Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Current Events 2: April-September 2020

[Denville]

It was the PR company. They are connected through that and a sure way for the charity to get promotion.

It is what it is. Like you say charity work is charity.

wel no. Charity work is often done for reasons of self promotion.. and esp when it is celebrities turning up to an event...

 

[Lee-Z]

I don't deny that the celebrity gets (self) promotion from this, but so do the charities, and if 5 people in the world see this and are inspired to support this charity (or another) as well, that is a good thing.

This is what the gain is for a charity to get a celeb involved, not (or very rarely) to get that celeb involved actually long term and hands-on (celeb probably doesn't even have the time for that), but to draw publicity and get others interested in a charity they previously wouldn't even know existed.

Can't fault H&M for giving publicity to charities, as the world needs these organisations. And this is completely in line with what the royals do in their royal life..

imo we should separate this from our own feelings about H&M ditching the royal life and blabbing to their friends about it, and those friends then blabbing to various media.

 

[Denville]

but Harry and Meghan do have time. It seems that apart from a few zoom chats, they're free... and they are not royal workers any more nor are they "celebrities". If they wanted to do real charity work, they could IMO do so.. volunteer quietly for some organisations and actually do something practical as opposed to turning up for a photo opportunity...

 

[Osipi]

but Harry and Meghan do have time. It seems that apart from a few zoom chats, they're free... and they are not royal workers any more nor are they "celebrities". If they wanted to do real charity work, they could IMO do so.. volunteer quietly for some organisations and actually do something practical as opposed to turning up for a photo opportunity...

Can I ask just how you know for a fact that they're not already doing what you're suggesting that they should do? How do you know how much "free time" they have on their hands. Are you privy to their daily calendars and appointment diaries? It also seems to be that you have a different idea of what "real" charity work is. Care to define that a bit more and just why its more "real" than any other charity work being done?

 

[Denville]

Can I ask just how you know for a fact that they're not already doing what you're suggesting that they should do? How do you know how much "free time" they have on their hands. Are you privy to their daily calendars and appointment diaries? It also seems to be that you have a different idea of what "real" charity work is. Care to define that a bit more and just why its more "real" than any other charity work being done?

Obviously real charity work is doing something that actually helps people as opposed to making speeches, or turning up to be photographed smiling. Since it doesn't appear that Meg or Harry has a job, at present, I presume they have a fair bit of free time. I doubt they are looking after Archie full time and he's a bit young to be going to playschool or having to be taken places.

 

[Lee-Z]

imho the route the seem to see for themselves is not the 'quiet, behind the scenes' role. Even if they may have indicated they wanted a quieter life when the split from the RF, they may have had a change of heart and feel more for the high-profile celebrity role.

The covid situation may have given them some time to evaluate what they really wanted to do, and i think we are now seeing the role the see for themselves.

This is not for everyone and they will loose previous supporters over this, but i think they see this route as having more possibilities to achieve the larger platform they are looking for.

I'm not really drawn to celebs myself, i often roll my eyes at anything Kardashian, but in my mind there is no doubt the Kardashians have a bigger platforn and more active followers than royals have.

Maybe the split from the RF will be more evident and more pronounced in the future, and imo it would be good if H&M will have more achievements to their name so they can be announced as fi. 'Meghan, the founder of Charities-R-us' (yes, i made that up) or 'Harry, patron of the Invictus Games' and not just as Meghan Duchess of Sussex or Prince Harry like they do now to get on their platform.

imo it's always better to be announced for what you've achieved than with a title you happen to have because you were born in a particular family or married into one.

as always, just my 2 cts

 

[Denville]

I don't think they had a change of heart, at least not Meghan. I think this role that she's playing now is what she envisaged, and Harry's going along with it...

 

[Osipi]

Obviously real charity work is doing something that actually helps people as opposed to making speeches, or turning up to be photographed smiling. Since it doesn't appear that Meg or Harry has a job, at present, I presume they have a fair bit of free time. I doubt they are looking after Archie full time and he's a bit young to be going to playschool or having to be taken places.

"Real" charity work also depends on donations and volunteers to be able to do anything at all so they need "real" publicity and "real" donors and volunteers that give their time to assure a charity of *any* of these things is doing "real" charity work.

I don't think you're going to see an announcement of Harry or Meghan getting a "real" job as in the description of how most of us have gone to "work" for a "paycheck". What they do with their time is their own business and is as "real" to them as Joe Public kissing his wife goodbye in the morning and going off to his 9-5 job at an automobile factory.

That's the thing. None of us have the right to deem what the Sussexes do or don't do as "real" or 'worthwhile" or look down our noses at them or put them up on the highest pedestal for close inspection. They're the captains of their own souls and masters of their own fate as private citizens now. They can throw pool parties 24/7 if they want to. They can stand up for allowing penguins in the frozen food section of the local grocery store if they want. We don't have to like it or admire it but they can do whatever they want to now.

 

[Denville]

Yes and we can comment on it...
Im not a big fan of celebrities visiting charities, as IMO the benefit to the charities is relatively small compared with the publicity it gives to the celebs.. ANd I don't like being told to give to charities by people who are wildly rich....
and as Megh and H are neither celebrities nor working royals there's no need for them to do this sort of thing. They could volunteer their time, as they are not likely to be able to "work" at present.. or they could privately donate.. if they don't want to do anything active.

 

[Osipi]

Yes and we can comment on it...
Im not a big fan of celebrities visiting charities, as IMO the benefit to the charities is relatively small compared with the publicity it gives to the celebs.. ANd I don't like being told to give to charities by people who are wildly rich....
and as Megh and H are neither celebrities nor working royals there's no need for them to do this sort of thing. They could volunteer their time, as they are not likely to be able to "work" at present.. or they could privately donate.. if they don't want to do anything active.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. You've given me flashbacks to a super duper celebrity studded concert that raised $127 million by having one concert. I think I still have the Live Aid t-shirt packed away here somewhere so celebrities and rock stars and royals (OH... btw Charles and Diana opened the concert) can and do make a difference for charities and issues like famine in Ethiopia. ?

 

[Heavs]

I think bringing your own photographer to these events to "document your own activities" ie for publicity and so you can sell your own photos completely muddies they waters on this. It's not the charity taking photos for publicity or work for part of an organisation bigger than you (BRF) it's pure self promotion and the charity which they probably do believe in and I'm sure does great work, becomes incidental.

It fits with them wanting to control their narrative, not actually disliking the media and essentially being half in half out without the restrictions, this is that independent attempt.

Yesterday a political event, today a quasi "royal" event, tomorrow a big business deal. I don't think that's going to work long term without causing trouble.

 

[Osipi]

Question. Do we know that Harry and Meghan provided the photographer as a fact? Just wondering.

 

[evolvingdoors]

Question. Do we know that Harry and Meghan provided the photographer as a fact? Just wondering.

The pictures are copyrighted: enter photographer name for the duke and duchess of Sussex.
If it was for the charity it will would have been copyrighted for the charity.

So yes, this was an obvious PR stunt.

 

[Osipi]

OK. Thanks for clarifying that for me. Yeps.. that does make it seem to be more a PR stunt on the Sussex end rather than they were "spotted" out doing some good turns somewhere. ?

 

[Lilyflo]

I don't think there's anything wrong with bringing their own photographer (if they did) and promoting the photos if that brings attention to the charity. The BRF has press photographers (local and/or national) at their events so they don't need to bring their own but they share the photos on social media and their own website to promote the work they do.

If we're going to criticise people for using charitable events for personal or corporate promotion then we'd probably have to include almost everyone that does it because we have no way of knowing who has purely altruistic motives. The desire to help people might be a driver in many cases but that desire could also be entwined with a need to feel good about ourselves and to have other people think well of us.

I have said recently that Meghan's actions imply to me that she's genuine in her concern for the less fortunate and that she's also driven by a desire for celebrity. I'm sure she's not alone in that so I'm trying not to be overly critical of her when she's actually doing something beneficial to others.

 

[Kataryn]

In my opinion, they have behaved impeccably since being on their own. That Meghan has a political opinion is nothing to gainsay during the times the US is in at the moment. If I was the queen, I'd give them back some possibilities to work with Royal jobs as long as they follow the "advice" of the Royal Household. But I would let them stay in Santa Barbara for the sake of the little one.


Thus far I have only read accusations against Meghan and Harry, nothing proven and nothing to look down on them. They in their personal life and their emotions might not be up anybody's alley, but I can understand Meghan from her American upbringing and knowing from jobs I held in London, how "the establishment" politely but cruely looks down on anyone not born into their ranks. And I'll never forget "Yes, minister" and "Yes, Prime minister" and Sir Humphrey Appleby's sleazy treatment of his "boss", so I can imagine what they went through. If they gop on living quietly in the US and only come out to work for the greater good, why should they not come to the UK and help papa Charles and granny Liz occasionally?

 

[Lee-Z]

if they'd choose to live quietly in the US i don't see a reason for them not to perform some royal duties, but imo they seem to be on a path to not persé live quietly, but actually get involved, get a platform and have a public opinion.

This choice imo will have the logical followup that they can't do royal duties.
This is not a problem for them, it is their choice.
I could imagine HM and P.Charles regretting it a bit, but they too won't have a big problem with it, the RF will adjust and the others will divide the jobs amongst the people who have remained loyal to the royal service.
If a monarchy can overcome a king stepping away from his duties, it will definitely overcome one of the other senior members stepping down.

It is unfortunate that this coincides with another royal (P.Andrew) having to drop royal duties, but things in life don't always happen when and how you want, so this too will be managed by the RF.
It is not H&M's fault that the Andrew thing happened and if H&M don't see themselves fit or willing to live a life of service, they should step out rather than continue and be a liability within the RF.

Imo this is probably why there was a 'trial year' to see which direction H&M's choice will take them, and imo their appearances lately and their speeches and involvements show they choose a path bringing them further away (not just geographically) from the RF.

 

[Denville]

OK. Thanks for clarifying that for me. Yeps.. that does make it seem to be more a PR stunt on the Sussex end rather than they were "spotted" out doing some good turns somewhere. ?

They have been "spotted" out doing good turns about what 3 or 4 times since they moved to LA.... and each time it seem like the photos appear on the Net....

 

[Denville]

if they'd choose to live quietly in the US i don't see a reason for them not to perform some royal duties, but imo they seem to be on a path to not persé live quietly, but actually get involved, get a platform and have a public opinion.

This choice imo will have the logical followup that they can't do royal duties.
This is not a problem for them, it is their choice.
I could imagine HM and P.Charles regretting it a bit, but they too won't have a big problem with it, the RF will adjust and the others will divide the jobs amongst the people who have remained loyal to the royal service.
If a monarchy can overcome a king stepping away from his duties, it will definitely overcome one of the other senior members stepping down.

It is unfortunate that this coincides with another royal (P.Andrew) having to drop royal duties, but things in life don't always happen when and how you want, so this too will be managed by the RF.
It is not H&M's fault that the Andrew thing happened and if H&M don't see themselves fit or willing to live a life of service, they should step out rather than continue and be a liability within the RF.

Imo this is probably why there was a 'trial year' to see which direction H&M's choice will take them, and imo their appearances lately and their speeches and involvements show they choose a path bringing them further away (not just geographically) from the RF.

I think I understand what you're saying but when you say there's no reason why they should not perform some royal duties.. I'm not sure I agree. The fact is - they're not royal in America and they have stepped down form "active royal duty" so while they are royal in the sense that they're part of the BRF, they are not working royals any more. So I don't quite see why they seem to think of themselves as royal and feel they want/ need to "do some royal duties". (esp since they boht apper to have embraced "leftist" ideology, you'd think the last thing they want to be, is royal).
Moreover, they have apparently abandoned the convention that royals don't get involved in politics...and are increasingly doing things that can be seen as political...
Yes I think the monarchy will survive their walking out, that does not mean that it was a good thing to do...

 

[poppy7]

wel no. Charity work is often done for reasons of self promotion.. and esp when it is celebrities turning up to an event...

I don't disagree. I have just stopped caring about it. Because they are just seeming ridiculous to me. Hopefully, after the 15 minutes, the media wont bite anymore and promote their work. Not because I don't think the charities are worthy but because they don't really need Harry and Meghan anyway. Hopefully they can just live a happy life in Santa B or wherever.

I find the notion that you are promoting your own charity work to build your brand disturbing.

 

[poppy7]

In my opinion, they have behaved impeccably since being on their own. That Meghan has a political opinion is nothing to gainsay during the times the US is in at the moment. If I was the queen, I'd give them back some possibilities to work with Royal jobs as long as they follow the "advice" of the Royal Household. But I would let them stay in Santa Barbara for the sake of the little one.


Thus far I have only read accusations against Meghan and Harry, nothing proven and nothing to look down on them. They in their personal life and their emotions might not be up anybody's alley, but I can understand Meghan from her American upbringing and knowing from jobs I held in London, how "the establishment" politely but cruely looks down on anyone not born into their ranks. And I'll never forget "Yes, minister" and "Yes, Prime minister" and Sir Humphrey Appleby's sleazy treatment of his "boss", so I can imagine what they went through. If they gop on living quietly in the US and only come out to work for the greater good, why should they not come to the UK and help papa Charles and granny Liz occasionally?

Because that is not what was decided. And to be honest, that is looking like a good thing.

I don't think there's anything wrong with bringing their own photographer (if they did) and promoting the photos if that brings attention to the charity. The BRF has press photographers (local and/or national) at their events so they don't need to bring their own but they share the photos on social media and their own website to promote the work they do.

If we're going to criticise people for using charitable events for personal or corporate promotion then we'd probably have to include almost everyone that does it because we have no way of knowing who has purely altruistic motives. The desire to help people might be a driver in many cases but that desire could also be entwined with a need to feel good about ourselves and to have other people think well of us.

I have said recently that Meghan's actions imply to me that she's genuine in her concern for the less fortunate and that she's also driven by a desire for celebrity. I'm sure she's not alone in that so I'm trying not to be overly critical of her when she's actually doing something beneficial to others.

The royal family are in a trinity to support charities. Press, them, charity. Everyone gets something but mostly theybare all there for the charities. The royals oy significance is how they serve others. That is entirely their reason for being. It isn't quite the same thing.

 

[Denville]

Because that is not what was decided. And to be honest, that is looking like a good thing.

[...] I think if they came back, only dedicated royal watchers or strongly "Sussex fans" would want to see them working..
The queen made it very clear that they could not be half in and half out and that while she would prefer them to stay, if they wanted to go she would manage without them and that they were not "working for her" any longer.

The RF has suffered a blow with the Andrew scandal which also meant that he had to give up his work, and with the departure of Meg and Harry but IMO they are pretty determined NOT to allow H and M to dictate to them and that they will manage without them if they're not prepared to stay withn the family...

 

[Humbugged]

The pictures are copyrighted: enter photographer name for the duke and duchess of Sussex.
If it was for the charity it will would have been copyrighted for the charity.

So yes, this was an obvious PR stunt.

No this is them keeping their own stuff in house .The press can't just lift the image from the site and photo shop it without going through them .


The last time they did that it was photo shopped and they were then blamed for doing it .See Janina Gavankar and her Christmas card



ETA


The charity seems really happy with what happened . What was entirely charity that got it's donations from the US are now getting donations from all over the world

 

[Mbruno]

I think bringing your own photographer to these events to "document your own activities" ie for publicity and so you can sell your own photos completely muddies they waters on this. It's not the charity taking photos for publicity or work for part of an organisation bigger than you (BRF) it's pure self promotion and the charity which they probably do believe in and I'm sure does great work, becomes incidental.

It fits with them wanting to control their narrative, not actually disliking the media and essentially being half in half out without the restrictions, this is that independent attempt.

Yesterday a political event, today a quasi "royal" event, tomorrow a big business deal. I don't think that's going to work long term without causing trouble.

If they are indeed selling the photos of their own "volunteer" charity work, then I agree there is a conflict of interest which puts into question how "voluntary" their work really is. But we don't know for sure if that was the case, do we?


I don't really have any problem with that kind of charity work, even if it is only for self-promotion, as long as they don't use it commercially, which I doubt they would. I do have a problem with Meghan getting involved in the US election as "the Duchess of Sussex". I think it is wrong, both from the UK and the US perspectives.

 

[Humbugged]

If they are indeed selling the photos of their own "volunteer" charity work, then I agree there is a conflict of interest which puts into question how "voluntary" their work really is. But we don't know for sure if that was the case, do we?


I don't really have a problem with that kind of charity work, even if it is only for self-promotion, as long as they don't use it commercially, which I doubt they would. I do have a problem with Meghan getting involved in the US election as "the Duchess of Sussex". I think it is wrong, both from the UK and the US perspectives.

They did not sell there photos . It's a copyright thing ,as whoever wants the pictures has to go though them to publish them

 

[Mbruno]

They did not sell there photos . It's a copyright thing ,as whoever wants the pictures has to go though them to publish them

In any case, I think it is sad how they have lowered their status by moving out of the UK and of the RF. Until recently, they were royals officially representing a major European country and accorded official state precedence and all that. Now they are just two generic celebrities in a place (California) that is full of A-listers far above the Sussexes' paygrade (and I mean not only the Hollywood stars, but also the billionaires who also engage in philanthropic work).

Meghan may see it as an improvement over her previous life as an obscure cable TV actress and Internet personality, but how is that an upgrade for Harry? I feel like he has been robbed of what was rightfully his by birth.

I know some will say that was his choice and that he was the one who wanted out, but I don't buy it. Besides, people sometimes are misled and make the wrong choices under the influence of others.

 

[poppy7]

They did not sell there photos . It's a copyright thing ,as whoever wants the pictures has to go though them to publish them

You will pay for using it because it is copyrighted. Money may go to photographer though.

 

[Duchess_Watcher]

Meghan weighing in on the US election and using the title of Duchess of Sussex by her name is annoying. I love that the Royals had remained neutral in politics.

 

[Eskimo]

The pictures are copyrighted: enter photographer name for the duke and duchess of Sussex.
If it was for the charity it will would have been copyrighted for the charity.

So yes, this was an obvious PR stunt.

You will pay for using it because it is copyrighted. Money may go to photographer though.

This^^^. Every publication that uses the pictures (including the actual charity) has to pay the copyright owner a fee for using them

 

[Osipi]

Or get permission to use the photographs. Its standard. A lot of articles will use copyrighted material and state along with it "printed with permission by the owner".

This gives the Sussexes control of their photos and who can print them. Actually I think it's a pretty smart move to make.