Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
ted hughes

Royal Commentators hoaxed

Recommended Posts

ted hughes
Posted (edited)

Leading royal commentators have come under fire after they were filmed giving their views about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s performance in their eagerly awaited interview with Oprah Winfrey for an undisclosed fee, days before they had seen it.

Four commentators, including the Queen’s former press secretary Dickie Arbiter and CNN’s royal commentator Victoria Arbiter, gave interviews to a fake news company created by YouTuber pranksters Josh Pieters and Archie Manners on Friday, two days before the interview was aired. They had been told it would be shown immediately after the CBS programme was broadcast.

In the prank, the commentator and editor-in-chief of Majesty magazine, Ingrid Seward, said of the Duchess of Sussex, “to my mind this was an actress giving one of her great performances – from start to finish, Meghan was acting”, despite not having seen the interview.

Royal commentators hoaxed into critique of Meghan interview before seeing it | Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex | The Guardian

Edited by ted hughes
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
TigerBright19
Posted (edited)

I think the questions and answers were probably taken out of context to make it appear they were giving a review of the interview, when in reality they were probably just asked a bunch of hypothetical questions and they gave their response to what Meghan might say e.g.  Question to Royal commentator - If Meghan says she will refuse to take the vaccine, what would your response be to that?  A - They give their answer to that hypothetical question, and then they answer the next one, but the developer of the film edits the question to make it appear they are giving a Royal review, when that was not the case at all.  It is probably a common procedure to ask Royal and political analysts dozens of hypothetical questions before an event has happened, with the expectation that after the event has happened the editor will only choose the relevant answers that relates to the event and discard the rest.  This team of pranksters probably do not realize this procedure, and the Royal commentators very likely have little to worry about, especially if they make it clear that they were only responding to a series of hypothetical questions and giving a genuine answer to each of them.

 

 

Edited by TigerBright19
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ted hughes
21 minutes ago, TigerBright19 said:

I think the questions and answers were probably taken out of context to make it appear they were giving a review of the interview, when in reality they were probably just asked a bunch of hypothetical questions and they gave their response to what Meghan might say e.g.  Question to Royal commentator - If Meghan says she will refuse to take the vaccine, what would your response be to that?  A - They give their answer to that hypothetical question, and then they answer the next one, but the developer of the film edits the question to make it appear they are giving a Royal review, when that was not the case at all.  It is probably a common procedure to ask Royal and political analysts dozens of hypothetical questions before an event has happened, with the expectation that after the event has happened the editor will only choose the relevant answers that relates to the event and discard the rest.  This team of pranksters probably do not realize this procedure, and the Royal commentators very likely have little to worry about, especially if they make it clear that they were only responding to a series of hypothetical questions and giving a genuine answer to each of them.

 

 

I agree with you, except I believe the "pranksters" know exactly what the procedure is. Decades ago, I recall radio disc jockeys were given one-sided "interviews" with pop groups like the Beatles, where the Beatles would record answers to questions which the disc jockeys would ask (all scripted) so that it sounded as if they were in the dj's studio with him. This saved the stars making unnecessary journey around countries (this was in the US) and the djs got a "scoop" interview. Nothing is real in reality TV or radio- or very little.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats
3 hours ago, ted hughes said:

I agree with you, except I believe the "pranksters" know exactly what the procedure is. Decades ago, I recall radio disc jockeys were given one-sided "interviews" with pop groups like the Beatles, where the Beatles would record answers to questions which the disc jockeys would ask (all scripted) so that it sounded as if they were in the dj's studio with him. This saved the stars making unnecessary journey around countries (this was in the US) and the djs got a "scoop" interview. Nothing is real in reality TV or radio- or very little.

I recall that and back at the club i get in the mail a ren and stumpy promo CDs and one was just that a pseudo interview, it had ren and stimpy answering whatever questions the DJ made up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.