Jeremy Clarkson’s ‘vile’ Meghan Markle article ruled as ‘sexist’ by officials
| Last updated
The press regulator has ruled Jeremy Clarkson's article about Meghan Markle was sexist.
In one of his articles for his column in the Sun, the former Top Gear presenter spoke about how he dreamt of Markle being 'paraded naked through the streets' as people throw 'lumps of excrement' at her, declaring he hated Markle on a 'cellular level'.
The 63-year-old later apologised, reflecting on his words as 'disgraceful' and the Sun did as well, removing the article from its website.
Markle and Prince Harry accused Clarkson of spreading 'dangerous conspiracy theories and misogyny' as well as 'hate rhetoric' and over 25,000 people complained to the Independent Press Standard Organisation (IPSO) about the column.
The press regulator has since revealed the results of its investigation - first launched in February 2023.
Clarkson's article - titled 'One day, Harold [Prince Harry] the glove puppet will tell the truth about A Woman Talking Bollocks' - was published on 17 December, 2022.
It also referenced Nicola Sturgeon and Rose West: "Meghan, though, is a different story. I hate her.
"Not like I hate Nicola Sturgeon or Rose West. I hate her on a cellular level."
The article was reported to IPSO by the Fawcett Society and the WILDE Foundation, accusing Clarkson of having discriminated against Markle on the grounds of her sex, harassed her and making discriminatory references to her on the grounds of race.
The Sun was also accused of having breached its discrimination clause (12) because 'the acts described by the author in his column and the language used is inherently misogynistic and sexualised, pointing to gender-based discrimination'.
The details surrounding the Sun's breach of clause 12, as per the Sun's website, reference Clarkson's claim the Duchess 'exercised power via her sexual hold over her husband' as being a 'reference to stereotypes about women using their sexuality to gain power'.
"[It] also implied that it was the Duchess’ sexuality - rather than any other attribute or accomplishment – which was the source of her power," it adds.
The investigation also refers to the comparison Clarkson made between Markle, Sturgeon and West.
"The only clear common characteristic between the three being their sex and the writer’s 'hate'."
IPSO also condemned Clarkson's highlighting of Markle's position as 'a specifically female negative role model' and his 'dream' of humiliating and degrading her.
The investigation resolved: "IPSO considered that any of these references, individually, might not represent a breach of the Code.
"However, to argue that a woman is in a position of influence due to 'vivid bedroom promises', to compare the hatred of an individual to other women only, and to reference a fictional scene of public humiliation given to a sexually manipulative woman, read as a whole, amounted to a breach of Clause 12."
IPSO's investigation subsequently concluded the piece contained 'pejorative and prejudicial reference' to Markle's sex, but the press watchdog rejected complaints the piece was inaccurate, discriminated against Markle on the grounds of race or harassed her.
Ipso's chairman, Lord Faulks reviewed Clarkson's article as being 'humiliating and degrading towards the duchess'.
In a statement to the Independent, the Sun said: "Ipso has ruled that The Sun published a column about the Duchess of Sussex which contained a pejorative and prejudicial reference to the Duchess’s sex.
"The committee did not uphold separate elements of the complaint that the article was inaccurate, harassed the Duchess of Sussex, and included discriminatory references to her on the ground of race. The Sun is today publishing the summary of Ipso’s findings."
LADbible has contacted Jeremy Clarkson and The Sun for comment.