Did BBC tone down Harry and Meghan documentary?
THE BBC last night appeared to back down on claims that Buckingham Palace briefed against Harry and Meghan after being accused of peddling ‘overblown and unfounded’ allegations.
A BBC2 documentary examining the relationship between the royal households and the media also stepped back from suggestions that William allowed aides to brief about his brother’s mental health – which was categorically denied by, and deeply offended many in, the royal household.
The two-part documentary series, fronted by BBC journalist Amol Rajan, had already drawn unprecedented censure from Buckingham Palace, Clarence House and Kensington Palace.
The royal households believe it contains a slew of unsubstantiated and categorically inaccurate accuprime-time sations about collusion with the media, particularly in connection with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex during the tumultuous period of their decision to quit royal duties, dubbed ‘Megxit’.
The households’ lawyers had been preparing to examine the final programme with a fine-tooth comb and had not ruled out a formal complaint. But last night’s offering had seemingly been watered-down at the 11th hour, with editing going on up until the last minute. Plans for an accompanying podcast have also been postponed by the BBC.
A royal source said: ‘It is unlikely the matter will be taken further.’
The programme did, however, give significant airtime to Meghan’s personal solicitor, who went on the attack to defend the duchess against accusations of bullying, denying she had ever ‘improperly’ used her ‘power’.
Speaking with the Duchess of Sussex’s express permission, Jenny Afia, of libel lawyers Schillings, insisted there were ‘massive, massive inaccuracies’ in claims that she had targeted and forced out several members of staff. These claims, which were first made public earlier this year, are now the subject of an internal Buckingham Palace inquiry.
In an interview for the documentary, entitled The Princes And The Press, Miss Afia said: ‘The overall allegation was the Duchess of Sussex was guilty of bullying.
‘No, absolutely not. I think the first thing to be really clear about what bullying is.
‘What bullying actually means is improperly using power repeatedly and deliberately to hurt someone, physically or emotionally.
‘The Duchess of Sussex absolutely denies ever doing that.’
Valentine Low, a reporter from
‘Massive inaccuracies’
‘Psychologically traumatised’
The Times who reported details of the bullying allegations earlier this year, flatly denied that William had any knowledge of or colluded with the allegations being made public.
But he did say those who had spoken to him were ‘very glad’ that their stories were being made public and were ‘still in tears’ two-anda-half years later because of their experiences working for Meghan. He said: ‘Some were still psychologically traumatised. So something went badly wrong in those days.’
Mr Rajan himself suggested that unfavourable stories about Meghan were published because of a perception she didn’t ‘behave’ as a princess should.
‘There are plenty of reasons why negative stories are written about people in the press, and often that criticism is justified,’ he told the programme. ‘But some of the criticism levelled at Meghan arose from the feeling, the sense, in some quarters that this isn’t how our princesses are supposed to behave.’
Addressing the question of whether William had ever allowed aides to ‘brief’ the media about Harry’s mental health, Johnny Dymond, the BBC’s royal correspondent, said he had spoken to Kensington Palace, who made clear William was simply worried about his brother following his 2019 documentary with ITV’s Tom Bradby.
William, who has earned plaudits for his long-standing campaign to get more support for mental health issues, is said to be particularly upset at the suggestion he would ever have encouraged or condoned this.
In fact it was Harry himself who first raised the suggestion in a 2019 television interview when he said he had experienced a resurgence of mental health issues that needed ‘constant management’.
At the time William was only reported to have been ‘concerned’ at the wellbeing of his brother and his wife, which was considered a natural and instinctive response to what he had just watched.