Skip to main content
Philip, Meghan and institutional racism: a spotter’s guide
The press treatment of two very different royals and the complicity of the political establishment are all you need to know about engrained bigotry in Britain, argues SOLOMON HUGHES

IMMEDIATELY after the government published a report claiming “institutional racism” was exaggerated, the leaders of both political parties gave clear and open examples of how institutions could be racist.

First off, Labour leader Keir Starmer had a long, friendly interview in the Times. Journalist Decca Aitkenhead asked Starmer if he would describe press coverage of Pince Harry and Meghan Markle as racist.

He shook his head and said, “I wouldn’t.” With a gesture and two words, Starmer cleared all media of prejudiced Markle coverage.

The 95th Anniversary Appeal
Support the Morning Star
You have reached the free limit.
Subscribe to continue reading.
Similar stories
(L to R) Claudia Jones on the cover of the Young Communist Weekly Review (US), October 1938, Claudia Jones and Betty Gannett (CPSU theoretician) arrested after their bail was revoked July 17, 1951 / Pics (L to R) YCL/CC, Public domain
Features / 21 February 2026
21 February 2026

On the 121st anniversary of communist Claudia Jones’s birth ROGER McKENZIE looks at political events that shaped her, and those she helped shape

PJ Harvey performing on the Pyramid stage, at the Glastonbury Festival at Worthy Farm in Somerset. Picture date: Friday June 28, 2024
Media / 23 December 2025
23 December 2025

On January 2 2014, PJ Harvey used her turn as guest editor of the Today programme to expose the realities of war, arms dealing and media complicity. The fury that followed showed how rare – and how threatening – such honesty is within Britain’s most Establishment broadcaster, says IAN SINCLAIR

The main entrance of The Guardian Newspaper office on York Way, north London
Features / 21 July 2025
21 July 2025

At the very moment Britain faces poverty, housing and climate crises requiring radical solutions, the liberal press promotes ideologically narrow books while marginalising authors who offer the most accurate understanding of change, writes IAN SINCLAIR