Harry and Meghan’s loyal publicist
Engaging Paraphrase:
When Your Own Book is Cited, But the Author Gets the Date Wrong
Opening a book for review and finding your own work in the bibliography is always a pleasant surprise. However, the excitement quickly fades when you realize that the author, Omid Scobie, has inaccurately stated the publication date of your book, The Crown in Crisis. It was published in 2020, not 2021. This mistake doesn’t bode well for the accuracy of Scobie’s work. Scobie, known for his controversial bestseller Finding Freedom about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, has faced criticism for manipulating facts to fit his own agenda. He has been labeled, perhaps harshly but accurately, as ”Meghan’s mouthpiece.”
Scobie’s lack of writing prowess becomes evident from the very first pages of his book, Endgame. He delves into mind-numbingly precise details about what he wore on the day of Queen Elizabeth II’s death and how he reached the television station. Yet, he struggles to explain the significance of the events he is commenting on, resorting to a vague statement about a “dynastic sea change.” It’s clear that Scobie fails to acknowledge that such changes have occurred throughout history when a monarch passes away and their successor takes over.
Many readers who pick up Endgame have likely already read Scobie’s previous work, Finding Freedom, and know what to expect. Scobie presents himself as a troublemaker for the royal institution, claiming to know and share too much. In reality, he sneers at traditional members of the royal family and portrays Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in an overly positive light. The book implies that the couple represents a modern, multicultural, and liberal monarchy, while the old guard is depicted as conservative and repressed.
However, Scobie’s argument lacks originality and is hindered by his biased writing style. The book’s appeal lies in the gossip and scandal it offers, rather than its literary merit. Unfortunately, it fails to deliver on this front as well. The most significant story surrounding its publication was a leak that named two ”royal racists” who allegedly questioned the skin color of Harry and Meghan’s first child. Yet, the rest of the book lacks comparable revelations.
Scobie focuses on half-hearted historical analysis and rehashed stories of animosity within the royal family, particularly targeting Prince William. He criticizes William’s desire to succeed his father as king and portrays his treatment of Harry as driven by jealousy. The treatment of Princess Diana is dismissive and bordering on misogynistic, contrasting her with Kate Middleton, whom Scobie portrays as more amused and human.
While the British royal family has faced challenges and its reputation has been tarnished by the actions of Harry and Meghan, it has weathered similar storms in the past. The monarchy is likely to survive well into the future, making Scobie’s poorly written and mean-spirited book irrelevant. It seems unlikely that he will receive any further insider information from Montecito for future denigration.
Endgame: Inside the Royal Family and the Monarchy’s Fight for Survival
by Omid Scobie
Dey Street Books, 416 pp., $32
Alexander Larman is a journalist, historian, and author, most recently, of The Windsors at War: The King, His Brother, and a Family Divided (St. Martin’s Press).
What are some examples of claims made by Scobie that have been debunked or widely reported before?
Eality, he is just regurgitating information that has already been widely reported—and in many cases, debunked. His reliance on anonymous sources raises questions about the credibility of his information.
In addition to his lack of credibility, Scobie’s writing style is deeply unimpressive. His use of run-on sentences, careless punctuation, and excessive grammatical errors distract the reader from the content of his argument. It’s clear that he did not spend enough time editing and proofreading his work.
Furthermore, Scobie’s blatant manipulation of facts and propagation of false narratives is deeply concerning. He attempts to present himself as an objective observer and analyst of the royal family’s affairs, but his biased approach is evident throughout his book. Scobie regularly cherry-picks information to support his own preconceived notions, and conveniently omits important context that could paint a different picture.
Ultimately, Scobie’s work fails to meet the standards of reputable journalism and reliable scholarship. His inaccuracies, lack of credible sources, and biased presentation of information undermine the integrity of his writing. It is important for readers to approach his work with a critical eye and seek out alternative sources for a balanced perspective on the royal family and their affairs.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...