all.

    • Mac says:

      Charles led the organic and regenerative agriculture movement in the UK, which makes him an extremely credible environmentalist. He also have been a leading voice on conservation for decades and was one of the first public figures to call for climate action. Charles needs to drastically lower his carbon footprint, but that doesn’t discredit his work as an environmentalist.

      • Maria says:

        If the average Brit has a yearly carbon footprint of 10 tons while he and Camilla are producing nearly 3,000 a year then it kind of does discredit him.
        Him needing to drastically lower it is an understatement.
        The way he runs the Duchy of Cornwall is full of shadiness. I see no reason why this area wouldn’t be the same.
        He did not lead the organic food movement in the UK, such a statement completely ignores the work of organizations like the Soil Association etc.

      • nina says:

        Nope, not buying him as a serious environmentalist. And no he did not lead the organic and regenerative farming movement in the UK. farming.He was just given more publicity because of who he is. More a do as I say not do as I do.

      • RoyalBlue says:

        Charles is no more a leading voice on conservation than William is a leading voice on saving the planet (Earthshot.) Their handlers WISH they were leading voices and are trying to place them in that position because they hold the titles HRH.

      • GraceB says:

        I think most people need to check themselves on their carbon footprint and question whether their trips are necessary. Charles included. Way too many private jet flights. At the same time, as Mac said, he really has been at the forefront of this in the UK. Not just organic farming but also methods of generally more environmentally friendly farming. Also people keep referring to his gas guzzling cars but his cars are pretty much all electric hybrids, including his range rover and Jaguar. He has a vintage car which runs off of waste wine products or something along those lines. Even the electric to run the households/charge the cars is solar or renewable, so for me the biggest issue here is the number of private jet trips he takes but he’s still miles ahead of all the other royals, with the other changes he’s made.

      • Maria says:

        His footprint is larger than all of the other royals’. Please do not compare his output with that of a normal person. We all have improvements to our behavior we could make, but the entitlement of Charles is something else. And no, just because his PR magnifies his statements does not mean he is at the forefront of this, any more than Kate is at the forefront of childhood development. He’s the Prince of Wales, so they magnify what he does to make him look important, but he is not the game changer.
        His personal estates and possessions may be inclined towards environmental activism in many ways, but that is something anyone could do if they had the wealth. In fact, it’s the bare minimum.
        And let’s examine the oft-confirmed stories of his food waste. Despite his denials, it’s been corroborated by MANY accounts that his cooks will throw away pans of eggs. Each egg requires an average of 53 gallons of water to produce. Even his foibles are costly.

    • Amy Bee says:

      @Originallala: He also likes to pretend that he’s a small farmer, he’s not.

  11. Mac says:

    Climate change is inherently not a political issue. It was made “political” by the fossil fuel industry paying politicians to deny the science of climate change. If you are accusing Charles of being political by calling for climate action you are on the wrong side of history.

    • Maria says:

      He’s the one further politicizing it by running this op-ed in a paper where the majority of its readers are right-wingers who don’t believe in it.
      Charles is not being political by calling for climate change. He is being political for dictating how the plebs should behave while with the exception of the sustainability of Home Farm he is largely a hypocrite.

      • Mac says:

        @Maria Did you read the op-ed? Charles is calling on the free market to invest in climate solutions. Since free markets caused the problem is it only fair they should bear the bulk of the expense in fixing it.

      • Maria says:

        I did read it. What you said had nothing to do with that, so naturally I addressed *your* comment, not the article.
        It doesn’t change what I said at all, though, so I’m not sure what your point is. It’s the same message he’s spouted for years, trying to get companies like Shell and GlaxoSmithKline to work with environmental groups. Look how much good that’s done…
        He’s lobbied and interfered in politics for years, but has chosen to spend more of his time on leaking stories about his son in exile and refusing to give his brother a specific title and focus on making sure he doesn’t need to be legally held accountable for lack of financial transparency in his organizations than to actually focus on doing some good, which would involve him paying some of that expense too.

      • Mac says:

        @Maria Terra Carta is designed for free markets, not individuals. But, sure …

      • Maria says:

        Which is why I didn’t mention it, lol.
        But my points still stand.

      • Mac says:

        @Maria, no, my point still stands. Calling on the private sector to do its part in preventing a climate apocalypse is not a political issue.

      • Maria says:

        When done in this manner? Yes, it is. He’s supported this particular media outlet and the conglomerates who run it who have stoked up environmentalism denial for years. One article is not going to do a lot for that.
        To each their own.

  12. Noki says:

    This only cements the type of scandalous dossier that the Mail has on the Family. He would rather risk being an a**wipe to his son and daughter in law than have the Mail go scorched earth on him and his impending Kinghood.

  13. Jan says:

    Harry did say the Tabloids have the BRF by their balls, for good press they have to perform like show ponies, no surprise that tampon and wifey are doing this song and dance.

    • Eurydice says:

      This, right here. It’s an odd choice, going to the DM with a serious op-ed, but I wonder if there isn’t some kind of positioning going on here? The tabloids have to look ahead to when Charles will be King. Maybe the DM is trying to tighten the screws on Charles?

  14. ABritGuest says:

    I would ask why Charles can’t do an op ed in a more respectable paper but papers like the London times& telegraph are no better than tabloids now anyway.

    As they say it’s a firm not a family& Harry is right that they are trapped as doubt Charles is a fan of the Fail. I cannot imagine working with an org that disparages my child day in and out who he had sued for libel. But Charles probably needs to get the Fail’s support for his reign, so they back Camilla being named queen consort& to encroach on William & the Middleton’s territory.

    • Jan says:

      Are there any respectable newspapers in England?

      • Totorochan says:

        Yes! Check out the websites for the Guardian and the Independent (put UK in as a search term). They are two major national non-conservative non-tabloid newspapers. Both have environment/climate change sections.

  15. S808 says:

    Knowing the tabs have his balls in a vice gives me joy tbh. Harry is free in ways he never will be.

    • Alexandria says:

      This. At least it’s clear the royal family and courtiers are really stupid at PR. They don’t have to be afraid of the press. These tabloids and so called rota need royals to have their jobs, book deals and tv slots anyway. What’s the worst thing if the royals are not needed anymore? They won’t be murdered. They can live off their wealth and use the usual ways the rich use to pay less taxes. Maybe Andrew would be scared I guess.

  16. Catherine says:

    IMO. This is payment for the Daily Mail leading the charge against the Crown and the BBC’s panorama interview. The point is not to persuade anyone. It’s to show that Charles and by extension the Royal Family are support the publication that had done the most to harass the Sussexes. Also, I believe that the Mail had BTS approval to publish Meghan’s letter and that has backfired completely so they owe them. They don’t have any info they can leak about the Sussexes so I think there will be more of these tabloid exclusives.

  17. Izzy says:

    Gee, how “woke” of them to publish Prince Hypocrite’s missive.

  18. Over it says:

    See the only part of this that pisses me off is him playing BFF with one of the major tabloids that makes the life of his grandchildren mother hell. Charles really is as shitty as they come

  19. Gail Hirst says:

    May I just say this about that? Back in the early ’70′s when I first became ‘woke’ his was the ONLY voice with enough ‘authority’ for ANYONE to listen to. Many of us, too late to actually BE hippies, were labelled hippies nevertheless. Peace, love and good will to Mother Earth were labelled impractical, pie in the sky thoughts of the ‘high’ society. So, credit where credit is due.

    I’m sure Charles faces security issues also. We clammer about H&M’s (far greater) need for security, but I’m sure it’s an issue for him, too. We don’t know if there’s a target (the worst parts of me hope there is, but not really) on Charles’ back. And he’s fearful. Lord Mountbatten death shattered him. We also know he is a man who enjoys his perks. It might not occur to him he’s being hypocritical and if there is no one around to tell him, because he knows nothing different, he may still think he’s doing ok.

    This does NOT excuse his parenting/monarch-role-playing towards his youngest son. That’s disgusting, not providing Harry security, leaking his location, etc. No excuse. But in terms in being an environmentalist, we’re all a bit hypocritical (at least, every time I fire up the car to take the dogs to an off leash walk, I know I am being hypocritical…but I cannot walk to the off leash areas as they are too far away, but the dogs need some off leash time as well as their regular, on leash city walks). It’s a conundrum for us all.

    • Maria says:

      The government was instituting environmental reforms at the end of the 1960’s on and there was plenty of public awareness and organizations about it, if he was the only one you listened to then that’s fine but he was not the only voice of authority speaking about it by far.

      And he may have security concerns but his impact is also caused by things like using helicopters for short distances (a practice his eldest son has adopted) and by Camilla not liking scheduled commercial flights preferring private air travel. As I mentioned above, he and Camilla put out nearly 3,000 tons of carbon per year. To say it’s hypocritical in the same way an average person is isn’t quite fair.

      Charles has done some good work, but his reputation has been vastly overblown in my opinion.

    • nina says:

      That’s comparing apples to oranges. Deliberately leaking your child’s location, knowing he and his family has no security, which by the way you pulled. What kind of parent does that. Clearly he does.

      I would go to hell in a gasoline jacket just to protect my kids, but it seems old Chuckie will sacrifice even his own child and grandchild to protect himself. He really is a special kind of mf.
      I’m not even including protecting Meghan because clearly she is nothing to him.

  20. LMR says:

    This seems fishy to me. The DM raked Chuckles the Clown over the coals in for his wasteful 2020 Oman trip for some dude’s funeral.

    I wonder if he chose the DM out of duress to prevent something worse from being published. But he made this deal with the worst of the worst publications as far as Harry is concerned. Is that his final answer on their relationship?

  21. Alexandria says:

    Real smart trying to disprove the invisible contract by publishing an op ed in a dumb tabloid. Clowns.

  22. Jay says:

    I think your last question is the crucial one – why publish this in the DM? Why now? Maybe it’s some version of Charles not wanting to only preach to the choir of woke liberal new Yorker subscribers☺️, but to reach people where they are – but then why not put something out in a more alternative media if you really want to reach out? It just seems like an acknowledgement that his team is not very agile. At least that’s what

    The DM is a tabloid, but it’s still a very traditional media, and one that is allegedly sympathetic to the crown. I wonder why they decided to run this editorial. Does it add prestige just to have the POW appear in print? It will be interesting to see what kind of reactions this gets from the DM readership – scorn? Charges of hypocrisy? Maybe grudging agreement?

  23. bub244 says:

    As ludicrous as if the royal family lectured us on frugality. It’s great that a prominent name is pushing environmentalism, especially as Prince Charles may be able to reach an audience that is normally more skeptical (old, white). HOWEVER it is not enough to walk the walk. The footprint of the royal family’s houses alone must be huge.

    As always, down with the monarchy.

  24. L4frimaire says:

    Let’s see, Harry has an op-Ed published in Fast Company, Meghan has an op-Ed published in NY Times, while Charles uses the Daily Mail. The anti-woke, climate denying, hostile to eco-warriors, who thinks Greta Thunberg is public enemy no.1 (after Meghan of course). That Daily Mail. A tabloid that plays very fast abd loose with truth and facts, and thinks science is one step above witchcraft. Way to be taken seriously, Chuck. Guess the Fail was cashing a check Charles owed them.

  25. blunt talker says:


  26. Robin Samuels says:

    EVERYTHING PRINCE CHARLES DOES IS PERFORMATIVE AND MOST OFTEN HE SPEAKS WITHOUT CLEAR THOUGHT. Look at him on a bicycle in a suit and tie with leather shoes; drinking from a cup which I’m sure he didn’t pour for himself. He has to keep his Royal photographer, Jobson, employed and the invisible contract intact with the Daily Mail. Rupert Murdoch is winning. The UnRoyal Family is scrambling for relevance on a daily basis, William and Kate remain silent in the basement and Prince Andrew under mummy’s skirt.