Media manipulation: the presentation of Kate and Meghan
With the passing of our longest serving monarch, the United Kingdom mourns the end of an era. An era which spanned seventy years, witnessing incredible advancements in the technological, scientific, and political world. So why, in 2022, when there's all of that to talk about, are two other royal women apparently causing such a divide amongst the headlines, the monarchy, and the country?
Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton presented a united front for the Queen's state funeral, arriving together with Kate's two older children. However, there have been two extremely different responses to the Duchess of Sussex and the now Princess of Wales’ behaviour at the funeral. Images were released of both Kate and Meghan throughout the course of the funeral and the difference in response that unfolded, proved that the hate debate surrounding the Duchess of Sussex hasn’t gone away.
Once the media released the images of Kate Middleton at the state funeral, millions of - mostly positive - comments flooded the web. The comments were largely centred around elegance and beauty, with a huge interest in the Princess’ clothing choice and jewellery. Because, of course, the most important part of a funeral is one’s attire and jewels. There was nothing but comments of adoration and respect for Kate, “Elegance, grace and class,” read one. “A true royal. Always graceful, so intelligent, always honouring the position and responsibilities toward the people,” another added. This semantic sense of acceptance and love from the public is what Kate receives for simply existing, and yet Meghan can’t seem to do anything without causing controversy.
Minutes after the images were published of Kate, the Duchess’ followed soon after. There were a couple of images in particular that seemed to give the general public perfect ammo to tear Meghan down. Because, of course, the Duchess can’t even grieve without somehow doing that wrong too. The hate towards Meghan was being fired from a range of angles, the press even questioning “why she had any right to be there”. Possibly to say her last goodbyes to her Grandmother in law, but then again, who knows? An image of the Duchess was released of her walking into Westminster Abbey, and with that the haters shot her down once more. “Honestly no one cares about Meghan right now…especially not what she was wearing,” commented one. “Who cares about the cape? Who cares about Meghan?” said another. And yet, people couldn’t wait to talk about Kate in her black coat dress, veiled hat and pearl jewellery- a choker, earrings and bracelet from the Queen’s collection.
However, this media manipulation goes back far further than this.
Let’s take a look at The Express on both women’s wedding day. A woman’s wedding day is supposed to be the happiest day of her life but not for Meghan, for Meghan it is her chance to make a hit on Princess Charlotte’s life, or at least that is the story that the Express is trying to sell. As they put it, her flowers could have ‘put Princess Charlotte’s life at risk.’ Make note of their use of the noun ‘risk’ to highlight Meghan’s irresponsible behaviour in having flowers at her own wedding. They even graced their readers with an innocent photograph of Charlotte sneezing to emphasise how close to passing she really was. Compare it to the grace and poise of Kate’s bouquet which appears to be ‘homegrown’ and ‘follows royal code’. Now in this article, they use the adjective ‘homegrown’ to describe Kate’s humble and courteous nature.
This nasty double standard is further shown through the media’s portrayal of both women’s pregnancies. Delving straight into the nasty right wing tabloid, The Daily Mail, you can clearly see the article on Meghan disrespects her whereas Kate's article praises her. Kate’s article opens with the exclamatory sentence ‘Not long to go!’ which implies the tabloid is excited about the new baby coming. The use of the gentle adverb ‘tenderly’ along with the dynamic verb ‘cradles’ helps to build a picture of Kate as a compassionate, maternal figure.
On the other hand, the article about Meghan completely slanders her and makes her look conceited. In particular the headline “Why can’t Meghan Markle keep her hands off her bump? Experts tackle the question that has got the nation talking: is it pride, vanity, acting or a new age bonding technique?” is quite the contrast from the messiah-like treatment of “Pregnant Kate”. Immediately this article is questioning Meghan with the interrogative “why” as if she’s committed a crime of some sort. Also note how Meghan’s pregnancy bump is just a “bump” minimising the fact she’s carrying a child. Now, is it reaching to say that her baby is being subtly dehumanised by removing the noun ‘baby’ from ‘bump’ overtly telling their readers that Meghan’s mixed-race child is just a bump?
Finally, we will look at the difference between these two women and avocados, yes, the tabloids have managed to make eating avocados political. The Express showed their immediate interest in Kate with the rhetorical question: ‘Kate’s morning sickness cure?’ Using the verb ‘cure’ indirectly pushes any blame or pressure away from Kate and makes whatever sickness that she has an external issue. Pay close attention to The Express’ use of the very formal noun ‘Duchess’ for Kate. However, for Meghan Markle’s article the writer calls her by her first name: ‘Meghan’. The Daily Mail goes on to say that ‘Meghan’s favourite avocado snacks… is fuelling human rights abuse, drought and murder.’ Using this power of three shows the Daily Mail’s persistence in painting Meghan as a dangerous or manipulative person by putting her name in the same article that has traumatic verbs such as ‘abuse’ and ‘murder’. The use of the verb ‘fuelling’ also indicates that they believe, or are trying to make us as readers believe, that Meghan is some sort of war criminal or malicious/ evil person but never lose sight of what this article is actually focused on: avocados…
The question is why? What is the reason for the tabloid’s poor treatment of Meghan Markle? Well, perhaps it is because of what she represents - a challenge to the status quo of a white, privileged monarchy. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that it tends to be Conservative, white, middle class and aged men who find her a problem. Incredibly, they have not been obsessing to the same extent over the dubious connections to a sex-trafficker of a ‘proper’ royal. Objective? It doesn't seem so.
Let's hope that the Carolean era is more generous and diverse in its outlook.
Year 13 linguists:
Rachel Martin, Millie Williams, Rasim Alihodzic, Violet Spencer, Iona Taylor
Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton presented a united front for the Queen's state funeral, arriving together with Kate's two older children. However, there have been two extremely different responses to the Duchess of Sussex and the now Princess of Wales’ behaviour at the funeral. Images were released of both Kate and Meghan throughout the course of the funeral and the difference in response that unfolded, proved that the hate debate surrounding the Duchess of Sussex hasn’t gone away.
Once the media released the images of Kate Middleton at the state funeral, millions of - mostly positive - comments flooded the web. The comments were largely centred around elegance and beauty, with a huge interest in the Princess’ clothing choice and jewellery. Because, of course, the most important part of a funeral is one’s attire and jewels. There was nothing but comments of adoration and respect for Kate, “Elegance, grace and class,” read one. “A true royal. Always graceful, so intelligent, always honouring the position and responsibilities toward the people,” another added. This semantic sense of acceptance and love from the public is what Kate receives for simply existing, and yet Meghan can’t seem to do anything without causing controversy.
Minutes after the images were published of Kate, the Duchess’ followed soon after. There were a couple of images in particular that seemed to give the general public perfect ammo to tear Meghan down. Because, of course, the Duchess can’t even grieve without somehow doing that wrong too. The hate towards Meghan was being fired from a range of angles, the press even questioning “why she had any right to be there”. Possibly to say her last goodbyes to her Grandmother in law, but then again, who knows? An image of the Duchess was released of her walking into Westminster Abbey, and with that the haters shot her down once more. “Honestly no one cares about Meghan right now…especially not what she was wearing,” commented one. “Who cares about the cape? Who cares about Meghan?” said another. And yet, people couldn’t wait to talk about Kate in her black coat dress, veiled hat and pearl jewellery- a choker, earrings and bracelet from the Queen’s collection.
However, this media manipulation goes back far further than this.
Let’s take a look at The Express on both women’s wedding day. A woman’s wedding day is supposed to be the happiest day of her life but not for Meghan, for Meghan it is her chance to make a hit on Princess Charlotte’s life, or at least that is the story that the Express is trying to sell. As they put it, her flowers could have ‘put Princess Charlotte’s life at risk.’ Make note of their use of the noun ‘risk’ to highlight Meghan’s irresponsible behaviour in having flowers at her own wedding. They even graced their readers with an innocent photograph of Charlotte sneezing to emphasise how close to passing she really was. Compare it to the grace and poise of Kate’s bouquet which appears to be ‘homegrown’ and ‘follows royal code’. Now in this article, they use the adjective ‘homegrown’ to describe Kate’s humble and courteous nature.
This nasty double standard is further shown through the media’s portrayal of both women’s pregnancies. Delving straight into the nasty right wing tabloid, The Daily Mail, you can clearly see the article on Meghan disrespects her whereas Kate's article praises her. Kate’s article opens with the exclamatory sentence ‘Not long to go!’ which implies the tabloid is excited about the new baby coming. The use of the gentle adverb ‘tenderly’ along with the dynamic verb ‘cradles’ helps to build a picture of Kate as a compassionate, maternal figure.
On the other hand, the article about Meghan completely slanders her and makes her look conceited. In particular the headline “Why can’t Meghan Markle keep her hands off her bump? Experts tackle the question that has got the nation talking: is it pride, vanity, acting or a new age bonding technique?” is quite the contrast from the messiah-like treatment of “Pregnant Kate”. Immediately this article is questioning Meghan with the interrogative “why” as if she’s committed a crime of some sort. Also note how Meghan’s pregnancy bump is just a “bump” minimising the fact she’s carrying a child. Now, is it reaching to say that her baby is being subtly dehumanised by removing the noun ‘baby’ from ‘bump’ overtly telling their readers that Meghan’s mixed-race child is just a bump?
Finally, we will look at the difference between these two women and avocados, yes, the tabloids have managed to make eating avocados political. The Express showed their immediate interest in Kate with the rhetorical question: ‘Kate’s morning sickness cure?’ Using the verb ‘cure’ indirectly pushes any blame or pressure away from Kate and makes whatever sickness that she has an external issue. Pay close attention to The Express’ use of the very formal noun ‘Duchess’ for Kate. However, for Meghan Markle’s article the writer calls her by her first name: ‘Meghan’. The Daily Mail goes on to say that ‘Meghan’s favourite avocado snacks… is fuelling human rights abuse, drought and murder.’ Using this power of three shows the Daily Mail’s persistence in painting Meghan as a dangerous or manipulative person by putting her name in the same article that has traumatic verbs such as ‘abuse’ and ‘murder’. The use of the verb ‘fuelling’ also indicates that they believe, or are trying to make us as readers believe, that Meghan is some sort of war criminal or malicious/ evil person but never lose sight of what this article is actually focused on: avocados…
The question is why? What is the reason for the tabloid’s poor treatment of Meghan Markle? Well, perhaps it is because of what she represents - a challenge to the status quo of a white, privileged monarchy. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that it tends to be Conservative, white, middle class and aged men who find her a problem. Incredibly, they have not been obsessing to the same extent over the dubious connections to a sex-trafficker of a ‘proper’ royal. Objective? It doesn't seem so.
Let's hope that the Carolean era is more generous and diverse in its outlook.
Year 13 linguists:
Rachel Martin, Millie Williams, Rasim Alihodzic, Violet Spencer, Iona Taylor