Piers Morgan is an incredible journalist, but ITV were right to sack him.

I have waited for the storm to settle somewhat before commenting on the words of Piers Morgan in response to the barnstorming televised interview between Meghan Markle, Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey (which, for the purposes of reference we will call ‘the interview’). In circumstances such as these, the level of conflicting coverage and media opinion can lead to one struggling to see the wood for the trees. So, it is always advisable to allow the whirlwind to pass and retrospectively analyse events calmly, coming to a sensible conclusion in the absence of social-media furore.

I should, at this point, make my position, indeed my ‘biases’, on three points crystal clear:

1). I am, always have been and, but for some significant unforeseen event or change in circumstances, always will be a strong supporter of the British monarchy.

2). I have little to no interest in the private lives of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, mainly out of respect for their privacy.

3). Whilst I don’t find myself perpetually nodding in agreement with everything Piers Morgan says, I do believe him to be a highly competent journalist and, a man of principle.

Background

So, what did Piers Morgan actually do to deserve the boot from Good Morning Britain (GMB)? Well, I don’t believe it to be quite as cut and dry as many media outlets would have me believe.

During the course of ‘the interview’, Ms Markle had explained that she had suffered from mental illness during her time as a working Royal. She expressed that she had suicidal thoughts, that she felt trapped, alone and that this in turn had an impact on her marriage and the mental wellbeing of her significant other. Meghan Markle vividly explained a recurring situation in which her husband would arrive home of an evening following a day’s work, to find her crying whilst feeding their young baby. She also claimed that both she and Harry had attempted to get some support from the Royal family, which, according to her, fell on deaf ears.

Piers Morgan, who has been consistently critical of Meghan Markle over a sustained period of probably about two and a half years, took to the airwaves to declare that he didn’t believe her account of events, although it is noteworthy that he did not specifically limit this analysis to her comments about her mental health. In response to Meghan’s claim that she had nobody to turn to, Piers said “"Who did you go to? What did they say to you? I’m sorry, I don’t believe a word she said, Meghan Markle. I wouldn’t believe it if she read meek but if I were to sum him up in one word based on what I do know of him, I’d say ‘consistent’. Whether it is trophy hunting or vegan sausage rolls, he approaches each debate in exactly the same way: identify a position based often on perception (sometimes facts); argue the case strongly; concede where the facts don’t back up his initial position; agree to differ. Like him or loathe him, we can’t get enough of him and the swift decline of GMB’s viewing figures since his departure supports this view.

Because of this consistency, both in his approach to debate and his opinion of Meghan Markle, I wasn’t at all surprised by his remarks. In fact, many of my close friends and family who appear to be quite heavily invested in this drama seem to agree with him, they take a dim view of Meghan and find most of what she says to be implausible. Personally, I am ambivalent.

I can’t say for sure what was going through Piers’ head when he uttered the words that triggered MIND and other mental health campaigners, but it was clumsy and hugely insensitive. I happen to take the view that he probably does recognise that Meghan’s circumstances at the time of her suffering, did lend themselves to a detrimental impact on her mental wellbeing. And I suspect his disbelief is directed at her claim that despite repeated attempts to seek help, this was not forthcoming, a conclusion that does have some basis in logic.

Did he actually do anything wrong though? yes, he did. Despite my mild sympathy for Mr Morgan and what appears to be something of a hyperbolic reaction to his words, he is a public figure, a role model for many people, and he has significant reach across society. With such a profile comes responsibility, a responsibility to educate oneself about key and often sensitive societal issues and use that very profile he is privileged to have, to bring about a positive change of culture. As I have said in my previous posts, language matters and Piers’ clumsy choice of words only strengthen the mental health taboo which currently exists.

I have also mentioned in previous posts that often, the biggest barrier to people with ill mental health seeking help is the fear that they will not be believed, and so, it was incumbent on Mr Morgan as a high profile broadcaster to make clear at the outset that he didn’t disbelieve Ms Markle’s expression that she was suffering, just that he was sceptical of her claims that the Royal family were so reluctant to help. Had he have made that simple caveat; he might have avoided what followed.

Were ITV right to sack him?

Piers Morgan is, in my view, one of the greatest journalists in modern times: his work on holding the British government to account over their chaotic handling of the country’s COVID19 response; his ferocious campaigning against trophy hunting; and the way he used his platform in America during his time at CNN to give some profile to the gun-control debate, were all brilliant examples of this. Even the perceived faux pas for which he is most vilified, his publishing of apparently fake photos which showed British soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners, was vindicated by Chief of Defence Staff  and former head of the British Army General Sir Nick Carter who told Piers during a visit to Northern France several years ago that he was right to publish them.

Given I hold him in such high regard, do I believe ITV were right to sack Piers Morgan? Yes, I do. They are one of the largest and most successful broadcasting organisations in the UK and GMB has a direct line into the homes of over one million viewers each day (or it did, before Piers’ departure). If we are to bring about a change of attitude towards mental health and sufferers, major institutions such as ITV have to lead that change. Piers Morgan represented ITV and his words, whether intentional or not, were highly offensive and reflective of a culture that is restricting the ability of sufferers to seek help. He might not recognise it, but people follow his lead and assume positions based on his narrative, a narrative which in this case was exceptionally dangerous. As a responsible, high-profile British institution, ITV had no choice but to let him go.

I am in no doubt that Piers Morgan will be adorning our TV screens again very soon and I continue to admire him for his many excellent journalistic endeavours, but his recent stumble should send a strong an unassailable message to other public figures about the importance of language, and the need to create an environment where anybody who claims to be suffering from any mental ailment is believed, whatever one's general view of other aspects of the claimant's character. ITV have set a very efficacious standard for its high-profile employees, scepticism about mental health is never acceptable, whatever the situation.

I am pleased ITV have been courageous and taken seriously their responsibilities, but for the sake of effective journalism, I hope Piers Morgan will rise again.