This has been a crazy week in which the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have opened their guns on the Royal Family and the tabloid Press – and received the congratulations of the President of the United States.
A week during which in many parts of our country it is deemed inexcusable to question any allegation uttered by Meghan because she is a person of mixed race.
But in this litany of lunacies nothing has approached the latest development. An online article by the British fashion journalist Hamish Bowles in American Vogue reaches new heights of idiocy.
Bowles writes that ‘from the beginning, the viciousness of the British Press, tabloid and otherwise, was astounding to me’. He’s entitled to his opinion, though we can certainly see where he is coming from.
A week during which in many parts of our country it is deemed inexcusable to question any allegation uttered by Meghan because she is a person of mixed race. Pictured, Meghan with Harry during their Oprah interview
It is the imputation of racism against the Daily Mail in general, and my colleague Sarah Vine in particular, which is so breathtaking. Bowles suggests that the use of the word ‘niggling’ in a headline above a piece she wrote about the Sussexes in 2017 had some sort of racist intent.
He is of course thinking of the N-word with which ‘niggling’ has some phonetic similarities though it is etymologically distinct, being of Scandinavian origin according to my Oxford English Dictionary. The word ‘niggle’ didn’t appear in her story and was used only in the headline.
Can a grown-up fashion journalist honestly believe that the sub-editor who chose the widely used, wholly innocent and attractive word ‘niggle’ had racist intentions? It beggars belief.
An online article by the British fashion journalist Hamish Bowles (pictured) in American Vogue reaches new heights of idiocy
Maybe Americans don’t employ the word much – but that is no excuse since Bowles is British, as is his 71-year-old editor, Anna Wintour. I assume she read this piece before it was published. Has she also taken leave of her senses?
Or do they know very well that ‘niggle’ has nothing whatsoever to do with the N-word? Are they cynically jumping on an anti-Press bandwagon steered by Meghan and Harry?
They are reasonable questions because there have been so many falsehoods over the past few days. Several of the ‘screen grabs’ of newspaper and website front pages used during the Oprah Winfrey interview were doctored to imply a racist motivation where none existed.
The ‘niggle’ headline was one of them. The word was blacked out – which of course suggests to the casual viewer (who doesn’t expect what is presented as evidence to be manipulated) that the Mail had used some dreadful phrase.
Will Nigella Lawson be required by Bowles and Wintour and the new cultural gauleiters to change her name? Must the Niger River be called something else? Should the people of Nigeria hang their heads in shame and demand that their country be re-christened?
I don’t mind what Bowles thinks of the British Press. As I say, he is entitled to his view. But I do mind very much when reason is suspended and the truth is deliberately distorted to demonise a newspaper and a blameless journalist.
What a grisly week this has been for our country and our culture. Can sanity and balance be recovered? Or are we going to be led ever deeper into the land of lunacy?
Now Vogue says ‘niggling’ in Meghan Markle headline is a racist insult
By Sam Greenhill Chief Reporter for The Daily Mail
American Vogue was yesterday branded absurd for suggesting the phrase ‘a niggling worry’ was racist towards Meghan Markle.
The magazine criticised a Daily Mail front page for using the words alongside Harry and Meghan’s engagement photo in 2017.
It was used in a headline to signpost to an inside article written by Sarah Vine. American Vogue suggested the word was racist, even though ‘niggling’ means ‘to gnaw at’ or a ‘persistent annoyance’.
Last year, Anna Wintour (pictured), the editor-in-chief of US Vogue, was forced to make an apology for publishing material that had been intolerant, as well as not doing enough to promote black staff and designers
The magazine admitted as much, yet went on to level what the Mail called an ‘extremely serious and unfounded allegation’ of racism.
In its latest issue, long-standing Vogue writer Hamish Bowles, a 57-year-old Briton, states: ‘In 2017, the Daily Mail, featuring Harry and Meghan’s touching engagement picture on the front page, saw fit to run the headline from their columnist Sarah Vine: “Yes, they’re joyfully in love. So why do I have a niggling worry about this engagement picture?” (Webster’s defines the word niggling thus: “bothersome or persistent especially in a petty or tiresome way”. Nevertheless, the word seemed a surprising choice and jumped from the page, as presumably it was intended to.’
Last night Toby Young, general secretary of the Free Speech Union, said: ‘It’s a bit like claiming that a newspaper is racist because the ink it uses on its pages is black. It’s just silly and absurd.’
The word is in such common use that it has appeared in The Times 3,687 times, in The Guardian 2,268 times – and 2,037 times in the Daily Mail.
It has even been used eight times in American Vogue itself. Last year, Anna Wintour, the editor-in-chief of US Vogue, was forced to make an apology for publishing material that had been intolerant, as well as not doing enough to promote black staff and designers.
Yesterday the Mail wrote to her asking her to amend the latest article’s ‘deliberate accusation of racism against this paper and Sarah Vine’.