Duke and Duchess of Sussex, General News Part 1: May 2018 - December 2018

[Terri Terri]

Then let's agree to disagree! It is my opinion and I stand by it. You are as entitled to have your own opinion as I do mine.

There is a reason why Prince Harry felt the need to take the unprecedented step to issue that statement in November 2016. Not even Prince William, whose girlfriend and now wife Kate Middleton, felt the need to issue any statement about the media harassment of Kate in the almost 10 years that they dated. And why was that?

Prince Harry himself spoke about the racist undertones of media coverage against Meghan. Who can forget the Daily Mail's scurrilous headlines stating that Doria was 'Almost straight outta Compton and lived in a gang scarred neighbourhood' because of the false narrative that if you are black and live in the USA, you must be part of a gang!

If that was not racial profiling and bias then I don't know what it was!


End. Of.

 

[Somebody]

I will say it again...the BIGGEST difference between Meghan and all the other British royal brides before her who were also older, foreign born, divorced, had their own professional career etc

I don't think anyone fits your description...

Princess Michael of Kent is probably closest fitting 2 out of 4 catagories (foreign born and dovorced) and she is criticized until today and unlike Meghan she doesn't seem to have a vocal fanbase - as she is married to the most minor prince among the queen's cousins, there is less interest in her.

 

[Terri Terri]

I didn't mean to say that there was anyone else who by themselves fit that description like Meghan. There is a post up thread which identified other women who had married into the royal family who were also divorced (Camilla), had a professional career (Sophie) etc.

My point was that the biggest difference between Meghan and those women is the racial element.

 

[Gawin]

I don't think anyone fits your description...

Princess Michael of Kent is probably closest fitting 2 out of 4 catagories (foreign born and dovorced) and she is criticized until today and unlike Meghan she doesn't seem to have a vocal fanbase - as she is married to the most minor prince among the queen's cousins, there is less interest in her.

I think Princess Michael's personality plays a part. There's a reason she's called "Princess Pushy."

 

[PetticoatLane]

The idea that Kate was somehow exempted from much tabloid criticism in the UK after she married could be the most incredible historical revisionism I've seen on this board.

Kate was and is criticised for almost everything she is/does/says, including after the wedding. Criticism was also heavy on this board. From her hair, to her make up, her too-short skirts, her boring shoes, her posture, her expressions, her public speaking, her work ethic, 'Waity Katie', her closeness with her own family, the way she gets in and out of cars - the list goes on and on. For all these things she has been attacked. Let's also not forget she was the victim of a terrible invasion of privacy when photos of her sunbathing topless were splashed all over the media and the internet, after she was married.

All this is before we consider the attacks on her family. Pippa alone was followed and photographed hundreds of times each and every day by paps for years. Kate's parents have been attacked as being money-grubbing exploiters of their daughter's fame and snobbish social climbers. Each and every career setback of Kate's brother is covered in detail in the tabloids.

Meghan will get a rough time from the tabloids but so does every other member of the BRF, including the Queen (remember The Sun publishing photos of a tiny Princess Elizabeth doing a 'Nazi salute' on its from page?) Meghan is simply going to have to learn to live it.

 

[Zonk]

This is so true.

For those of us who have been around a long time...this is par for the course. Almost everyone who has married into the BRF has had this happen to them...especially if you marry a high profile royal. In the last 20 to 30 years (as it relates from Sophie, Camilla, Catherine and Meghan) I will say the only difference is in the medium. Back in the Diana and Fergie days they had to deal with the newspapers (which I believe were published at least twice a day...the Morning and Evening edition)....Sophie and Camilla had to deal with the newspapers and internet and Catherine and Meghan have to deal with the newspapers, the internet and social media. Remember when Catherine and William broke up? The articles were incredibly nasty to Catherine and her family. How about every time Party Pieces advertises their regular birthday specials...when both Charlotte and George were born they were accused of profiting off the birth cause they sold Prince and Princess plates and napkins...which is the norm in EVERY party store that I have been in . But the Middleton's were taking advantage of their grandchildren title's. OR when they sold items to be used in the Jubilee which I again I think would be the norm for any British party store.

I mean, if you read the comments in the Daily Fail or any other gossip site you will read some of the most outrageous things as it relates to Catherine and Meghan. Its' like someone puts something out there and people take it as the truth because its the Internet. Catherine is getting a pass now because of Meghan...the tabloids have a new person to target. But don't think Catherine didn't get it either....and it has nothing to do with race moreso her being an American and actress. Heck, they tried to demean Lady Frederick Windsor because she was/is an actress.

What is amazing about this DF article is how ridiculous it is. Is it a crime to get up at 5 AM now? And I seriously doubt Meghan is sending texts to the staff that early...maybe an email or two...but who doesn't do that? I have had managers in the past who sent emails way before and way after normal work hours...that just told me that they worked too much!

I also find it incredulous that if Meghan is such a reported diva....did this just happen in the last six months? Surely she must have been like that on the set of Suits.I am sure anyone who worked there was offered a pretty penny to let loose some secrets...and yet there are none. Personally I think the DF is working on its click bait revenue....they know there are people who will click on any article about Meghan to share their venom. They did the same with Catherine.

 

[Terri Terri]

Who says that Meghan isn't dealing with it? She is doing just that by shutting out the noise, getting on with her marriage, work and looking forward to the birth of het first child.

It is us on social media that spend more time discussing this issue more than maybe the royals do.

As for the 5 AM starts...so what? Maybe Meghan is an early riser and does her yoga and meditation first thing in the morning. And we have to remember that as an actress she worked 16 - 18 hour days!

 

[Ista]

I agree with both Zonk and PetticoatLane. Several of us on this and other threads have said the same things over and over. Meghan is not facing a unique amount of tabloid nastiness. Being biracial gives the tabloids another thing to slam her for, but if she weren't biracial, it would be (and is) something else: her age, her accent, her romantic past, she's lazy, she's a workaholic, etc. She's just the latest victim. It was Catherine before her, and Camilla, Sophie and Sarah before that. None of the royals have been immune. None of them. If you ever have a few hours to spare, take a look back at the kinds of things that were being published in the 70's and 80's. Harry certainly knows all that history, and that is exactly why he has been, rightly, so protective. There is no way Meghan was going to get a pass on all that.

 

[Fijiro]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Terri Terri View Post
I will say it again...the BIGGEST difference between Meghan and all the other British royal brides before her who were also older, foreign born, divorced, had their own professional career etc
I don't think anyone fits your description...

_________________

I don't think anyone fits your description...

Princess Michael of Kent is probably closest fitting 2 out of 4 catagories (foreign born and dovorced) and she is criticized until today and unlike Meghan she doesn't seem to have a vocal fanbase - as she is married to the most minor prince among the queen's cousins, there is less interest in her.

Anne and Camilla also fit 2 out of 4 categories – older than current spouse and divorced

One other thing, Sophie of Wessex was 35 years at the time of her marriage – I don’t remember anyone suggestion she’s too old to have children. In fact their children-to-be’s titles were announced when Edward was made Earl of Wessex on their wedding day. Sophie was 38 when Lady Louise was born.

 

[TLLK]

I agree with both Zonk and PetticoatLane. Several of us on this and other threads have said the same things over and over. Meghan is not facing a unique amount of tabloid nastiness. Being biracial gives the tabloids another thing to slam her for, but if she weren't biracial, it would be (and is) something else: her age, her accent, her romantic past, she's lazy, she's a workaholic, etc. She's just the latest victim. It was Catherine before her, and Camilla, Sophie and Sarah before that. None of the royals have been immune. None of them. If you ever have a few hours to spare, take a look back at the kinds of things that were being published in the 70's and 80's. Harry certainly knows all that history, and that is exactly why he has been, rightly, so protective. There is no way Meghan was going to get a pass on all that.

I agree as well. As Zonk pointed out the medium has changed since the 1970's but the speculation, gossip and rumors continue. I can't imagine what Lady Diana Spencer would have had to contend with if social media and the internet had existed in 1981. I'm sorry that Meghan is having to contend with this type of coverage, but in truth it is not out of the ordinary.

 

[jacqui24]

This is a pattern they have all had to endure, like it or not. Unfortunately, it comes with the territory. Anne was one of the early ones to have to endure the press criticism, even though she as a princess of the blood. Her response, guided by her father, was to focus on what matters and let her work do the talking. The rest is history. Meghan will do well to follow that.

It is suggested that she is committed to her work, and has a strong work ethic. As long as she does that, within the constraints of her position in the RF, she will be fine. Along the way, she will have to work hard to be accepted by the British people. That will mean working away in unglamorous locations, on causes that really matter to the British people. Also, patronising foreign luxury brands when on official engagements will certainly not help.

Except, apparently working hard is a problem now. Article like this are making Britain look bad if this is actually reflective of how the people think.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

Except, apparently working hard is a problem. Article like this are making Britain look bad if this is actually reflective of how the people think.

The nasty vituperative articles cater to a portion of their readership, many of whom are not even British. I don’t think it reflects on Britain or all or even the majority of the British people.
Yes, there are narrow minded people out there who dislike Meghan because she is an American or divorced or an actress, is older than Harry or yes, is bi-racial.
That doesn’t make this sort of article okay, but the nasty articles about other Women who married into the Royal family were just as horrid.

 

[Madame Verseau]

I think we can agree that this is Meghan's turn in the tabloid barrel and elements in her life are giving the tabloids more to work with. The main thing is she is living up to the nickname of Tungsten and she won't give them the satisfaction of publicly crumbling. Harry chose well; having what her critics think is the "right" background is not enough. By marrying into the Firm and becoming a working royal that person has to be able to take the garbage thrown at him/her. Meghan knew what she was up against going in so she decided to take matters into her own hands and forge her royal identity and work with the staff available to her. Hacking them off is self defeating. So far I believe she has done a good job and I look forward to her future projects. The tabloids can kick rocks.

 

[Osipi]

I only did a fly by of the article and it was true to form Fail bird cage liner. We do get affirmation of a few things though.

1. When Meghan stated that she wanted to be known as the woman that works rather than the lady that lunches, she wasn't lying. She came into the Firm with a job to do and she's hit the ground running full steam ahead. Six months into the marriage, Meghan has already made a huge success of a cookbook to help the Hubb Kitchen and thoroughly wowed on her first overseas tour. On top of that, she did all this (and more) at the onset of a pregnancy.

2. The celebrity angle. I don't know how many of you have noticed besides me that the Royal Foundation projects often encourage "big" names and faces to be ambassadors for their projects. The more backing these projects get, the more likely that what the project hopes to do reaches more people. We see it all that time that Harry's relationship with the Obamas have been a reciprocal backing of each other's endeavors but Meghan's friendship's with well known people is to be sneered at? I think not.

3. No one has picked on her freckles yet. Perhaps freckles are something that people have and not worth noticing. Gotta go after the things that make a person "lesser" than royal or British or sometimes, even human. To me, when they pick an area of Meghan's person to demean, there's probably a whole lot of people that identify with that area of Meghan's person and it is also a slam and a slur against them also. The Fail commentators are renown for their ability to trash and demean and wear out the word "sponger" but I think if we look closely at these kind of articles, the slurs they put onto Meghan could be written about any one of us. These articles are written to incite negativity and to be totally honest, the person being written about could be anyone.

And so it goes. The Fail is a dying breed of a publication and they're running on fumes exhaled by negative people.

 

[MARG]

Well buckle up fellow forum members, someone has finally discovered the implications of Meghan's IRS problem. Gee, were we not all nattering on about how her tax would impact the entire BRF. Well, it seems possible that they have hit the great wall if the snarling online is to be believed.

Her income is interest on her own money and the part of the allowance that The Prince of Wales gives Harry to run his household. Oh, and they want the details of her wardrobe including that which she purchased herself, Harry gifted her, paid for by POW and let's not forget the "working wardrobe", accommodation paid for by Harry and Nott Cott paid for by HM, cars paid for by either or both of them. Jewellery, both wedding presents and purchases and the value of every borrowed piece as well, tiara, chandelier earrings. etc.

So, all those things we thought the BRF and their well paid financial gurus had under control however they are evidently digging deep and want the Duchy of Cornwall's proof, the Duchy of Lancaster's proof and the kicker, how treasury works it's input and how much trickles down to Meghan and then, of course, there's the cost of security from the Constabulary . . . .

Oh dear, oh darn. Maybe the government will give her citizenship as a belated wedding present.

 

[Osipi]

And we thought the Fail had all the vultures!!

 

[Terri Terri]

Marg...what is the source of that online snarling about Meghan's IRS filing? Wouldn't that information be private and confidential? I can't believe that the royals would not have sought US tax advice when Harry and Meghan became engaged.

 

[Somebody]

Well, if they figure it out now, they are still in time to make sure their child doesn't have the same issue from birth.

 

[Zaira]

The idea that Kate was somehow exempted from much tabloid criticism in the UK after she married could be the most incredible historical revisionism I've seen on this board.

Kate was and is criticised for almost everything she is/does/says, including after the wedding. Criticism was also heavy on this board. From her hair, to her make up, her too-short skirts, her boring shoes, her posture, her expressions, her public speaking, her work ethic, 'Waity Katie', her closeness with her own family, the way she gets in and out of cars - the list goes on and on. For all these things she has been attacked. Let's also not forget she was the victim of a terrible invasion of privacy when photos of her sunbathing topless were splashed all over the media and the internet, after she was married.

All this is before we consider the attacks on her family. Pippa alone was followed and photographed hundreds of times each and every day by paps for years. Kate's parents have been attacked as being money-grubbing exploiters of their daughter's fame and snobbish social climbers. Each and every career setback of Kate's brother is covered in detail in the tabloids.

Meghan will get a rough time from the tabloids but so does every other member of the BRF, including the Queen (remember The Sun publishing photos of a tiny Princess Elizabeth doing a 'Nazi salute' on its from page?) Meghan is simply going to have to learn to live it.

I am not going to get into this about Kate vs Meghan, but there are some of us who HAVE been around for years and do remember the Kate coverage back in the early days onward so many of us have our stances precisely because we have been royal watching for years and years---they just may be a different stance than yours.

 

[jacqui24]

Well buckle up fellow forum members, someone has finally discovered the implications of Meghan's IRS problem. Gee, were we not all nattering on about how her tax would impact the entire BRF. Well, it seems possible that they have hit the great wall if the snarling online is to be believed.

Her income is interest on her own money and the part of the allowance that The Prince of Wales gives Harry to run his household. Oh, and they want the details of her wardrobe including that which she purchased herself, Harry gifted her, paid for by POW and let's not forget the "working wardrobe", accommodation paid for by Harry and Nott Cott paid for by HM, cars paid for by either or both of them. Jewellery, both wedding presents and purchases and the value of every borrowed piece as well, tiara, chandelier earrings. etc.

So, all those things we thought the BRF and their well paid financial gurus had under control however they are evidently digging deep and want the Duchy of Cornwall's proof, the Duchy of Lancaster's proof and the kicker, how treasury works it's input and how much trickles down to Meghan and then, of course, there's the cost of security from the Constabulary . . . .

Oh dear, oh darn. Maybe the government will give her citizenship as a belated wedding present.

This is NOT true. I wish the tabloids would just leave the tax situation to experts and stick to what they know best, which is not tax matters. I've written an extensive post on this issue before addressing the basics. Let me see if I can remember which thread it's in. And btw, all of this is known to the BRF and the government before the engagement is announced. They wouldn't be doing this without having sought proper advice from professionals from the very onset.

Well, if they figure it out now, they are still in time to make sure their child doesn't have the same issue from birth.

That's up to the government, not Meghan. I always thought it's odd that they went the way they did, and I get that some will be up in arms about it because it's special treatment. Well damn, they are royals for God's sake. They aren't the same. Normal people don't go on foreign tours and take on domestic engagements representing the Queen. This is only going to provide a slow drip drip drip of tabloid fodder for years to come.

 

[MARG]

This is NOT true. I wish the tabloids would just leave the tax situation to experts and stick to what they know best, which is not tax matters. I've written an extensive post on this issue before addressing the basics. Let me see if I can remember which thread it's in. And btw, all of this is known to the BRF and the government before the engagement is announced. They wouldn't be doing this without having sought proper advice from professionals from the very onset.

I have read two separate stories about this today in general forums and entertainment news. Perhaps we used our intelligence and sorted it out way back then and I have no doubt it is not true.

However, the reason I raised the issue instead of going "what a load of old cobblers" and moving on was to inform my fellow forum members that someone somewhere has started discussing exactly what we did months ago and it would mean this is going to be the next thing to beat up on Meghan about.

The Internal dealings of two Royal Duchies and the Government, hmm I think there are many people who will get their knickers in a knot over the "idea" of this, never mind the truth, as always it's the headlines that are the click bait.

To be honest, though, a large part of one article definitely sounded familiar and wondered if a few of our posts had been plagiarised, particularly one that raised all the abovementioned possible problems. But as for honesty, since when have the tabloids cared.

 

[jacqui24]

BTW, wasn't there published information on the Duchies regardless? I seem to recall that when the financials were published this year, some RRs made a note that Duchy of Lancaster has kept it promise and divested of its interest in some of the funds that they were investing in that had tax avoidance structures. Not all of it yet, but it's in progress. That tells me at least some information are public anyways. Also, the short answer is no, they wouldn't get access to information on Duchies. Notice how all the articles say "could"? I COULD win the lottery. Doesn't mean it's likely.

And really, if anyone wants to get upset about it, there is a VERY easy solution. But it's not something Meghan could do.

 

[Marlo]

Well buckle up fellow forum members, someone has finally discovered the implications of Meghan's IRS problem. Gee, were we not all nattering on about how her tax would impact the entire BRF. Well, it seems possible that they have hit the great wall if the snarling online is to be believed.

Her income is interest on her own money and the part of the allowance that The Prince of Wales gives Harry to run his household. Oh, and they want the details of her wardrobe including that which she purchased herself, Harry gifted her, paid for by POW and let's not forget the "working wardrobe", accommodation paid for by Harry and Nott Cott paid for by HM, cars paid for by either or both of them. Jewellery, both wedding presents and purchases and the value of every borrowed piece as well, tiara, chandelier earrings. etc.

So, all those things we thought the BRF and their well paid financial gurus had under control however they are evidently digging deep and want the Duchy of Cornwall's proof, the Duchy of Lancaster's proof and the kicker, how treasury works it's input and how much trickles down to Meghan and then, of course, there's the cost of security from the Constabulary . . . .

Oh dear, oh darn. Maybe the government will give her citizenship as a belated wedding present.

Didn't the Daily Mail writes the same thing last year?

 

[Ista]

Well buckle up fellow forum members, someone has finally discovered the implications of Meghan's IRS problem. Gee, were we not all nattering on about how her tax would impact the entire BRF. Well, it seems possible that they have hit the great wall if the snarling online is to be believed.

Her income is interest on her own money and the part of the allowance that The Prince of Wales gives Harry to run his household. Oh, and they want the details of her wardrobe including that which she purchased herself, Harry gifted her, paid for by POW and let's not forget the "working wardrobe", accommodation paid for by Harry and Nott Cott paid for by HM, cars paid for by either or both of them. Jewellery, both wedding presents and purchases and the value of every borrowed piece as well, tiara, chandelier earrings. etc.

So, all those things we thought the BRF and their well paid financial gurus had under control however they are evidently digging deep and want the Duchy of Cornwall's proof, the Duchy of Lancaster's proof and the kicker, how treasury works it's input and how much trickles down to Meghan and then, of course, there's the cost of security from the Constabulary . . . .

Oh dear, oh darn. Maybe the government will give her citizenship as a belated wedding present.

Well, you knew that was coming. Honestly, I'm so puzzled by the decision to not expedite her citizenship to avoid all this. I'm sure there would have been rumblings about her being treated specially, but so what? One way or the other there was going to be gossip-fodder. At least try to control the narrative.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

Didn't the Daily Mail writes the same thing last year?

There were a number of articles around the time of the engagement and then again around the time of the wedding.

 

[Ista]

This is NOT true. I wish the tabloids would just leave the tax situation to experts and stick to what they know best, which is not tax matters. I've written an extensive post on this issue before addressing the basics. Let me see if I can remember which thread it's in. And btw, all of this is known to the BRF and the government before the engagement is announced. They wouldn't be doing this without having sought proper advice from professionals from the very onset.

It was Post #972 on the Meghan Markle Religious Conversion and Citizenship thread. Excellent information and very pertinent. Thank you again to jacqui24 for taking the time to explain.

 

[alvinking]

I will say it again...the BIGGEST difference between Meghan and all the other British royal brides before her who were also older, foreign born, divorced, had their own professional career etc is that Meghan is BIRACIAL and her mother is BLACK!!!!! I do not underestimate that RACISM plays a part in the negative media narrative against Meghan. But the cowardly and hypocritical British press, especially the tabloids, aren't as racially blatant since Prince Harry issued that unprecedented statement in November 2016 so they are now using different tactics!

In total agreement with your assessment. And I could add, how many royals have their Wikipedia page locked because of vandalism. One can only imagine the vile write ups that have been added, if one looks at the vile KP Instagram posts as a yardstick.

As far as her taxes are concerned She is going to file what what she is going to file period. What the IRS gonna do? Send inspectors to audit a foreign government. Duchy of Cornwall? Duchy of Lancester? You people are out of your mind. Keep steering the pot this is so transparent it is not even funny anymore.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

So I read the article-much of it is ridiculous. “Meghan is raising eyebrows wearing a black tuxedo and skirts above her knees.” Umm, no, neither of those things is something new.

Of course the article is ridiculous. It's peppered with snide little comments all the way through, inviting its readers to disapprove of 'this American who's trying to change everything.' I've no doubt the DF and the Sunday Fail are following an editorial agenda.

In the six months since Meghan married Harry it's been around one semi-favourable article to about half a dozen negative ones in the tabloid Press, especially the DM. They don't attack Harry as much as his wife because he remains very popular with the British public, but Meghan is the interloper and therefore considered fair game.

Well yeah, but that was my point. The DF headline and blurb portend something really seismic and negative, and then there's just nothing to it but clearly ridiculous and probably made-up and exaggerated statements about nothing that's actually damning, negative, or unusual.

As I mentioned in another thread, the press got used to overloading on pictures and stories of Meghan every day during the South Pacific tour. And M&H followers were clicking on news items with gusto. The Sussexes are now back into their London and Cotswolds routine of lying very low under-the-radar, aside from occasional public events. Therefore, the tabs have absolutely got to come up with something to keep people in M&H withdrawal clicking away, even if it's faux news.

And of course, since the tour was highly successful and favorable toward Meghan, it's no surprise that negative stories are cropping up from a number of quarters attempting to 'knock Meghan down.' It doesn't work because there's no legitimacy to any of the negativitiy.

 

[Kataryn]

Oh dear, oh darn. Maybe the government will give her citizenship as a belated wedding present.

I thought so, too.... LOL.

 

[jacqui24]

Well, you knew that was coming. Honestly, I'm so puzzled by the decision to not expedite her citizenship to avoid all this. I'm sure there would have been rumblings about her being treated specially, but so what? One way or the other there was going to be gossip-fodder. At least try to control the narrative.

Exactly. That whole thing just didn’t seem like a well thought out idea despite the best of intentions. I’m sure they consulted experts in legal and financial areas, that’s not what I’d be concerned about. What I’m concerned about is this is leading to tabloid tax experts and all kinds of speculations and conspiracy theories. Might as well just have taken the hit at once and put the kabosh on the whole thing. Complete unnecessary fodder.