Politics

Questions of racism linger as Harry, Meghan step back

Published

7 years ago

January 15, 2020

LONDON (AP) — When accomplished, glamorous American actress Meghan Markle married Prince Harry in 2018, she was hailed as a breath of fresh air for Britain’s fusty royal family. That honeymoon didn’t last.

Full Coverage: Royal rift

Now the couple wants independence, saying the pressure of life as full-time royals is unbearable. And a debate is raging: Did racism drive Meghan away?

When Prince Harry, who is sixth in line to the throne, began dating the “Suits” actress — daughter of a white father and African American mother — the media called it a sign that Britain had entered a “post-racial” era in which skin color and background no longer mattered, even to the royal family.

U.K. Labour Party lawmaker Clive Lewis, who like Meghan has biracial heritage, says the royal rift shows that Britain still has a problem with “structural racism.”

“We can see it with Meghan Markle and the way that she’s been treated in the media, we know that this is a reality of the 21st century, still,” Lewis told Sky News. “After 400 years of racism you can’t just overturn it overnight.”

Frederick W. Gooding, an assistant professor of African American studies at Texas Christian University in Fort Worth, Texas, said it would be “disingenuous” to claim race had not been a factor in Meghan’s treatment.

“She was always going to be an outsider,” he said. “There was always going to be this barrier because of her race.”

From the start, some in the media wrote about Meghan using racially loaded terms. One tabloid columnist referred to her “exotic” DNA. A Daily Mail headline described her Los Angeles roots as “(almost) straight outta Compton” and claimed she came from a “gang-scarred” neighborhood. A TV host described Meghan as “uppity.”

Meghan was criticized for everything from eating avocados — which the Daily Mail claimed fuel “human rights abuses, drought and murder” — to wearing dark nail polish, apparently an etiquette faux pas.

Morgan Jerkins, a senior editor at Zora, a Medium.com site for women of color, said that because Meghan was “an outsider, culturally, racially, and socioeconomically, she has been the royal family’s scapegoat.”

Others point out that Meghan is hardly the first royal to get a rough ride in the media. The press and the royal family have an intense and often toxic relationship going back decades. Harry’s mother, Princess Diana, was snapped by paparazzi wherever she went. When she and Prince Charles admitted that their marriage was in trouble, her private life became public property.

Diana was killed in a Paris car crash in 1997 while being pursued by photographers. Prince Harry, who was just 12 when his mother died, said in October he feared “history repeating itself. … I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces.”

After Diana’s death, a chastened British press mended its ways — a bit. The media left young William and Harry alone in exchange for carefully staged interviews and photo opportunities as they grew up. That practice has continued with the three young children of William and his wife, Kate.

But in many ways little really changed. Royal stories still sell newspapers and generate clicks. That has meant intense — and even illegal — scrutiny. In the early 2000s, tabloid reporters hacked the voicemails of Prince William and royal staff members in pursuit of scoops.

Younger female royals are routinely judged on appearance, demeanor and habits. Prince William’s wife was relentlessly scrutinized for years: dismissed as dull, accused of being lazy for not having a full-time job, and dubbed “waity Katy” before William proposed.

Still, Meghan’s treatment has sometimes seemed harsher. Last year the Daily Mail ran photos of a pregnant Meghan cradling her bump under the headline: “Why can’t Meghan Markle keep her hands off her bump?” Months earlier the same paper had described a pregnant Kate as “tenderly” cradling her bump.

British Home Secretary Priti Patel denied Meghan has suffered from racist media coverage,

“I’m not in that category at all where I believe there’s racism at all,” Patel, who is of Indian heritage and whose parents emigrated to Britain from Uganda, told the BBC. “I think we live in a great country, a great society, full of opportunity, where people of any background can get on in life.”

But others say the media double standard Meghan faced is evidence that talk of “post-racial” Britain is wildly premature.

“Her treatment has proved what many of us have always known: No matter how beautiful you are, whom you marry, what palaces you occupy, charities you support, how faithful you are, how much money you accumulate or what good deeds you perform, in this society racism will still follow you,” writer Afua Hirsch, author of the book “Brit(ish): On Race, Identity and Belonging,” wrote in the New York Times.

That feeling was echoed by Hayley Oliver, a recent Virginia Tech graduate who wrote a college essay about how Meghan and other mixed-race women are treated in popular culture. She said Meghan had years of charitable work, including advocacy for women’s healthcare and gender equality worldwide that preceded her marriage into the royal family.

“What about her in those roles?” said Oliver, who is also biracial and says she’s inspired by Meghan for the stances she takes. “When you see someone who looks like you. … it makes it easier to imagine yourself in that situation or the possibility of where you could go.”

While Britain is by most measures less racist than it used to be, non-white Britons are still over-represented among the poor and imprisoned, and under-represented at the top of well-paid professions, including politics, journalism and the law. Britain’s 2016 decision to leave the European Union — a move fueled in part by concerns about immigration — was followed by an increase in cases of racist abuse reported to police.

Meghan acknowledged in an October interview that she had been unprepared for the intense media scrutiny she would get as a member of the royal family. She told ITV journalist Tom Bradby that before she married Harry, “my British friends said to me, ‘I’m sure he’s great, but you shouldn’t do it, because the British tabloids will destroy your life.’”

“And I very naively … I didn’t get it,” she said.

Unlike other members of the royal clan, Meghan and Harry have pushed back. As long ago as 2017, Harry criticized “the racial undertones of comment pieces; and the outright sexism and racism of social media trolls and web article comments.”

Now the couple has had enough. They plan to move part-time to Canada, withdraw from royal media-coverage arrangements and seek financial independence. The queen has reluctantly agreed to let them become semi-detached royals in order to avoid a damaging family split.

The racism debate will rage on. Writing in The Guardian, British columnist Nesrine Malik said she doubted it would have much positive effect.

She argued that the racism debate had become a “pantomime, in which everyone — people of color, tabloid journalists, TV hosts — is playing well-rehearsed parts.”

“Britain’s conversation about race endlessly repeats itself, first as tragedy, and for ever thereafter as farce,” she wrote.

Florida

FIU Becomes First Florida University to Launch CORE Emergency Management Partnership

Published

3 hours ago

August 26, 2026

FNN NEWS

MIAMI, Fla. (FNN) — Florida officials announced the launch of the Coalition for Operational Readiness in Education, or CORE, Program at Florida International University, beginning an initiative designed to strengthen the state’s emergency management workforce through partnerships with colleges, universities and technical and trade schools.

The program will connect higher education institutions with the Florida Division of Emergency Management and other state agencies to provide students with specialized education and training in emergency management.

CORE is also expected to provide opportunities for students to earn industry-recognized certificates and establish pathways to jobs with emergency management offices and private-sector industry partners across Florida.

FIU First to Launch CORE

Florida International University in Miami is the first institution where CORE is being rolled out.

State officials said 11 institutions have committed to participating, with the long-term goal of expanding the initiative to every college, university, technical school and trade school in Florida.

The statewide expansion would create a pipeline of students trained for careers involving disaster preparedness, emergency response and recovery.

Building Florida’s Emergency Management Workforce

Florida’s exposure to hurricanes and other natural disasters has made emergency preparedness and response a major state priority.

Officials said maintaining Florida’s emergency management capabilities requires developing the next generation of professionals who will work before, during and after disasters and other emergencies.

The CORE partnerships are designed to connect classroom education with professional training, certifications and employment opportunities.

Education-to-Employment Pipeline

The program is intended to create a more direct pathway from education to careers in emergency management.

Through partnerships involving state agencies, educational institutions and industry organizations, students could gain specialized training while developing credentials recognized by employers.

The initiative could also help state and local emergency management agencies develop a larger pool of trained candidates as Florida’s population and emergency-response needs continue to grow.

Statewide Expansion Planned

While the program begins at FIU, officials said the broader objective is statewide.

The goal is to eventually establish CORE partnerships throughout Florida’s higher education and workforce-training system, including universities, colleges, technical schools and trade schools.

Florida officials also envision CORE becoming a workforce-development model that other states could replicate.

Key Takeaways

Program: Coalition for Operational Readiness in Education (CORE)
Initial launch: Florida International University in Miami
State partner: Florida Division of Emergency Management and other state agencies
Participating institutions: 11 institutions have committed so far
Training: Specialized emergency management education and workforce preparation
Credentials: Industry-recognized certificates
Career component: Pathways to emergency management agencies and industry employers
Long-term goal: Expand CORE to colleges, universities, technical schools and trade schools throughout Florida
National objective: Develop a Florida workforce model that could be replicated in other states

Florida

Byron Donalds Selects Miami-Dade Sen. Bryan Avila as Running Mate in Florida Governor’s Race

Published

1 day ago

August 25, 2026

FNN NEWS

MIAMI, Fla. (FNN) — Republican gubernatorial nominee Byron Donalds selected Florida state Sen. Bryan Avila of Miami-Dade County as his running mate for lieutenant governor, adding a South Florida lawmaker to the GOP ticket for the 2026 general election.

Donalds announced Avila as his choice Tuesday, Aug. 25, at Miami’s historic Freedom Tower, a location closely associated with South Florida’s Cuban exile community.

The selection puts Avila alongside Donalds as Republicans turn their attention to the general election and the race to succeed Gov. Ron DeSantis.

Who Is Bryan Avila?

Avila is a Republican state senator from Miami-Dade County and previously served in the Florida House of Representatives.

His selection gives the Donalds ticket a prominent South Florida presence and adds a lawmaker with experience in both chambers of the Florida Legislature.

The Miami announcement also places immigration, communism, economic opportunity and Florida’s relationship with Latin American communities near the center of the Republican ticket’s general-election messaging.

Road to the General Election

With Avila joining the ticket, Donalds now moves toward the November general election with the Republican nominees for governor and lieutenant governor in place.

The lieutenant governor selection is one of Donalds’ most consequential decisions since securing the Republican nomination, helping define the geographic, political and demographic strategy of his statewide campaign.

Florida

Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee Chair Christine Hunschofsky Faces Lawsuits, Election Complaints

Published

3 days ago

August 24, 2026

FNN NEWS

Who is next? Lawsuits and Florida election complaints put the incoming House Democratic leader’s oversight of political attacks, campaign spending and tactics against former Democratic lawmakers under scrutiny

ORLANDO, Fla. (FNN) — Incoming Florida House Democratic Leader Christine Hunschofsky, a former Parkland mayor is facing growing scrutiny over campaign tactics by the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee, the party-affiliated committee she chairs, as former Democratic lawmakers challenge political attacks through lawsuits and Florida election complaints.

The disputes are placing increased scrutiny on Christine Hunschofsky, chair of the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee, and Cassidy Whitaker, the committee’s caucus director for the 2026 election cycle.

The controversy goes beyond ordinary party infighting, with former Democratic lawmakers alleging that FHDCC used opposition research and campaign communications containing false or misleading information to attack members of its own party.

Those allegations raise questions about the committee’s research, approval process and campaign tactics — and whether House Democratic leaders can rebuild trust with lawmakers targeted by the same political organization they are expected to help lead.

Former Democratic lawmakers are now turning to the courts and Florida’s election complaint process to challenge FHDCC-linked campaign tactics, intensifying scrutiny of the committee’s leadership, spending, opposition research and oversight.

The lawsuits and complaints remain allegations. They do not establish that Hunschofsky, FHDCC or others violated the law.

But the controversy is no longer simply an internal Democratic campaign fight.

FHDCC Faces Real Legal Challenges

State Representative-Elect and former Democratic state Rep. James Bush III sued FHDCC and other defendants in Miami-Dade County over allegedly defamatory election communications.

Former Democratic state Rep. Daisy Morales has separately challenged campaign communications involving FHDCC through litigation in Orange County and Florida’s election complaint process.

The cases involve separate elections and allegations and must be decided on their individual evidence.

State Rep.-elect Daphne Campbell, a former state senator and former state representative, told Florida National News in a phone interview that she is considering filing a defamation lawsuit as well.

Together, however, they place FHDCC’s campaign practices under greater scrutiny and create a leadership test for Hunschofsky as she prepares to lead Florida House Democrats.

Hunschofsky’s Leadership Under Scrutiny

Hunschofsky’s position as chair does not automatically make her personally liable for every communication, expenditure or decision made by FHDCC.

But leadership brings accountability for how an organization operates.

Political attack campaigns require research, writing, production, vendors, financing and distribution. FHDCC’s internal structure determines how those activities are authorized and supervised.

That makes Hunschofsky’s authority, knowledge and oversight relevant as the committee responds to legal challenges involving its campaign activity.

The central issue is straightforward: What happened under the FHDCC banner, and what responsibility did its leadership have for it?.

Party Establishment vs. Voters’ Choice

The controversy also exposes a deeper tension between party leadership and voters who expect to choose representatives based on the priorities of their communities.

Political parties can recruit, endorse and financially support candidates.

Voters make the final choice.

Heavy intervention by a party organization in a Democratic primary can create the perception that party leaders are trying to make that choice for voters.

That can damage trust when voters believe local experience, constituent service and understanding of their community matter more than the preferences of party leadership.

Democrats Spending Money Fighting Democrats

The internal battles come as Florida Democrats face a larger electoral challenge.

Republicans hold substantial power in Tallahassee, while Democrats need financial resources to compete for legislative seats and statewide offices.

Money spent attacking Democrats in expensive Democratic primaries cannot simultaneously be spent challenging Republicans.

FHDCC has the right to participate in elections within the law. But intraparty battles followed by lawsuits and election complaints create a political question about whether those resources are advancing the committee’s broader mission of electing Democrats.

Minority Democrats and Party Trust

The disputes also involve former minority Democratic lawmakers.

Bush and Campbell are Black. Morales is Puerto Rican, Hispanic.

That does not establish racial or ethnic discrimination by Hunschofsky or FHDCC.

But former minority Democratic lawmakers turning to courts and election regulators over tactics associated with their own party creates a political challenge for Democrats, who depend heavily on Black and Hispanic voters.

Those voters have the same interest as every Florida voter in accurate campaign information, fair elections and political organizations that follow the rules.

A Political Standard That Should Apply to Both Parties

The controversy also creates an uncomfortable comparison for Democrats who have criticized President Donald Trump’s aggressive treatment of political opponents.

The lawsuits and election complaints do not establish that FHDCC copied Trump’s strategy or adopted a “Trump playbook.”

But they raise a broader question of consistency.

Democrats who demand accountability when Republicans exercise political power aggressively should be prepared to apply the same standards to organizations within their own party.

Republicans should do the same when allegations involve their side.

Fairness cannot depend on which party benefits.

From Political Fight to Legal Process

Negative campaigning and opposition research are legal and receive substantial First Amendment protection.

Political committees, however, remain subject to election laws, campaign-finance requirements and civil law.

A lawsuit does not prove defamation.

FHDCC’s separate argument that it cannot be sued.

An election complaint does not prove an election-law violation.

Neither automatically creates a criminal investigation.

If evidence ultimately supports potential criminal conduct, the appropriate law-enforcement agency or prosecutor — not political parties, candidates or news organizations — determines whether an investigation is warranted.

The principle protects everyone: allegations must be proven, due process must be respected and political influence should not shield proven violations.

Who Is Next?

The growing legal disputes leave FHDCC with a political problem extending beyond Bush, Morales and Campbell.

Who is next on the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee’s target list?

No Democrat is entitled to immunity from legitimate political criticism simply because that candidate belongs to the party.

But candidates should be able to expect political organizations to play by the rules.

The same principle applies to Republicans.

Political organizations can fight hard, expose legitimate weaknesses and spend money advocating for their candidates.

They still have to follow the law.

Hunschofsky Faces a Leadership Test

Hunschofsky is not watching the controversy from outside the organization.

She chairs the Florida House Democratic Campaign Committee while preparing to lead Florida House Democrats, including minority Democratic lawmakers who were targeted by the committee’s campaign attacks.

The lawsuits and election complaints therefore put FHDCC’s governance, campaign strategy and financial oversight directly within the public debate surrounding her leadership.

The courts will determine the civil allegations before them. Election regulators will determine matters within their jurisdiction. If evidence independently supports potential criminal violations, law-enforcement authorities can determine whether an investigation is warranted.

For Hunschofsky, the leadership test is whether the committee she chairs can defend its campaign practices, account for its spending and maintain the trust of Democratic voters while the allegations move through Florida’s courts and election-enforcement system.

The lawsuits and election complaints remain allegations. They are not findings that Hunschofsky or FHDCC violated the law.

For Florida voters, the standard should be simple:

Play by the rules. Follow the evidence. Apply the law equally.

Florida National News is seeking comment from Hunschofsky and FHDCC regarding the lawsuits, election complaints, campaign spending and committee oversight. FNN will update this report with responses and significant developments.