Forum Topic

What did Morgan actually say Kerry ? - I didn't watch it (and indeed can say I haven't watched a second of breakfast TV in years) but from what I've seen in other media yesterday he expressed an opinion casting doubt on aspects of what Meghan was claiming (indeed her mental health) and then today walked off briefly because another presenter suggested that he had it in for Meghan.Now I can't stand Morgan.  But what's he employed as by GMB ?.  He's not a newsreader is he, and from the media coverage I've seen of him over his time on GMB he's no stranger to expressing views or opinion, so he's never been expected to be impartial.Surely as a presenter, if you're discussing a topic, then you either stick solely to the facts, i.e. he said that, she said that (in which case that's basically simply reporting the news) or, if a group of people are having a discussion about that topic, then inevitably one of them is going to express an opinion, otherwise there's nothing to debate or discuss.  Unless the presenter is told to remain entirely impartial at all times, which, based upon what I've read about Morgan's tenure on GMB, has never been the case.41,000 people complained because they didn't like him expressing an opinion.  Why haven't the same 41,000 people complained when he's previously expressed an opinion about other things ?.  Is it okay that just because they don't share or like his opinion on a particular issue/individual, they complain, but when they agree with him or aren't bothered about the individual/subject, then they don't complain ?.And how come when last week a local Councillor spent part of a Council meeting repeatedly gesticulating that another Councillor was mentally ill it wasn't deemed worthy of being reported in the front page article on here (despite that article all being about how fractious the meeting was) and the only person who wrote on here that such conduct was unacceptable was me ?.

Adam Beamish ● 2058d

Okay, so I've just read the latest report about this on the BBC website.I don't see why the ITV Chief Executive has any more or any less of a right to express her view that everything Meghan said was truthful than Morgan has to express a contrary view.  And indeed if the Chief Executive has expressed that opinion (and unless she knows Meghan personally than it is just an opinion) solely to get Ofcom off her back or to appease 41,000 complainers, then that's even more 'twisted'.If we're going to have this stance, then every discussion show must be taken off air.  Question Time, HIGNFY, Loose Women (again never seen it but I'm guessing the panellists express personal opinions) to name but a few must all be stopped, because we cannot have a situation where anyone is given a platform to express an opinion which others may disagree with.Where does it end ? - can sports commentators express an opinion about how a team or an individual is playing, or whether they believe what the coach or manager said in an interview is truthful ?.Of course there's a line, and as I say I don't believe it's acceptable or appropriate for someone, in a work setting, to accuse A N Other of being mentally ill, but that's a million miles away from a presenter, known for his forthright opinions, simply saying that he doesn't believe what someone else says, especially when his opinion was presumably balanced out by contrary views from others on the show, like the weather presenter today.We're ever moving towards a world which we have to walk around like lobotomised amoebas, prevented from thinking or expressing ourselves as individuals for fear of causing disagreement or offence.  If we've learnt something from history surely it's that people hiding away their opinions or feelings for fear of the reaction of others isn't a good thing ?.

Adam Beamish ● 2058d

I'm not sure the "absence" debate's going anywhere fast..So if anyone still wants to chew the cud on this, can I suggest an interesting angle which emerged overnight..Half asleep and listening to the radio early this morning, I'm sure I heard news of a poll revealing that a very large proportion of the over 60's sympathised with Piers Morgan's view of Meghan inventing her suicidal tendencies just to gain support and sympathy – as opposed to a large proportion of the under 30's lining-up to have Morgan publicly disgraced for such blatant and grotesque lank of empathy.A generational gulf cum chasm of opinion.The young, taught and raised not to be afraid but to reach out and share their troubles.  To be kind towards others and not bully minorities - or anyone who is somehow “different” from the “norm”. Whether that be a difference of skin colour, physical or mental disability, physical attractiveness, or absolutely anything.  A generation now completely used to having an HR department at work in a world that increasingly supports and emphasises fair play and equal opportunity..As against the older generation with memories of parents who experienced war.  With values of unquestioned loyalty through thick and thin,  passed down from father to son and mother to daughter.  To fight and never surrender and then win against all and any odds.  A stiff upper lip generation, taught to suffer and endure stress, hold tight and eventually you will emerge into the sunlight of tomorrow.  A generation that would never betray either its country or its parents.These are of course generalisations.  And society is historically well used to going through periods of extreme changes in attitude:  the bawdy Restoration after the Puritans;  Edwardian English gaiety after years of oppressive Victoriana; the roaring twenties and the swinging sixties - these social landslides are nothing new.On this occasion, I suspect there's lots more lessons to be learned before the good old whirligig of time turns once again - when we wake up one day and see things completely differently...(PS:  I suspect this was a D Mail poll.  If so I can't check it out 'cos the Mail's copy is hidden behind a pay wall)

Stuart Kerr ● 2057d

'A generational gulf cum chasm of opinion.The young, taught and raised not to be afraid but to reach out and share their troubles.  To be kind towards others and not bully minorities - or anyone who is somehow “different” from the “norm”. Whether that be a difference of skin colour, physical or mental disability, physical attractiveness, or absolutely anything.  A generation now completely used to having an HR department at work in a world that increasingly supports and emphasises fair play and equal opportunity..As against the older generation with memories of parents who experienced war.  With values of unquestioned loyalty through thick and thin,  passed down from father to son and mother to daughter.  To fight and never surrender and then win against all and any odds.  A stiff upper lip generation, taught to suffer and endure stress, hold tight and eventually you will emerge into the sunlight of tomorrow.  A generation that would never betray either its country or its parents.'I think that probably sums it up, as one of those 'oldies' - I think it's become apparent through the last year that we've coped in different ways. Possibly because we tend not to go out so much we've been more stoic with the restrictions. That's not to say we're not all heartily sick of not being able to see friends etc. just that we've a different approach, and, of course we spend more time at home anyway. Similarly with this latest hoo-ha, it is good that people feel able to share their problems and speak up about mental health and illnesses but sometimes it seems the pendulum has swung the other way. It also sticks in the craw to have two wealthy, spoilt people wittering on about their perception of the wrongs they have suffered at this particular time. Seeing the poor people and especially the kids in Syria and Yemen going hungry and living in terrible conditions sort of puts things in perspective, maybe that's why for many of us sympathy for the Sussexes is a bit thin on the ground? It might also account for a dose of scepticism regarding where the truth really lies?

Vanessa Smith ● 2057d

Yes, we were raised on all those WW2 stories  - The Cruel Sea, The Dambusters, Reach for the Sky, but we all know war is a filthy, cruel business and there aren't many winners. I often wonder what my generation and the succeeding one would do in similar circumstances? I like to think we'd have also stepped up to the plate if our survival was on the line, thankfully we've never been tested. The treatment of the shell-shocked servicemen in the Great War was appalling and shocking, but things have moved on and so much more is known about the mental effects that conflicts can have on people now.  Try as I might I struggle with a lot of what I've seen and read about Meghan and Harry's interview, and what has been obvious is the differences between the views of people in the U.S. generally sympathetic and people here, more sceptical. For instance, I just couldn't get my head around Meghan saying she hadn't realised she'd have to curtsey to the Queen! Whether you agree with that or not - Harry has lived his whole life with these behaviours and customs - are we supposed to believe he wouldn't have told her all about the pecking order, and put her straight about what to do etc.? Anyway, at the end of the day the Royal family are no different to the rest of us, allowing for wealth and privilege, most families are dysfunctional at times - we're all human, we fall out, we make up, and so do they.The Queen has always been guided by the attitudes of that previous generation - where you would never have discussed emotions - they just got on with things, that is possibly why it came as such a shock to Meghan, coming from her American background, 'two countries separated by a common language'.

Vanessa Smith ● 2057d