https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/12/06/royal-palace-can-never-afford-unfair/A royal Palace can never afford to be unfair
A very good article indeed.
May I quote:
Here are some points about this.
Misunderstandings can arise in conversations between strangers. With private social gatherings, an aggrieved guest can raise the matter afterwards by contacting the host. Ngozi Fulani did not attempt this. She quickly tweeted her version of the incident, thus turning it into a public matter without giving the Palace or Lady Susan the chance to respond privately. That was unfair.
Ms Fulani’s account of the conversation was presented as a verbatim one. How could such a dialogue have been accurately reproduced unless it had been recorded (which is not permissible at a private party)? It is unfair to rely absolutely on such an account, even if Ms Fulani was tweeting in good faith.
It has emerged that the passage that Ms Fulani broadcast was part of a longer conversation. It would be interesting to know the rest of it. Ms Fulani’s anxiety began, she suggests, when Lady Susan moved her hair from her name-badge in order to read it. It would be relevant here if the first person to have asked about the other’s name-badge had been Ms Fulani. That would have emboldened Lady Susan to reciprocate. It is unfair publicly to traduce Lady Susan on the basis of a partial account.
Buckingham Palace is insistent that Lady Susan resigned of her own free will. No doubt that is true: she has always done what she feels is her duty. But in this case, she was given almost no time and there was no serious attempt (how could there have been in a couple of hours?) to establish the facts. That was unfair.
The Palace announced that the conversation had been “deeply regrettable”. Given its incomplete state of knowledge, that was unfair too.
More:

A royal Palace can never afford to be unfair
Ngozi Fulani’s account of the conversation was presented as a verbatim one. How could such a dialogue have been accurately reproduced?
