The media and political class are gripped by selective outrage: they erupt in frenzied coverage over the latest Jeffrey Epstein file releases and Prince Andrew's long-ago associations with a notorious sex offender, yet remain conspicuously muted about the unbearable scandal of grooming gangs that systematically raped and exploited thousands of young British girls.
This glaring disparity in attention exposes a grotesque failure of priorities.
The most recent tranche of Epstein documents, released by the US Department of Justice on January 30, 2026 — over three million pages of documents including emails, text messages, and a gallery of photographs — has dominated headlines for days.
Images show a man who appears to be Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor in awkward, compromising poses, including one where he is positioned kneeling over a woman lying on the floor (with her face redacted to protect potential victims); emails from around 2010 reveal correspondence under an account labeled “The Duke” suggesting dinner “and lots of privacy” at Buckingham Palace after Epstein’s house arrest ended, and arrangements involving introductions to young women.
The coverage is wall-to-wall: front pages, studio panels, endless dissections of every detail and decade-old exchange.
The King responded correctly last year by decisively removing Andrew's titles, public duties, and Royal Lodge residence, rehousing him in modest, privately funded quarters on the Sandringham estate.
That swift action insulated the monarchy from renewed damage. Andrew's poor judgment in maintaining ties to a convicted sex offender was indefensible and damaging — no defence is offered — but no credible evidence places him at the centre of grooming, trafficking, or abusing minors.
We must not ignore the grooming gangs-sized hole at the heart of the Jeffrey Epstein obsession - Lee Cohen
|New York State Sex Offender Registry/PA
Andrew has consistently and strenuously denied any wrongdoing.
He settled a civil claim with a substantial payment, surrendered honours and status, and has lived in effective exile from royal life ever since. The consequences have been severe and lasting.
Yet media outlets treat these revelations as the defining scandal of our time. Why the explosion of interest? Because the story delivers everything the establishment loves: a disgraced royal, transatlantic celebrity intrigue, high-profile names, and the opportunity to indulge in theatrical takedowns of the privileged.
It's gossip dressed as serious journalism—designed for clicks, circulation, and cultural satisfaction in seeing elites humbled.
Contrast that intensity with the grooming gangs crisis: the organised, large-scale sexual exploitation of thousands of vulnerable young British girls — predominantly white and working-class — in cities and towns across Britain.
Children as young as 11 or 12 were targeted, lured with gifts and attention, plied with alcohol and drugs, subjected to repeated gang rapes, beaten, prostituted, and passed among perpetrators like objects.
When victims or families raised alarms, police, social services, and councils routinely dismissed them, destroyed evidence, or refused to act, paralysed by the terror of being labelled racist, inflaming community tensions, or harming their town's image.
This was not a random crime but industrial child sexual abuse, sustained over decades through institutional cowardice and deliberate cover-ups.
The scale and horror are staggering — far exceeding any individual royal misjudgment — yet the media response remains muted, sporadic, and quickly eclipsed by more comfortable narratives.
Where are the relentless front-page demands for accountability? Where is the saturation scrutiny of Westminster, police chiefs, and social services leaders who failed so catastrophically? The outrage is tepid at best.
More From GB News