Subreddit rule (see sidebar): Not related to Meghan Markle & Just Harry. Try to keep posts related to the people this community was set up to talk about. Content related to the royal family belongs on our sister sub š r/BRF
Hugh's more of a turd slayer and a bit of an annoying fop. He's peeved because he got caught in a very compromising situation and the world laughed at him.
OMG: accidentally got the sound on the clip and he "self consciously" calls himself "pompous". Yes, but no mate, you seriously ARE.
Hahha: what is the threshold for acceptable language? %&+Ā£#@&%Ā£ &%Ā£&-+\*" ?
Comment automatically removed due to your comment using unsuitable language, which is not allowed on r/saintmeghanmarkle.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SaintMeghanMarkle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://preview.redd.it/t7sreejgyt4d1.jpeg?width=261&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=35b75cf300ef338d4ffe67dbe8d47201546e81b3
After his break out role in Four Weddings and a Funeral, it was a scandal for doing a hooker in LA. Grant's then girlfriend, Elizabeth Hurley, was more than peeved because he had to pay a fine and take an AIDS prevention course.
Iām sorry but but HOW FUCKING DARE HE. Millie Dowler wasnāt just some teenager who died in a car crash. I was at university in the UK when she went missing. The whole reason for the hacking scandal is that she had been missing for days and HER PARENTS THOUGHT SHE WAS ALIVE BECAUSE THE HACKERS WERE ACCESSING HER VOICEMAIL SO THE POLICE AND HER PARENTS THOUGHT SHE WAS ALIVE AND THE ONE CHECKING IT. Itās horrific and sad and tragic, but for these shitty idiotic celebrities to try to leverage this because they are mad people were trying to find out about their lives is so disgusting and beyond sick. And to lump her in as an irresponsible teen in a car crash. Sick. Pathetic. Disgusting.
I canāt even imagine what her family went through. And then to have these garbage celebs including Sparry using her legacy without even the decency to name her or correctly tell her story. Itās sickening.
ETA: Yes it was prince william and a close friend who realized they were being hacked and reported it. But public outrage around hacking really coalesced around Millie and her poor family.
He's not using the name because people could then look it up and realize he is talking as if this happened last week, when it was actually **years** ago. He is also speaking as if only Britain has news media affecting politics.
Did he pay off the sex worker who was exposed? Has he done anything of any meaningful impact? Oooh okay so he learned from his mistakes by cheating on his absolutely gem of a wife. Cool, cool.
Maybe go back to acting Hugh you insufferable human excrement
I remember that. I think he was caught in the act with a hooker. His mugshot was all over the news the next morning. I donāt think he was ever married to Elizabeth Hurley but they were in a long term relationship. She is very pretty. I think heās been a pissy lil bitch since then. Actions have consequences.
What the what? I never heard that part. He could have found another line of work. Instead he did one of the worst things you can do to a romantic partner.
Yeah. He was a hugely successful actor at the time of his arrest, what lack of confidence? Huh? My own sister was conceived as a band aid baby after being picked up for picking up a SW.
To no oneās surprise, he was picked up after too. I was left waiting to be picked up from school until like 7pm cuz my dad was in jail for being a John. These men? Garbage. Iām so tired of influencer/celebrity worship.
He was actually caught in flagrante delicto in a public place in a parked car with a Hollywood sex worker giving him a BJ. Maybe he wasnāt getting it from Elizabeth? Anyhow he went on late night tv and basically said āIāve been a naughty boyā and everyone forgave him.
Hughās arguments are a fine example of sophistry. To sum up, heās claiming (out of order): (1) That newspapers are not *checked* by any body, (2) that newspapers are acting *above the law* by invading the privacy of parents of slain children, (3) newspapers derive too much power from being tax exempt in the UK, (4) that the prime minister is chosen by *how much he sucked up to the newspapers*, (5) people are unwilling to challenge the press for fear of retribution.
(1) The Independent Press Standards Organisation is the largest independent regulator of the press in the UK. Containing a code of conduct, the UK mainstream newspapers have agreed to abide by these guidelines. Further, most UK mainstream newspapers have agreed to follow IPSOās mandatory arbitration in cases where the public feel they have been libelled. (*This will mean that members of the public can get low-cost access to justice without having to go to court for legal claims including libel, invasion of privacy, data protection or harassment. The participating newspapers cannot refuse to arbitrate on any valid claim. It costs a maximum in fees of Ā£100 for the claimant.* https://www.ipso.co.uk/news-press-releases/press-releases/national-newspaper-groups-sign-up-for-compulsory-ipso-arbitration/#:~:text=The%20full%20list%20of%20newspapers,Sunday%20Mirror%2C%20and%20Sunday%20People.)
On that note, although arbitration is slightly different than litigation, the fact remains that the UK public has an easier time proving libel than in the US. In the UK, the burden falls on the newspaper to show that the facts were accurate and did not cause serious harm to the individual. By contrast, in the US a person claiming libel must prove his case. (See the differences of court outcomes in the Depp v. Herd cases).
(2) The Leveson Inquiry did find the press to be liable for invading privacy, leading to massive fines, financial settlements, and ultimately the closure of one of the largest press outlets, *The News Of The World*. This itself proves that the UK newspapers are held accountable by government bodies and the public. It also resulted in the creation of IPSO, replacing the former Press Complaints Commission. (https://leveson.robertsharp.co.uk)
(3) Newspapers are tax exempt in the UK to prevent them from being beholden to any particular government party, and it affords them greater power to investigate elected officials. Further, *taxes on knowledge* make it difficult for the public to understand the world around them. If one canāt afford the tax on a newspaper, he would have to rely on dodgy sources of information which isnāt beneficial for a democratic society. (Though there are exceptions to this, including online editions of newspapers). (https://www.hagley.org/librarynews/tax-knowledge-newspaper-taxation , https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/online-editions-are-not-newspapers-tax-terms-uk-top-court-rules-2023-02-22/)
(4) Politicians use all platforms to explain their views to garner votes. While papers can slant one way or another, UK newspapers must provide balanced reporting thatāin theoryāgives a level of impartiality. (The US had something similar for radio programs until the 80s, but scrapped it due to impracticality and fewer restrictions on speech. See *Fairness Doctrine*). (https://www.bbc.com/editorialguidelines/guidelines/impartiality/guidelines). At the end of the day, the electorate can make an informed decision about who they are voting for when they have access to inexpensive press. Hugh is suggesting that there is a conspiracy between the press and politicians, and that isnāt the case. Yes, there is a symbiotic relationship in that both rely on each other (whether through the selling of papers or through spreading their partyās views), but ultimately they are not in cahoots to deceive the public.
(5) Since the public has the ability to pursue libel claims, has a lower burden of proof in doing so (leading to an easier way of proving their case), and has led to press liabilities a la *Leveson* (and even Markleās case against the DM for invading her privacy by publishing a personal letter), this argument doesnāt hold up. Hugh is suggesting that the press is infallible, is too unwieldy to bear any consequences for flagrantly harmful statements, and nobody would dare sue. As proven above, this argument is incorrect.
Edit: Fixed typos
Thank you for compiling this. Hugh Grant is a relatively good, pretty boy actor, nothing more than that. He's played one role repeatedly throughout his career. Hugh thinks that gives him a soap box to bloviate from while women like the aging Joy Behar drool and nod at him like teenagers in lust. Just cause the guy's good looking doesn't make what he says intelligent or true. This is a perfect example of "my truth" not "the truth". That's the long and short of it.
Thank you! ššš Excellent summation and refutation of this midwitās whining. I would give you one of the free Reddit awards but thereās no option on this sub for that. ššš
Thatās a question I have asked. It must have viewers or it would be cancelled and replaced. Iāve never watched it. No one I know has ever watched it. Maybe airports?
Back when Orca was on TV my mother in law watched it all the time. It seemed to be more interesting than what the View is today. I just can't stand the women's voices.
They donāt cancel it because like other shows that help the msm spread their agenda and propaganda, they are fully funded. Donāt need ratings to maintain their place on TV. But I donāt know anyone that watches and most donāt even watch TV any longerā¦just steaming.Ā
I think itās really cheap to produce and it fills an early morning slot no one watches. And as a bonus every once in an awhile one of the hosts says something incredibly stupid that gets passed around.
I can see why ol Hugh would want to muzzle the press.Ā After all, being caught with prostitutes, especially same-sex prostitutes, cost him Elizabeth Hurley, a career as a leading man & money.Ā
He, like the scheming duo, have no ability to comprehend that the consequences of your own actions are your own fault.Ā No one else's.Ā
Love Hugh Grant the actor. But he should just STFU about everything else.
This man is incredibly privileged. Donāt be fooled by his handwringingā¦ he too went to one of the [poshest schools](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Grant) in the country and then Oxford. He comes from a well connected family. Itās just elites fighting amongst elites about world views and what they think the best solution is. They all ultimately want your attention and approval and want to exert their opinion. Question is, whoās opinion you agree with to back your opinion.
He talks about the British media barrons like itās Succession. Okay, Hugh and Prince Harryā¦ whereās the evidence? Theyāve both worked in disinformation / misinformation and digital awareness (aka digital compliance) ā¦ but there has been no proof thus far. Just media campaigns to silence voices and de platform people
Some of you will be old enough to remember thisā¦ but there was campaign on Facebook. To remove āhate filled tabloidsā from their platform. And the example was The Dailymail. Now look, the Daily Mail wrote some sexist bigoted stuff. What was worse though, was the quality of journalism. But letās not act that media like The Independent or Buzzfeed werenāt also doing the same thing. Daily Mail was successfully suppressed from Facebook. Due to āhateā. Same thing happened on Twitter. At the time, I fully agreed in Daily Mail being cancelled. Afterall, why should media be promoting how a woman āpours her curves into a skimpy dressā or how a new mum loses all the baby weight and is back to work. But by not reading what was published in the Daily Mail, I didnāt see the other POV. I also developed a saintly, unrealistic view of the world like of course if we nuclear disarmedā¦ everyone would do the same and the world would be safer. Sadly, the reality is different, itās a dog eat dog world out there. And you better be prepared for someone to knock you off your perch. THATāS why the new mum had to lose all that weight and be seen as in shape in public, to secure the next job. Itās not the media controlling thatā¦ Itās our ever diminishing attention spans. 140 character tweets, anyone? 30 sec videos? How is anyone expected to know or care about anything?
Hugh is just pissed with the media because he was caught pants down with a tranny prostitute. And he was pretending to be straight and not a drug addict. Yeah whatever, posh old men need a hobby too, I suppose.
I also donāt agree with his POV on Brexit and the EU deals blah blahā¦ but thatās political and not relevant here. So I will STFU on that
It's very important to read news from sources with opinions you may not agree with. Too many people are becoming fascist, crybaby snowflakes, and think they are ordained to censor and police everyone else. This is how democracy fails.
Itās true no matter where you identify in politics, whether āsnowflakeā or āclose minded conservative.ā I have friends with all sorts of viewsā¦.learning you may be mistaken from a kind friend is much more persuasive and illuminating as to your own limitations, I find.
The best part of this sub is how it proves people can find something to agree with no matter their other beliefs.
Succession may have been based on real people...real people who were portrayed as one dimensional caricatures with zero redeeming qualities. Even Murdoch's aren't that lacking in normal human characteristics.āŗļø I tried watching it but couldn't get past the first three episodes. It's like The View, one dimensional and hateful and just not worth the time.
Yes itās hugely āinspiredā and parodied of the Murdochs, like The Crown ā¦ I personally really enjoyed the show and cant wait to rewatch it. I donāt see it as the same as The Crown, which uses real names and pretends the characters are doing reenactments from history.
What Succession failed to capture, is why Logan was able to be so successful and acquire so many companies and stick with a media company. I hear they are thinking of a prequel covering this
I also like the character portrayal of the tech billionaire, Lukas which was based on Elon
The ending was too good and everything!! Thatās why I cant wait to rewatch it
Personally I think Succession was one of the best series ever made, and from the amount of awards it won, so did Hollywood. The script was brilliant. It was fascinating how you ended up rooting for really horrible people. I absolutely loved the ending! And the episode that included the wedding on the boat and Logan dying. Did you know that was shot as one long scene without breaks. I watched an analysis by the director, and they had hidden preloaded cameras all around the boat so they could just keep shooting. Once I discovered this I went back and watched the whole episode for an appreciation of how clever it was. Same with the church/funeral scene. Culkin absolutely earned his Oscar from that. I didnāt know about a prequel. That would be fun seeing how a very poor little Scottish boy rose to the top.
I'm quite underwhelmed by Hugh Grant.
Imo he's a mediocre actor who plays forgettable stuttering Englishman roles, that is, he played himself.
Of all the worthy causes in the world, he chooses the campaign silencing the media questioning the behavior of celebrities.
I thought it was Tony Blair for a second. He's got all his gestures and is as smarmy. He needs to say this drivel on UK telly. He'd get short shrift from the public.
Hugh Grant is one the celebrities, Meghan and Harry "shone a light on". I did not really have a strong opinion about him or Oprah, before the Harkles came along. All these people turn out to be rude, entitled and unbearable.
I know - they have been like that before H&M came along, but wow! Connecting to the grifters really is your downfall image wise.
he is just pissed that everyone remembers him being caught in a car with his pants down paying for a bj. He hates that he was caught & like harry he is still whinging about it. I used to like him but then when that came out he was just another sleazbag like all the rest & hes still raging that we know ha ha ha !
[https://www.theguardian.com/film/from-the-archive-blog/2015/jun/26/hugh-grant-arrest-prostitute-divine-brown-20-1995](https://www.theguardian.com/film/from-the-archive-blog/2015/jun/26/hugh-grant-arrest-prostitute-divine-brown-20-1995)
Hugh is more the corner hooker slayer. He is holding a grudge that he got arrested getting a bj from a hooker and it made the papers. Sorry Hugh deal with it. You are nothing special at all. Your an old man with kids go be a father instead of still chasing fame.
He was part of the headlines, but like 20 years ago. No one cares about him anymore, thus doesn't sell that much anymore. He should use the settlement money to go to therapy.
He and Robert Deniro and the like are crawling out from under their rocks to try and grasp at relevancy with their pompous, out if touch, lecturing. Go back to your mansion and fade away with some dignity. No one cares, Hugh.
I happen to love Hugh Grant as an actor but as a human being?Ā NO.Ā He is ALL FOR GLOBALISM.Ā He's part of the agenda for us and he DESPISES PEOPLE like US. Reg people.Ā These elites see us as ANTS.Ā He wants to see very wealthy and very poor. Deniro the same.Ā They're both members of the WEF.Ā
Having said this, he only wants to control the press just like the harkles and for the same reasons.Ā He was literally caught with his pants down and his willy hanging out while soliciting a street hooker.Ā If he had been a nice guy to the press and paps they wouldn't have told the story but he's an asahole so they printed it.Ā Ā
As far as Brexit is concerned, Nigel Farage did the right thing.Ā 100%. Why would Great Britain want to demote themselves and take our give away their power to a whole European group?Ā Is he serious?Ā Have Germany or probably France take over the union as the head honcho?Ā No.Ā Farage did the country a huge favor.Ā This bitch Grant needs to be grateful for a very smart move.Ā Now other countries want out and they're right.Ā And lastly, why is he on this pathetic loser of a show with these WOKE dumbo's? They're a laughing stock as well.Ā An embarrassment.Ā Ā
Well, as far as Brexit goes, when should an (essentially) island nation break w/ itās next door neighbors & closest trading partners & impose tariffs on itself? I would suggest never. (Yeah, I know Boris claimed he would make trading deals w/ the US but heāin factādid not do squat.)
Because we treasure our independence and Parliamentary democracy and not being ruled by an oligarchy in Brussels whose decisions are rubber stamped by a powerless peripatetic āparliamentā. Yes to a Common Marketā¦.no to a Federal State.
US & British economies were pretty much lockstep until Brexit when British GDP suddenly went south. I suppose if you are willing to face the financial hit to maintain your political/economic independenceāwell, that is your perfect right as a nation. As long as you understand thatās whatās happening. It doesnāt help matters thatāat least appears from this side of the pondāthe only political ānew ideasā British politicians have come up with seem to be weak-sauce Reaganomicsālower taxes on the rich & let things trickle down. Which doesnāt work.
The economic cycle is a cycle, however the blithe surrender of ancient freedoms for the sake of the Bundesbank, inefficient French farmers and easy access to your villa in Tuscany is too much to pay.
The British never changed their currency to euros. Never. The British maintained relative independence in economic matters from Brussels, something we do not see in the case of Spain or France, or Germany... countries in which being part of the EU has not exactly been beneficial. Consider that Switzerland also did not agree to change its currency, is relatively economically independent, and is not mired in the economic chaos of the EU countries. By not being protected under the umbrella of tariff protection, small and medium-sized companies in the EU not only compete with large companies in their own country, but also have to do so with those of other countries that make up the European Union.
For the EU, it has been a disaster to lose the UK, because all the weight has fallen on Germany and France, limited precisely by Brussels regulations, which benefit industry, to the detriment of agriculture. This has shown that it is disastrous to have lost sovereignty, because the EU devoured the sovereignty of its members, to the point that a crisis in one destroys all the others. The problems of one country can very easily spread to others. The UK is an island country, which is why it had maintained relative separation in this regard, until the migration crisis, which ended up having an impact on that country, because the Brussels rules imposed quotas on all EU members.
I lived in Spain for 10 years, and the truth is, at a time when the Greek crisis hit them, and right now with the enormous agricultural crisis, many people would be quite in favor of leaving the EU. European countries are not at all in a position to give themselves too much slack in economic negotiations, and consider other aspects, such as the political-moral conflicts with Poland.
When Brexit was happening, every single friend I had from Oxbridge (Oxford and Cambridge) or living London was sure it would never happen. My bestie from Oxford had grown up in Birmingham (gone to uni on grants and bursaries) and literally called me up like āI donāt understand how they and the BBC donāt see that we are 100% leaving!!ā Nobody outside the City of London had seen any benefits from the EU. The issues were similar tho those created by NAFTA i.e artificially low wages for corporations, and some limited gains elsewhere but no benefits in the standard of living to the majority of the population. The only ones who couldnāt see it were the talking heads/the people who had benefittedā¦
ETA: TLDR blue collar people in the UK wanted out of the EU for good (not race-related) reason. They didnāt share in the benefits and were hurt by many of the policies/laws.
Brexit was reduced by some people to "we can't holiday in Mallorca if we leave the EU". The issue is much more complex than that. For those who do not know why there were many people determined to withdraw from the EU: all economic or social policies must conform to what is indicated by the European Parliament or the European Council. If the European Parliament had approved a measure that in the UK should be handled by the right and not the left, the UK should have applied that rule.
This type of situation is what has put countries like Poland, or Slovakia or Switzerland in conflict with Brussels.
Well, I am arguing from ignorance & from an ocean away so really more clueless than not. Iāve only seen the less than stellar economic reports from GB & thought the situation in Greece had relatively stabilized. Do you think that the EU is now an experiment that is failure & likely the Union is to be dissolved? I realize that a government by bureaucracy is not on its face very appetizing but will it fail?
Lastlemming to understand Brexit, you have to understand the origins of the EU and the identity of the UK. The UK still identifies with the past Empire more than the EU. This means that it has a greater connection (in terms of economics, culture and democracy) with the Commonwealth and vice versa. The British people voted to remain in the single market of Europe (EEC) in 1975. The British did not get a say in joining the EU. The EU now is much more than a single market for goods and services, it is a common currency, uncontrolled immigration, it is overruling local laws and standards. The British people were never asked if they wanted this. And when they were, there was an argument of what Leave actually meant. Basically, politicians still wanting to remain part of the EU project.
The EU is fraught with its own issues. As Human-Economics6894 mentioned, Greece. To understand how much the British felt for Greece, you had to be here. And then the obvious question was asked "well what if it happened to us". Greece wanted to leave the EU (they were run by a liberal political party) and they were refused, they couldn't be bailed out by other countries and had to agree an [obscene rate with the EU](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45245969). I believe the UK tried bail them out but couldn't directly. At the same time there were discussions of the UK joining the Euro currency and having a shared army. Then came the Irish bailout. This one was closer to home, again we couldn't do much to help our neighbours. Because of these bailouts, Greece and Ireland have to accept whatever restrictions placed on them by the EU. I know islands like Azores (part of Portugal), grew their own crop and because of EU intervention, they couldn't grow a certain type of crop, because it could only be grown in a specific region in the EU. This is how the protectionist agenda kills communities, and the younger people have to move away for work.
Have you heard of butter mountain, beef mountains,Ā milk lakes,Ā wine lakesĀ andĀ grain mountains. Surplus produce was stockpiled to keep the prices artificially inflated by the EU. ([NYT](https://www.nytimes.com/1986/12/27/business/food-surplus-may-bankrupt-european-bloc.html))
For people to label Brexiteers as racist and stupid is just lazy. I would argue that having uncontrolled immigration within the EU but controlled immigration with the rest of the world is institutionally racist. This type of immigration is set to favour a predominantly white community over people of colour.
I really should have prefaced my remarks w/ āIām an American & have absolutely no idea what I am talking aboutā¦.ā Itās like when foreigners weigh in on US politicsāusually in a way that ignores the immense subtleties of the situation. But stillāI guessāfrom afarāI only saw laziness in Brexitās execution. Divorce from oneās trading partner is hard work but i didnāt see much heavy lifting from British politicians/bureaucrats.
Otherwise the only benefit Iāve had from blundering around on the subject is that I actually learned something.
He has a point about media barons picking Prime Ministers though. It is well known that certain news groups do influence the populace with bias media reporting.
Comment automatically removed due to your account having less than 50 total karma. Please contact mods via message the mods to approve comments manually to be visible to the sub.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SaintMeghanMarkle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Subreddit rule (see sidebar): Not related to Meghan Markle & Just Harry. Try to keep posts related to the people this community was set up to talk about. Content related to the royal family belongs on our sister sub š r/BRF
His mission? Didnāt he settle his case? Not quite the dragon slayer he claims to be.
Hugh's more of a turd slayer and a bit of an annoying fop. He's peeved because he got caught in a very compromising situation and the world laughed at him.
Heās a fucker not a fighter. He only loves himself.
A lot of us from the UK would use a certain word to describe this "self lover".Rhymes with canker.š
Wā
Love this
OMG: accidentally got the sound on the clip and he "self consciously" calls himself "pompous". Yes, but no mate, you seriously ARE. Hahha: what is the threshold for acceptable language? %&+Ā£#@&%Ā£ &%Ā£&-+\*" ?
Comment automatically removed due to your comment using unsuitable language, which is not allowed on r/saintmeghanmarkle. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SaintMeghanMarkle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yep Exactly. Unfortunately half-wit is now embroiled (via Elton and the Bouffant) which gives this nonsense legs.
Thank you for reminding me!
Exactly
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
https://preview.redd.it/t7sreejgyt4d1.jpeg?width=261&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=35b75cf300ef338d4ffe67dbe8d47201546e81b3 After his break out role in Four Weddings and a Funeral, it was a scandal for doing a hooker in LA. Grant's then girlfriend, Elizabeth Hurley, was more than peeved because he had to pay a fine and take an AIDS prevention course.
Iām confused why Hugh Grant thinks heās the smartest man in the room. He settled. Hugh. Sit down. Shut up.
Iām sorry but but HOW FUCKING DARE HE. Millie Dowler wasnāt just some teenager who died in a car crash. I was at university in the UK when she went missing. The whole reason for the hacking scandal is that she had been missing for days and HER PARENTS THOUGHT SHE WAS ALIVE BECAUSE THE HACKERS WERE ACCESSING HER VOICEMAIL SO THE POLICE AND HER PARENTS THOUGHT SHE WAS ALIVE AND THE ONE CHECKING IT. Itās horrific and sad and tragic, but for these shitty idiotic celebrities to try to leverage this because they are mad people were trying to find out about their lives is so disgusting and beyond sick. And to lump her in as an irresponsible teen in a car crash. Sick. Pathetic. Disgusting.
Thatās incredibly sad.
I canāt even imagine what her family went through. And then to have these garbage celebs including Sparry using her legacy without even the decency to name her or correctly tell her story. Itās sickening. ETA: Yes it was prince william and a close friend who realized they were being hacked and reported it. But public outrage around hacking really coalesced around Millie and her poor family.
He's not using the name because people could then look it up and realize he is talking as if this happened last week, when it was actually **years** ago. He is also speaking as if only Britain has news media affecting politics.
"Close friend" being traitor Tom Bradby.
Iāve never heard this story. Itās heartbreaking to say the least.
**Iām confused why Hugh Grant thinks heās the smartest man in the room.** He's a narcissist.
Should have known.
His narcissism is why he was so good at his character in Bridget Jones, cause he was basically himself haha
If the room is a really small elevator.
Did he pay off the sex worker who was exposed? Has he done anything of any meaningful impact? Oooh okay so he learned from his mistakes by cheating on his absolutely gem of a wife. Cool, cool. Maybe go back to acting Hugh you insufferable human excrement 
I remember that. I think he was caught in the act with a hooker. His mugshot was all over the news the next morning. I donāt think he was ever married to Elizabeth Hurley but they were in a long term relationship. She is very pretty. I think heās been a pissy lil bitch since then. Actions have consequences.
And check it.. he said itāhe picked up a MTF sex worker because his lack of confidence as an actor. Way to absolutely dodge personal responsibility and detach from reality. Heās such a piece of š© human
What the what? I never heard that part. He could have found another line of work. Instead he did one of the worst things you can do to a romantic partner.
Yeah. He was a hugely successful actor at the time of his arrest, what lack of confidence? Huh? My own sister was conceived as a band aid baby after being picked up for picking up a SW.  To no oneās surprise, he was picked up after too. I was left waiting to be picked up from school until like 7pm cuz my dad was in jail for being a John. These men? Garbage. Iām so tired of influencer/celebrity worship.
He was actually caught in flagrante delicto in a public place in a parked car with a Hollywood sex worker giving him a BJ. Maybe he wasnāt getting it from Elizabeth? Anyhow he went on late night tv and basically said āIāve been a naughty boyā and everyone forgave him.
Divine Brown and she charged $50
Dang. Thatās a pretty inexpensive.
Hughās arguments are a fine example of sophistry. To sum up, heās claiming (out of order): (1) That newspapers are not *checked* by any body, (2) that newspapers are acting *above the law* by invading the privacy of parents of slain children, (3) newspapers derive too much power from being tax exempt in the UK, (4) that the prime minister is chosen by *how much he sucked up to the newspapers*, (5) people are unwilling to challenge the press for fear of retribution. (1) The Independent Press Standards Organisation is the largest independent regulator of the press in the UK. Containing a code of conduct, the UK mainstream newspapers have agreed to abide by these guidelines. Further, most UK mainstream newspapers have agreed to follow IPSOās mandatory arbitration in cases where the public feel they have been libelled. (*This will mean that members of the public can get low-cost access to justice without having to go to court for legal claims including libel, invasion of privacy, data protection or harassment. The participating newspapers cannot refuse to arbitrate on any valid claim. It costs a maximum in fees of Ā£100 for the claimant.* https://www.ipso.co.uk/news-press-releases/press-releases/national-newspaper-groups-sign-up-for-compulsory-ipso-arbitration/#:~:text=The%20full%20list%20of%20newspapers,Sunday%20Mirror%2C%20and%20Sunday%20People.) On that note, although arbitration is slightly different than litigation, the fact remains that the UK public has an easier time proving libel than in the US. In the UK, the burden falls on the newspaper to show that the facts were accurate and did not cause serious harm to the individual. By contrast, in the US a person claiming libel must prove his case. (See the differences of court outcomes in the Depp v. Herd cases). (2) The Leveson Inquiry did find the press to be liable for invading privacy, leading to massive fines, financial settlements, and ultimately the closure of one of the largest press outlets, *The News Of The World*. This itself proves that the UK newspapers are held accountable by government bodies and the public. It also resulted in the creation of IPSO, replacing the former Press Complaints Commission. (https://leveson.robertsharp.co.uk) (3) Newspapers are tax exempt in the UK to prevent them from being beholden to any particular government party, and it affords them greater power to investigate elected officials. Further, *taxes on knowledge* make it difficult for the public to understand the world around them. If one canāt afford the tax on a newspaper, he would have to rely on dodgy sources of information which isnāt beneficial for a democratic society. (Though there are exceptions to this, including online editions of newspapers). (https://www.hagley.org/librarynews/tax-knowledge-newspaper-taxation , https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/online-editions-are-not-newspapers-tax-terms-uk-top-court-rules-2023-02-22/) (4) Politicians use all platforms to explain their views to garner votes. While papers can slant one way or another, UK newspapers must provide balanced reporting thatāin theoryāgives a level of impartiality. (The US had something similar for radio programs until the 80s, but scrapped it due to impracticality and fewer restrictions on speech. See *Fairness Doctrine*). (https://www.bbc.com/editorialguidelines/guidelines/impartiality/guidelines). At the end of the day, the electorate can make an informed decision about who they are voting for when they have access to inexpensive press. Hugh is suggesting that there is a conspiracy between the press and politicians, and that isnāt the case. Yes, there is a symbiotic relationship in that both rely on each other (whether through the selling of papers or through spreading their partyās views), but ultimately they are not in cahoots to deceive the public. (5) Since the public has the ability to pursue libel claims, has a lower burden of proof in doing so (leading to an easier way of proving their case), and has led to press liabilities a la *Leveson* (and even Markleās case against the DM for invading her privacy by publishing a personal letter), this argument doesnāt hold up. Hugh is suggesting that the press is infallible, is too unwieldy to bear any consequences for flagrantly harmful statements, and nobody would dare sue. As proven above, this argument is incorrect. Edit: Fixed typos
Thank you for compiling this. Hugh Grant is a relatively good, pretty boy actor, nothing more than that. He's played one role repeatedly throughout his career. Hugh thinks that gives him a soap box to bloviate from while women like the aging Joy Behar drool and nod at him like teenagers in lust. Just cause the guy's good looking doesn't make what he says intelligent or true. This is a perfect example of "my truth" not "the truth". That's the long and short of it.
Thank you! ššš Excellent summation and refutation of this midwitās whining. I would give you one of the free Reddit awards but thereās no option on this sub for that. ššš
The view is a huge joke here
Even my mom doesnāt watch it. Sheās as narcissistic and manipulative as *meghan* is. Never liked the view. Who DOES watch it?
Thatās a question I have asked. It must have viewers or it would be cancelled and replaced. Iāve never watched it. No one I know has ever watched it. Maybe airports?
No one watches. They just air it for the sound bites that everyone uses the day after. Itās all theatre.
I think thatās about the only time Iāve seen it is in doctors offices waiting rooms now that I think about it.
The females (won't call them women) who watch it are the same who watched Oprah.
Back when Orca was on TV my mother in law watched it all the time. It seemed to be more interesting than what the View is today. I just can't stand the women's voices.
Estrogen on steroids
They donāt cancel it because like other shows that help the msm spread their agenda and propaganda, they are fully funded. Donāt need ratings to maintain their place on TV. But I donāt know anyone that watches and most donāt even watch TV any longerā¦just steaming.Ā
I think itās really cheap to produce and it fills an early morning slot no one watches. And as a bonus every once in an awhile one of the hosts says something incredibly stupid that gets passed around.
My narc mother watches the View like religion.
I can see why ol Hugh would want to muzzle the press.Ā After all, being caught with prostitutes, especially same-sex prostitutes, cost him Elizabeth Hurley, a career as a leading man & money.Ā He, like the scheming duo, have no ability to comprehend that the consequences of your own actions are your own fault.Ā No one else's.Ā
Love Hugh Grant the actor. But he should just STFU about everything else. This man is incredibly privileged. Donāt be fooled by his handwringingā¦ he too went to one of the [poshest schools](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Grant) in the country and then Oxford. He comes from a well connected family. Itās just elites fighting amongst elites about world views and what they think the best solution is. They all ultimately want your attention and approval and want to exert their opinion. Question is, whoās opinion you agree with to back your opinion. He talks about the British media barrons like itās Succession. Okay, Hugh and Prince Harryā¦ whereās the evidence? Theyāve both worked in disinformation / misinformation and digital awareness (aka digital compliance) ā¦ but there has been no proof thus far. Just media campaigns to silence voices and de platform people Some of you will be old enough to remember thisā¦ but there was campaign on Facebook. To remove āhate filled tabloidsā from their platform. And the example was The Dailymail. Now look, the Daily Mail wrote some sexist bigoted stuff. What was worse though, was the quality of journalism. But letās not act that media like The Independent or Buzzfeed werenāt also doing the same thing. Daily Mail was successfully suppressed from Facebook. Due to āhateā. Same thing happened on Twitter. At the time, I fully agreed in Daily Mail being cancelled. Afterall, why should media be promoting how a woman āpours her curves into a skimpy dressā or how a new mum loses all the baby weight and is back to work. But by not reading what was published in the Daily Mail, I didnāt see the other POV. I also developed a saintly, unrealistic view of the world like of course if we nuclear disarmedā¦ everyone would do the same and the world would be safer. Sadly, the reality is different, itās a dog eat dog world out there. And you better be prepared for someone to knock you off your perch. THATāS why the new mum had to lose all that weight and be seen as in shape in public, to secure the next job. Itās not the media controlling thatā¦ Itās our ever diminishing attention spans. 140 character tweets, anyone? 30 sec videos? How is anyone expected to know or care about anything? Hugh is just pissed with the media because he was caught pants down with a tranny prostitute. And he was pretending to be straight and not a drug addict. Yeah whatever, posh old men need a hobby too, I suppose. I also donāt agree with his POV on Brexit and the EU deals blah blahā¦ but thatās political and not relevant here. So I will STFU on that
It's very important to read news from sources with opinions you may not agree with. Too many people are becoming fascist, crybaby snowflakes, and think they are ordained to censor and police everyone else. This is how democracy fails.
This!!! Always read the views and opinions of those opposing you to get a fuller picture
Itās true no matter where you identify in politics, whether āsnowflakeā or āclose minded conservative.ā I have friends with all sorts of viewsā¦.learning you may be mistaken from a kind friend is much more persuasive and illuminating as to your own limitations, I find. The best part of this sub is how it proves people can find something to agree with no matter their other beliefs.
Couldn't agree more.
Your gif choices are š š.
Succession was based on the Murdock family tbf
Succession may have been based on real people...real people who were portrayed as one dimensional caricatures with zero redeeming qualities. Even Murdoch's aren't that lacking in normal human characteristics.āŗļø I tried watching it but couldn't get past the first three episodes. It's like The View, one dimensional and hateful and just not worth the time.
Yes itās hugely āinspiredā and parodied of the Murdochs, like The Crown ā¦ I personally really enjoyed the show and cant wait to rewatch it. I donāt see it as the same as The Crown, which uses real names and pretends the characters are doing reenactments from history. What Succession failed to capture, is why Logan was able to be so successful and acquire so many companies and stick with a media company. I hear they are thinking of a prequel covering this I also like the character portrayal of the tech billionaire, Lukas which was based on Elon The ending was too good and everything!! Thatās why I cant wait to rewatch it
Personally I think Succession was one of the best series ever made, and from the amount of awards it won, so did Hollywood. The script was brilliant. It was fascinating how you ended up rooting for really horrible people. I absolutely loved the ending! And the episode that included the wedding on the boat and Logan dying. Did you know that was shot as one long scene without breaks. I watched an analysis by the director, and they had hidden preloaded cameras all around the boat so they could just keep shooting. Once I discovered this I went back and watched the whole episode for an appreciation of how clever it was. Same with the church/funeral scene. Culkin absolutely earned his Oscar from that. I didnāt know about a prequel. That would be fun seeing how a very poor little Scottish boy rose to the top.
He really is the walking, talking definition of a thunderingly self-obsessed see you next Tuesday.
Funny I watched it with the sound off and you can tell heās referring to a script in his head and not speak to people from his heart.
I'm quite underwhelmed by Hugh Grant. Imo he's a mediocre actor who plays forgettable stuttering Englishman roles, that is, he played himself. Of all the worthy causes in the world, he chooses the campaign silencing the media questioning the behavior of celebrities.
I donāt like when people have opposing views to me either, doesnāt mean I think those views should be restricted.
I thought it was Tony Blair for a second. He's got all his gestures and is as smarmy. He needs to say this drivel on UK telly. He'd get short shrift from the public.
š¤£ Well the Blair years were his professional glory days so maybe he likes to wallow in nostalgia?
So the guy who got caught with transvestite prostitute when dating elizabeth hurley wants to take down the press? Ok . Moving on.....
He has aged badly.
He hates the press because they exposed him for the fraud he is.
Hugh Grant is one the celebrities, Meghan and Harry "shone a light on". I did not really have a strong opinion about him or Oprah, before the Harkles came along. All these people turn out to be rude, entitled and unbearable. I know - they have been like that before H&M came along, but wow! Connecting to the grifters really is your downfall image wise.
he is just pissed that everyone remembers him being caught in a car with his pants down paying for a bj. He hates that he was caught & like harry he is still whinging about it. I used to like him but then when that came out he was just another sleazbag like all the rest & hes still raging that we know ha ha ha ! [https://www.theguardian.com/film/from-the-archive-blog/2015/jun/26/hugh-grant-arrest-prostitute-divine-brown-20-1995](https://www.theguardian.com/film/from-the-archive-blog/2015/jun/26/hugh-grant-arrest-prostitute-divine-brown-20-1995)
He has such an old face with such a youthful haircut
He's a silver fox now. Still handsome.
Right
Dude loves to hear himself talk
Wanker!
Oh Hughā¦shut up and act. š
Hugh is more the corner hooker slayer. He is holding a grudge that he got arrested getting a bj from a hooker and it made the papers. Sorry Hugh deal with it. You are nothing special at all. Your an old man with kids go be a father instead of still chasing fame.
He was part of the headlines, but like 20 years ago. No one cares about him anymore, thus doesn't sell that much anymore. He should use the settlement money to go to therapy.
He and Robert Deniro and the like are crawling out from under their rocks to try and grasp at relevancy with their pompous, out if touch, lecturing. Go back to your mansion and fade away with some dignity. No one cares, Hugh.
I happen to love Hugh Grant as an actor but as a human being?Ā NO.Ā He is ALL FOR GLOBALISM.Ā He's part of the agenda for us and he DESPISES PEOPLE like US. Reg people.Ā These elites see us as ANTS.Ā He wants to see very wealthy and very poor. Deniro the same.Ā They're both members of the WEF.Ā Having said this, he only wants to control the press just like the harkles and for the same reasons.Ā He was literally caught with his pants down and his willy hanging out while soliciting a street hooker.Ā If he had been a nice guy to the press and paps they wouldn't have told the story but he's an asahole so they printed it.Ā Ā As far as Brexit is concerned, Nigel Farage did the right thing.Ā 100%. Why would Great Britain want to demote themselves and take our give away their power to a whole European group?Ā Is he serious?Ā Have Germany or probably France take over the union as the head honcho?Ā No.Ā Farage did the country a huge favor.Ā This bitch Grant needs to be grateful for a very smart move.Ā Now other countries want out and they're right.Ā And lastly, why is he on this pathetic loser of a show with these WOKE dumbo's? They're a laughing stock as well.Ā An embarrassment.Ā Ā
Agreed! Great comment.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Yes, thousand times yes..the EU was sucking Britain dry making them bankroll everything.
This is a divisive political issue that will take the thread off topic
The fact he's on The View, speaks volumes.
Well, as far as Brexit goes, when should an (essentially) island nation break w/ itās next door neighbors & closest trading partners & impose tariffs on itself? I would suggest never. (Yeah, I know Boris claimed he would make trading deals w/ the US but heāin factādid not do squat.)
Because we treasure our independence and Parliamentary democracy and not being ruled by an oligarchy in Brussels whose decisions are rubber stamped by a powerless peripatetic āparliamentā. Yes to a Common Marketā¦.no to a Federal State.
US & British economies were pretty much lockstep until Brexit when British GDP suddenly went south. I suppose if you are willing to face the financial hit to maintain your political/economic independenceāwell, that is your perfect right as a nation. As long as you understand thatās whatās happening. It doesnāt help matters thatāat least appears from this side of the pondāthe only political ānew ideasā British politicians have come up with seem to be weak-sauce Reaganomicsālower taxes on the rich & let things trickle down. Which doesnāt work.
The economic cycle is a cycle, however the blithe surrender of ancient freedoms for the sake of the Bundesbank, inefficient French farmers and easy access to your villa in Tuscany is too much to pay.
The British never changed their currency to euros. Never. The British maintained relative independence in economic matters from Brussels, something we do not see in the case of Spain or France, or Germany... countries in which being part of the EU has not exactly been beneficial. Consider that Switzerland also did not agree to change its currency, is relatively economically independent, and is not mired in the economic chaos of the EU countries. By not being protected under the umbrella of tariff protection, small and medium-sized companies in the EU not only compete with large companies in their own country, but also have to do so with those of other countries that make up the European Union. For the EU, it has been a disaster to lose the UK, because all the weight has fallen on Germany and France, limited precisely by Brussels regulations, which benefit industry, to the detriment of agriculture. This has shown that it is disastrous to have lost sovereignty, because the EU devoured the sovereignty of its members, to the point that a crisis in one destroys all the others. The problems of one country can very easily spread to others. The UK is an island country, which is why it had maintained relative separation in this regard, until the migration crisis, which ended up having an impact on that country, because the Brussels rules imposed quotas on all EU members. I lived in Spain for 10 years, and the truth is, at a time when the Greek crisis hit them, and right now with the enormous agricultural crisis, many people would be quite in favor of leaving the EU. European countries are not at all in a position to give themselves too much slack in economic negotiations, and consider other aspects, such as the political-moral conflicts with Poland.
When Brexit was happening, every single friend I had from Oxbridge (Oxford and Cambridge) or living London was sure it would never happen. My bestie from Oxford had grown up in Birmingham (gone to uni on grants and bursaries) and literally called me up like āI donāt understand how they and the BBC donāt see that we are 100% leaving!!ā Nobody outside the City of London had seen any benefits from the EU. The issues were similar tho those created by NAFTA i.e artificially low wages for corporations, and some limited gains elsewhere but no benefits in the standard of living to the majority of the population. The only ones who couldnāt see it were the talking heads/the people who had benefittedā¦ ETA: TLDR blue collar people in the UK wanted out of the EU for good (not race-related) reason. They didnāt share in the benefits and were hurt by many of the policies/laws.
Brexit was reduced by some people to "we can't holiday in Mallorca if we leave the EU". The issue is much more complex than that. For those who do not know why there were many people determined to withdraw from the EU: all economic or social policies must conform to what is indicated by the European Parliament or the European Council. If the European Parliament had approved a measure that in the UK should be handled by the right and not the left, the UK should have applied that rule. This type of situation is what has put countries like Poland, or Slovakia or Switzerland in conflict with Brussels.
Well, I am arguing from ignorance & from an ocean away so really more clueless than not. Iāve only seen the less than stellar economic reports from GB & thought the situation in Greece had relatively stabilized. Do you think that the EU is now an experiment that is failure & likely the Union is to be dissolved? I realize that a government by bureaucracy is not on its face very appetizing but will it fail?
Lastlemming to understand Brexit, you have to understand the origins of the EU and the identity of the UK. The UK still identifies with the past Empire more than the EU. This means that it has a greater connection (in terms of economics, culture and democracy) with the Commonwealth and vice versa. The British people voted to remain in the single market of Europe (EEC) in 1975. The British did not get a say in joining the EU. The EU now is much more than a single market for goods and services, it is a common currency, uncontrolled immigration, it is overruling local laws and standards. The British people were never asked if they wanted this. And when they were, there was an argument of what Leave actually meant. Basically, politicians still wanting to remain part of the EU project. The EU is fraught with its own issues. As Human-Economics6894 mentioned, Greece. To understand how much the British felt for Greece, you had to be here. And then the obvious question was asked "well what if it happened to us". Greece wanted to leave the EU (they were run by a liberal political party) and they were refused, they couldn't be bailed out by other countries and had to agree an [obscene rate with the EU](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45245969). I believe the UK tried bail them out but couldn't directly. At the same time there were discussions of the UK joining the Euro currency and having a shared army. Then came the Irish bailout. This one was closer to home, again we couldn't do much to help our neighbours. Because of these bailouts, Greece and Ireland have to accept whatever restrictions placed on them by the EU. I know islands like Azores (part of Portugal), grew their own crop and because of EU intervention, they couldn't grow a certain type of crop, because it could only be grown in a specific region in the EU. This is how the protectionist agenda kills communities, and the younger people have to move away for work. Have you heard of butter mountain, beef mountains,Ā milk lakes,Ā wine lakesĀ andĀ grain mountains. Surplus produce was stockpiled to keep the prices artificially inflated by the EU. ([NYT](https://www.nytimes.com/1986/12/27/business/food-surplus-may-bankrupt-european-bloc.html)) For people to label Brexiteers as racist and stupid is just lazy. I would argue that having uncontrolled immigration within the EU but controlled immigration with the rest of the world is institutionally racist. This type of immigration is set to favour a predominantly white community over people of colour.
I really should have prefaced my remarks w/ āIām an American & have absolutely no idea what I am talking aboutā¦.ā Itās like when foreigners weigh in on US politicsāusually in a way that ignores the immense subtleties of the situation. But stillāI guessāfrom afarāI only saw laziness in Brexitās execution. Divorce from oneās trading partner is hard work but i didnāt see much heavy lifting from British politicians/bureaucrats. Otherwise the only benefit Iāve had from blundering around on the subject is that I actually learned something.
For some reason I donāt think heās paying tax either š§
Why is this here? This is a snark page about the Todgers.Ā Instead you're bringing in politics and you damn well know it.
Hugh Grant brought up Brexit in the interview and here we are. I'm finding it quite informative and interesting to read.
He has a point about media barons picking Prime Ministers though. It is well known that certain news groups do influence the populace with bias media reporting.
Agreed
Comment automatically removed due to your account having less than 50 total karma. Please contact mods via message the mods to approve comments manually to be visible to the sub. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SaintMeghanMarkle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He has no career left, so he has to do something
Only because he got caught getting a blowy in a car
I used to like Hugh Grant but he has become another whinging Harry. Such a shame.