LEFT BIAS These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Left Bias sources. Factual Reporting: HIGH Notes: The Daily Beast is an American news reporting and opinion website focusing on politics and pop culture. The Daily Beast has been accused of biased reporting favoring Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election. The Daily Beast tends to sensationalize headlines, but they do typically source the info in their reports. (5/13/2016) Updated (2/24/2017) Source: http://www.thedailybeast.com/ Latest from the Daily Beast
https://www.thedailybeast.com/its-time-to-stop-the-classist-sexist-attacks-on-meghan-markle
GROW UPIt's Time To Stop The Classist, Sexist Attacks on Meghan Markle
Unable to openly attack Meghan Markle for not being posh enough, sections of the British media have found a Trojan horse for their snobbism: her alleged breaches of etiquette.
JD: Rubbish! American outlet that has no clue about UK traditions! MM shouldn’t have married in , nice try PR
TOM SYKES
07.14.18 9:05 PM ET
Two opposing and competing narratives in the British media coverage ofMeghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, are starting to emerge.
The surface narrative is, most would argue, appropriately positive: Gutsy, strong, independent woman with awesome personal style accepts potentially poison chalice of marrying into the British royal family, and does a stellar job of it.
JD: Tom went to Eton with Harry and he hates him ,so how can this be objective , he used to write for the Daily Mail, I think she has a bug up his bum
Less than two months after her wedding, Meghan has shown a remarkable work ethic, racking up a huge number of public engagements at which she appears genuinely happy.
More than this, the marriage has been a PR triumph for the hopelessly uncool Windsors as, at least partly by virtue of being an atypical royal bride – biracial, divorced, American, outspoken, successful in her own right, sure of her own mind, unwilling to be pushed around – she has helped broker the royal family, and her charming but slightly klutzy hubby, to a whole new market.
But there’s also a disturbing subtext around some coverage of Meghan, which seeks to cast her as an conniving interloper, unsuitably ambitious, an imposter, a working class usurper who doesn’t (yet) know her place. She is not, as newspaper editors sometimes wryly put it, PLU – People Like Us.
Her pretensions to subvert the sacred British class system is an impertinence that will be punished.
JD: The BRF has rolled out the red carpet for her. It’s not the palace’s fault if she won’t take direction, she is a control freak! And talk about yourself you went to Eton! The royals are uncool, what does that make Tom? BRF are tradition Tom, that’s what the peope want. Did you take in account how much money she spent? No, you didn’t. Unwilling to be pushed around, chose a different family! why does the royal family need brokering Tom? She is all those thing you mentioned, she paced back and forth until someone came out of the DM office and took her picture in 2016 with a whole foods bag. Tom you’re an idiot!
Of course, the papers can’t openly say this (out and out snobbism is only slightly less unacceptable than out and out racism), so instead some have developed a poisonous but effective strategy of latching on to very minor alleged breaches of protocol and using these to attempt to shame and embarrass Meghan, as well as bolster a negatively-charged perception of her as an outsider.
Oh please Tom, buy a clue and do some research, your editorial is biased leftist hogwash!
