Wall Flower

Unquestionably the worst I've seen. Not really a government but a collection of rorters, grifters, liars and incompetents masquerading as a government.

I've read a couple of random books in the DCI Banks series over the years from the library but never in any order. I was able to pick up the first two from my reliable second-hand bookshop so I've added it to my list of god knows how many series that I'm working my way through. I remember really enjoying Green for Danger. I loved the WW11 setting, the way the murder was staged and the motive really worked for me too. If you like old movies, there's a 1940's movie of the novel that you might enjoy.

It was the "Duchess of Pork" headline (with accompanying unflattering picture) about Fergie that began my longstanding hatred of the British tabloid press. I just think they added a bit of racism to their well-worn formula of sexism, cruelty, bullying, relentless targeting and general character assassination. I don't get why you think that's okay in Meghan's case. The thing that's changed is the papers' digital platforms, allowing for global dissemination of articles; and also the presence of social media. I'm on Twitter and it's been eye opening to see so many accounts solely dedicated to hating on Meghan (with some really crazy conspiracy theories); and that doesn't include other digital platforms like Youtube where there are monetised hate accounts. Hating on Meghan and Harry has become big business.

The British Royal family was directly responsible for Britain becoming a player in the Atlantic slave trade with the establishment of the Royal African Company by Charles 11 and the future James 11. The current Royal family aren't responsible for the misdeeds of their predecessors but, thanks to inherited wealth, they still benefit from those misdeeds. They might be seen as more credible anti-racists if they did more to acknowledged that past. Meanwhile, Rupert Murdoch held his summer garden party attended by the PM, half the Tory party, the Leader of the Opposition, the Directors of MI5 and MI6 (ffs) and members of the King's inner circle, including his private secretary and Director of Communications - all lining up to kiss Rupert's sulphurous arse. Prince Harry's not wrong to question this kind of cosy relationship or to be a bit pissed off that his father's inner circle is so keen to cosy up to a media organisation that's happy to relentlessly attack Harry and his wife.

Judging by twitter, Meghan seems to drive a lot of people absolutely bonkers, so there seems to be a permanent full moon where she's concerned.

He has the same job as the rest of the Royal family. Well, except for those ten years he spent in the army, including two tours of Afghanistan.

Unlike most of the family, Meghan successfully supported herself before joining the family, whether as a jobbing actor or a more prominent one. Not sure why that warrants such disparagement. I was under the impression that H and M left because of relentless and brutal treatment of Meghan by the tabloid and right wing media; a lack of public support from the RF; the all in or all out ultimatum and the leaking to the press of ongoing negotiations which forced their hand (and which I've seen from sources other than H and M). Maybe I'm just a bit cranky with the right wing press (both in Britain and here in Australia). These past weeks I finished a book about the Murdochs and the phone hacking scandal (absolutely gobsmacking); saw a prominent indigenous journalist step down from his role after relentless, often racist targeting in the RW press and social media over his daring to mention colonialism in a coronation broadcast; and an alleged survivor of sexual assault in Parliament having her court subpoenaed texts leaked and splashed over the front pages to discredit her. Harry's not wrong about the way elements of the press operate; the overweening influence it often wields; or the way it regularly sets out to target and destroy reputations or even lives.

Thanks. I've seen two earlier versions, one in maybe the nineties and a later couple of TV movies with Martin Shaw (from the George Gently series, if you've seen that). I agree that Dalgliesh seems a hard character to capture in adaptations.

I was thinking of checking out the current Dalgliesh series but you don't seem too impressed. Cover Her Face is one in the series that I haven't read, even though I was lucky enough to find an illustrated Folio Society edition at my local second-hand bookshop. Thanks for the reminder that I need to get to it!

As I understand it, they were staying at the private residence of a friend and didn't want to lead paps back there or have them camping out there. While plenty of photos were taken at the event, the paps were after shots that the mainstream media didn't have, bigger money earners for them, which was why they were so dogged in pursuit of the couple. The Sussex's statement didn't refer to the chase as high speed, that was added in by other people. It also made no reference to concerns for their own safety but alleged that the paps were engaging in risky behaviour like running red lights and getting up on sidewalks that created a danger to other drivers, the police escort and pedestrians. Anyway, happy anniversary to lucky couple. I'm sure a card from Piers is in the mail.

I'd be more excited if, after 60 years of watching Dr Who on Aussie TV, I didn't now have to sign up for yet another streaming service just to see the new series. Extra cranky because I was working my way through the classic series on Britbox when that disappeared too. Thanks BBC.

Yes, the same media shills that were outraged by the thought of Meghan attending are now outraged by her not attending. At least we can all rest easy that poor "the hardest thing I've ever done" Kate will be spared further trauma.

Chintz was very fashionable in the 80's although a lot of designers went for Chintz on Chintz on Chintz, so Morse's flat is very minimalist for the period. Chintz fabric was considered classic traditional British style, probably a lot of it in Royal residences and Country houses, so it wasn't out of place for a guy who liked classic British cars. John Thaw went grey early and .always looked older than his age. I was amazed when I found out that he was only 60 when he died. I inherited my Mum's chintz sofa. I do feel like the only person in Australia that doesn't have a grey sofa but I kind of like it.

I think you've misread the article. According to the Daily Mail's version from my newsfeed, Harry and Meghan did reimburse the cost of the renovations with a lump sum of 2.4 million pounds but then ceased paying rent as part of an undisclosed deal with their landlord. Supposedly, the increased value of the property as a result of the renovations, which the Sussex's effectively paid for, was applied as rent in lieu. The property was previously a series of separate cottages so the Royal Estate (and maybe Andrew) has had a win at Harry and Meghan's expense. Of course, this all depends on the reliability of the Daily Mail (parent company being sued by Harry) and Palace sources.

Plenty of backstabbing at Buck Palace, apparently. Montecito is probably safer from the paparazzi and the vultures of the British press, though.

I think it's increasingly difficult for Governments to be courageous on these kind of reforms when even small changes generate hysterical screeching about class warfare from the usual suspects. The media's propensity for demanding things be ruled in or out in perpetuity is also not helpful to long term reform. On a brighter note (for this leftie), Nigel Farage has apparently announced that Australia is now the wokest place on Earth. I guess New Zealand lost the crown following the resignation of Jacinda Ardern or the Queen of Woke as the Australian Merdochracy papers prefer to call her.

You know it's not actually true that Meghan got universally wonderful press prior to and during the wedding, as a slightest amount of googling can confirm. It is, however, a convenient narrative framing for the press and online haters, as it puts the blame for their actions and behaviour onto Meghan herself. Harry issued an official statement as early as Nov 16, well before the wedding which stated (in part): 'But the past week has seen a line crossed. His girlfriend, Meghan Markle, has been subject to a wave of abuse and harassment. Some of this has been very public - the smear on the front page of a national newspaper; the racial undertones of comment pieces; and the outright sexism and racism of social media trolls and web article comments. Some of it has been hidden from the public - the nightly legal battles to keep defamatory stories out of the papers; her mother having to struggle past photographers in order to get to her front door; the attempts of reporters and photographers to gain illegal entry to her home and the calls to police that followed; the substantial bribes offered by papers to her ex-boyfriend; the bombardment of nearly every friend, co-worker and loved one in her life.' That doesn't even include the hiring of private investigators (involving dubious legality); the platforming of the half-sister who alternated between trashing Meghan and angling for an invite to the wedding; the relentless pursuit of the father who, while somewhat complicit, was no match for the feral press; culminating in the publication of private correspondence and leading to Meghan's lawsuit against the Mail owners.

Probably explains why I can't help being sympathetic to Harry and Meghan as I'm on the opposite side politically and personally to the people that hate them. I also absolutely despise the tabloids and RW press that target them. As an Aussie, it's the Murdoch press that has my particular ire and Harry's visceral hatred of Murdoch warms my lefty heart.

The episode seems to have been a big hit with Right Wing nut jobs on my twitter feed. Is that the South Park audience these days or are Harry and Meghan just favourite targets for the anti-woke brigade?

Really interesting but I feel like the presenter wimped out a bit in the end. Illegality matters whether or not the media landscape is in the process of moving on from the legacy press. Some discussion of Harry needing to raise public opinion against the tabloid press to succeed in his aims but none about whether the relentless press attacks on Harry and Meghan serve the interests of media companies that are being sued by the prince. Also, should we only be critical of the media where actual illegality can proved? What about unethical behaviour, targeting of individuals or groups for character assassination, intrusive, relentless invasion of privacy, framing a narrative in a dishonest or misleading way, etc?

I enjoy Candice Renoir too (love picking up the occasional French word as a bonus). I'm Australian so My Life is Murder and Miss Fisher are old favourites. I haven't caught up with The Brokenwood Mysteries yet but it's next on my list once I finish the umpteen series of Murdoch Mysteries. Covid lockdown was a great time to catch up with some mystery series. Foyle's War is a classic. Looking forward to checking out the Three Pines series. I have the first Louise Penny book on my Kindle and have been debating whether to read it before seeing the series.

My bookclub read the Moonstone last month and we all enjoyed it, even a couple of people who aren't generally readers of the classics. It was actually funny, surprisingly accessible and the multiple points of view added interest. A bit long-winded but that seems a hazard of 19th century serialised novels. As a mystery reader, I enjoyed seeing one of the first depictions of a classic police detective. With the current discussion about the Kohinoor diamond, we all appreciated the ultimate return of the Moonstone to India. I don't know about younger readers, but Ivanhoe and Rob Roy by Walter Scott were still pretty well known when I was growing up and both had film adaptations.

On a whim, I picked up a book called Empire of the Normans by Levi Roach from the new books display at my library. It's described as 'the first global history of the Normans and their quest for dominance'. The author is a professor at Exeter Uni and has previously written about Anglo-Saxon kings. I'll be reading it as soon as possible as there are already four reserve requests for it; so I guess I'm not the only person in Canberra with an interest in history.

Has Agamemnon ever been depicted positively? I feel like he been depicted as a royal prick since classical times. Loved your mention of the Last of the Wine by Mary Renault. One of my favourite books. I replaced my falling apart copy last year so it's definitely time for a re-read. I think Pat Barker is just a better novelist than many writers getting into Greek myth/history retellings. She's also know for depicting war and the effects of war, which gives her Trojan books such immediacy. I have her Regeneration trilogy still to read, about the aftermath of WW1, which comes highly recommended to me.

Really looking forward to the third instalment of the Sooty Feathers books. Glad it's going well!